# Talk:HMS Mindful (1915)

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Mindful (1915)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 23:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
I will review this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


### Lead
The M class were an improvement on the previous L-class...: suggest either "The M class destroyers (or ships) were an improvement on those of the previous L-class..." or "The M class was..."
Amended.
...jointly sinking the German...: having read the portion of the article that deals with this action, I think it is better to say "helped sink"  rather than jointly (which I read as two ships being involved).
Good spot.


### Design and development
...the greater performance was appreciated...: suggest, for greater specificity, "the greater performance of the M-class was appreciated".
Happy to add.


### Construction and career
...the name had been used in the Royal Navy.: I may be overthinking this, but to me it seems this should be "by the Royal Navy."
No problem. I have amended that.
I'm pretty certain you would have included it if known, but for sake of completeness, I have to ask: is the name of the captain, or any of her captains, known?
I have some names, but no one that seems of significance.
At 6:29 PM, the destroyer...: the construction of this section, particularly the starting sentence, suggests that this is still 30 May, but I think it may have been the following day?
Good spot.
so did not follow Faulkner.: typo in the ship's name here.
Another good spot.
...was sold to Cohen...: needs more context as to who/what Cohen is.
G. Cohen is a shipbreaker. I have added the initial.


### Other stuff
Sources themselves look OK. However, doing some source checks, I can't see that cite 12 supports the point that V48 specifically was the ship destroyed, and that the Shark was involved. The source just refers to a destroyer being sunk, not a torpedo boat. Cites 16 and 18 also checked and support the material that they are used for - however, in the case of the former I feel it may be worthwhile adding where the action took place and that the sub had already attacked a trawler.
Well noted. The Royal Navy used the term destroyer for the German torpedo boats. I have added another reference that mentions the names of the other vessels explicitly. I have also added the detail for the action on 20 August.
Image tags check out OK
No dupe links
A nice solidly put together article otherwise. Zawed (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Zawed: Thank you for your kind words and excellent review. I think I have addressed your concerns. simongraham (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
This looks all good. I'm passing as GA as I believe that the article meets the necessary criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)