Talk:HSwMS Thor (1898)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HSwMS Thor (1898)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 17:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 14:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll have a look at this. Feel free to nudge me if I stall during the process. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• "File:HMS Thor (1898).jpg" licensing: As the author is unknown, how do we know they have been dead for 70 years?
  • Changed license.
• "File:HMS Thor.jpg" needs a US PD tag.
  • Added.
• Bibliography: Gard & Becker is not used as a source.
  • Added.
• "The success of Oden". 1. This is the first sentence of the stand alone main article. I think you need to back up and introduce the topic. 2. What was the nature of this success?
  • Reworded.
• " a three-ship class of first-class coastal defence ships. The ships differed from their predecessor". So the three replaced a single predecessor, yes?
  • The two refers to Thor and Niord.
• "The three vessels are considered members of the same class." Mentioning the name of the third ship would be nice.
  • Added.
• "After reconstruction". Give the date.
  • Added.
• "The guns could fire a 200 kg (450 lb) shell". Is their range known?
  • Sadly not in the sources that I have access to.
• "Two 25 mm (1.0 in) machine guns were carried by the pinnaces." 1. Two guns per pinnace, or one each for a total of two pinnaces? 2. How many pinnaces were there?
  • The sources do not explicitly say. The word pinnace is plural so it would be reasonable to assume two each with one gun but I feel it would be OR to speculate.
• "barbettes protected by 100 mm (3.9 in) nickel-steel armour". 1. Is there a missing 'thick'? 2. Why is the composition of the armour mentioned in this instance, but no other?
  • 1. There is. 2. The rest is Harvey steel. Clarified.
• " Four 90 cm (35 in) searchlights were carried." This may fit more naturally into the previous paragraph.
  • Moved.
• "a cost of SEK 1,871,000". 1. SEK in full at first mention please. 2. The MoS says "Most currency symbols are placed before the number, and unspaced ($123 not $ 123)."
  • 1. Done 2. I have removed the space.
• "a rolling keel". What might that be?
  • A bilge keel. Linked.
• "which improved performance." Are any details of the improved performance known?
  • Unfortunately not in the sources that I can find.
• "sell the remains for scrap". "remains" seems odd. What had been removed to cause only remains to be offered for sale?
  • Reworded.

A cracking little article, nice work. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Thank you. That is very kind. Please take a look at my changes and tell me if there is anything more that you think would help improve it. simongraham (talk) 01:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Checks

• All sources are reliable.
• Images are appropriately licensed.
• Spot checks are fine.
• Passes Earwig.