Template:Did you know nominations/Andrea Doria-class battleship

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 10:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Andrea Doria-class battleship

Italian battleship Andrea Doria during World War I

Improved to Good Article status by Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Parsecboy (talk). Nominated by Matty.007 (talk) at 19:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC).

  • Raised to good article status on 10 March. Clearly well-cited and long enough. Not a self-nom so no quid pro quo requirement. The image is in the public domain, but it's not particularly illuminating at small size—might be better to let another article handle the photo.
The hook doesn't work, unfortunately. The battleships (plural) spent WWI bottling up the Austro-Hungarian Navy rather than being bottled up (which I'm not sure you could call being in a bottle anyway). I added a new one which is also playful; the sentence which mentions the Swordfish doesn't have its own citation, but I'm sure I could find one. —Neil 12:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Alt looks good, thanks. This needs another reviewer. Thanks, Matty.007 16:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
The alt hook meets the DYK requirements. It's a great article.--Khanate General talk project mongol conquests 03:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg Thank you for the review, but in it you need to say what you have addressed (for example, no close paraphrasing found). Thanks, Matty.007 08:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg ALT1 hook needs specific review, including inline sourcing, neutrality, etc. Original review does not mention many DYK characteristics, including close paraphrasing checks; should not depend on GA review for all this but do own spot-checks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svgI think this is good to go on AGF, due to all sourcing being offline, footnotes that refer to books in the bibliography. I don't know of any way to check for copyvio/paraphrasing under those circumstances. It seems to be a rather neutral article with detailed specs about this class of ship. The ships involved didn't really see any war combat action, and where they were later in service it's only mentioned that they were present for any given circumstance. I'd say this is a detailed, neutral article. The hook is mentioned in the article and sourced thusly: Template:Tq Every paragraph is sourced, and this article looks really well written. This is good to go, I think. — Maile (talk) 16:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)