Talk:SMS Prinz Eugen (1862)

SMS Prinz Eugen (1862) 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.

SMS Prinz Eugen (1862) is part of the Ironclads of Austria-Hungary series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 26, 2016	Good article nominee	Listed
December 22, 2018	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

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.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime

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 historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:SMS Prinz Eugen (1862)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 18:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give this a review. Wizardman 18:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the issues I found:

A little odd to me, but why is both the author and source unknown for the image? If everything's unknown how are we sure that image is the ship in question?
- Probably a fair point - replaced with a photo with a source.
"Obsolescent by 1873," I'd say Obsolete instead just to make it sound slightly less passive, though if that makes the sentence technically wrong then you can skip this.
- I think obsolescent is better, technically.
" She proved to be very wet forward, " maybe it's obvious and im just missing it but i'm not sure what that means.
- See if how I reworded it makes it clearer.
" in attempt to draw out the Italians," in an attempt
- Fixed
" On 16 July, Persano took the Italian fleet, with twelve ironclads, out of Ancona, bound for the island of Lissa, where they arrived on the 18th" can this be reworded with fewer commas? Feels like it's overkill though maybe it's just my preference. Also you repeat that sentence twice in a row (i'd remove the end-section one and keep the start-section one personally)
- Should be better now - have a look.
" main base at Pola and Venice. " main bases
- Fixed

I'll put the article on hold and will pass when the issues are fixed. Wizardman 18:43, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the article, Wizardman. Parsecboy (talk) 20:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good now, so I'll pass the article. Wizardman 00:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA and images status

How did this get past GA review when the masthead image has no licence and is now up for CSD? Andy Dingley (talk) 09:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to add the template - it's been addressed. Parsecboy (talk) 10:07, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]