# Talk:Königsberg-class cruiser (1927)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Königsberg-class cruiser (1927)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dank (talk · contribs) 21:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Starting now. - Dank (push to talk) 21:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Toolbox reports that there's a link to Königsberg class cruiser (1927) (without the hyphen), but the only one I can find is the link to Category:Königsberg class cruisers (1927). - Dank (push to talk) 21:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
It was probably in Template:WWIIGermanShips. Should be fine now. Parsecboy (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Otherwise, toolbox checks out.
"The Königsberg class was ... their": singular "was", plural "their" (Since "They" follows, probably go plural with the whole thing ... The Königsberg-class ships were ...)
I went with "These ships were the first of the Reichsmarine with a modern cruiser design; their predecessor ..." - Dank (push to talk)
"their predecessor, Emden": their predecessor, Emden,
Fixed.
"with a main battery of nine 15 cm (5.9 in) guns and twelve 50 cm (20 in) torpedo tubes": with a main battery of nine 15 cm (5.9 in) guns and with twelve 50 cm (20 in) torpedo tubes (so people won't think the torpedoes were in the main battery)
Sounds fine to me.
"used in experiments with using": repetition
Should read better now.
"were very crank": The wiktionary page you're linking to has a noun with that meaning, but not an adjective. It's not in M-W.
It's in the wrong section - you wouldn't say "the ship is a crank", you'd say "the ship is crank(y)". See for instance dictionary.com, which has it as an adjective. And it is in the online Mirriam-Webster (here, it's the 5th entry), also as an adjective. I'll be correcting the Wiktionary entry accordingly. Parsecboy (talk) 14:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
My mistake, I didn't read far enough in M-W. How about "cranky"? I think that's going to be more familiar to the so-called "general reader". - Dank (push to talk) 14:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Sounds fine to me.
"but these were replaced later": replaced later
Done.
"Throughout the course of their careers, the ships' anti-aircraft batteries were repeatedly revised and improved.": Either drop the introductory phrase, or if you want to emphasize when they were revised, be more specific about that.
I was trying to make clear that they weren't just modified once and were done, that it was a continual process. I feel like cutting the phrase leaves the reader saying "when?"
I went with "The ships' anti-aircraft batteries were revised and improved throughout the course of their careers."; does that work? - Dank (push to talk)
"on either ends": on either end
Fixed.
I'm not sure what you can do about this, but the Armor section repeats the word "thick", like, a lot.
I just cut them out in most places, and there shouldn't be any loss of meaning.
Otherwise:
Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:  Yes

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:   Yes

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:   Yes

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:   Yes

C. No original research:   Yes

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:   Yes

B. Focused:   Yes

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:   Yes

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:   Yes

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:   Yes. Images are good.

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:   Yes

Overall:
Pass or Fail: On hold pending resolution of my initial comments. - Dank (push to talk) 23:15, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article, Dan, I appreciate your copy-editing advice as always. Parsecboy (talk) 14:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure. Pass. - Dank (push to talk) 18:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

My understanding for state yards is as follows:
Kaiserliche Werft to 1920
Rechsmarinewerft to 1920-1933
Kriegsmarinewerft 1933-1945
Irrespective of the link the shipyard names in this topic should be changed as they were constructed before 1933 Lǐshìmǎn (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Good catch - I'll update the article. Parsecboy (talk) 00:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks - hopefully when I get use to the editing system I can start changing them myself. Lǐshìmǎn (talk) 02:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)