Talk:SMS Lützow/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

1. It is reasonably well written:

   Not Yet

   1. "Major Francis Harvey, who ordered the turret be flooded" - How did they flood the turret? Briefly explain it.
      1. I added a note about how and why magazines were flooded. Do you think that's sufficient?
   2. Add a little bacground (or at least a clarification of the date) at the beginning of the "Battle of Jutland" section. As it stands, it sounds like Jutland happened the day after the events of the previous section.
      1. I added the date the ships left.
   3. Why did the German fleet leave the Jade estatuary? What was their mission when the Battle of Jutland occurred?
      1. An explanation has been added.
   4. The lead says the Lützow is sometimes given credit for sinking the HMS Defence, but the rest of the article makes no mention of this. It should be referenced and/or briefly explained in the section that deals with the Defence's sinking.
      1. I added a note with a quote from Campbell's that explains the situation with Defence. Is that sufficient?
   5. Also, the Battle of Jutland section is very long. I sugest it be further split into subheads.
      1. Sub-headers have been added. Do they sound a little too melodramatic?
   6. Is there any idea on where the ship was when it was sunk, or how far it was from port?
      1. It was about 60 km from Horns Reef, according to Tarrant.
2. It is factually accurate and verifiable:

   Not Yet

   1. Is there any information in other sources about the Battle of Jutland? As it stands, the section is referenced almost entirely by the Tarrant source.
      1. I've added a few lines from Halpern's A Naval History of World War I; Looking through Herwig's Luxury Fleet, he doesn't go into a ton of detail about the battle. I also have Campbell's Jutland: An Analysis of the Fighting to look through, but that will have to wait until tomorrow.

         1. Alright, I've gone through Campbell's book (which, is generally considered to be one of the best and most complete records of the battle) and added any details that were missing.

3. It is broad in its coverage:

   Pass No problems there.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:

   Pass No problems there.

5. It is stable:

   Pass No problems there.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:

   Pass No problems there.

7. Overall:

   On Hold while a few issues are addressed. —Ed!^(talk) 21:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

   Thanks for reviewing the article. I've addressed most of the problems, and the rest I'll take care of tomorrow. Parsecboy (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

   Alright, I've finally gotten around to finishing the Jutland section. Are there any problems remaining in the article? Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

   None at all. The article now meets the GA criteria according to my interpretation of them. Well done. —Ed!^(talk) 02:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)