Talk:French destroyer Panthère

French destroyer Panthère has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: December 29, 2015. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wik.ipedia.Pro's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Maritime / European / French / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  Maritime warfare task force European military history task force French military history task force World War II task force Ships This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles France Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wik.ipedia.Pro. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWik.ipedia.Pro:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:French destroyer Panthère/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 14:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Two dupe links

   The italicized numbers in the gun names look funny to me.

   "She was laid down...a month later" - that's a rather long sentence with a number of sub-clauses - might be worth splitting at "...vacated by her sister ship Jaguar. She was launched..."

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Good idea to split the long sentence. Those are the full names of the guns and should be completely italicized even if the 130 mm is the exact same as English. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! Thanks for reviewing this in between present wrapping, etc. Funny how just playing with the paper would likely delight your youngest just fine, but traditions must be observed... Merry Christmas.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:58, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]