# Talk:HMS Vigilant (1777)

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Vigilant (1777)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 12:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi,

Will do in the next day or two. Regards, MathewTownsend (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
review
Really very good, with everything in place. Well written. Just a few nitpicks:
"and she had a beam of 36 ft (11.0 m)" why not "with a bean of 36 ft ..." - "had" makes it sound her bean length changed, whereas the article doesn't clarify if measurement errors accounted for the difference.
"She was then survey" > surveyed?
"sometime during the year" > that year?
That's all for now. Well done!
MathewTownsend (talk) 20:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Good suggestions, all done. Thanks for the review.
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for  criteria (and here for what they are not)

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

B. Complies with  MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Provides references to all sources: 

B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Main aspects are addressed: 

B. Remains focused: 

Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Congratulations!  MathewTownsend (talk) 21:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)