# Talk:Bremen-class cruiser

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bremen class cruiser/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 13:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

"All seven ships were good sea boats..." -- this sort of sounds like an opinion. Who is making this assertion?
All it means is they had good seakeeping - sort of like saying an airplane is fast in a dive or
It's not explained why Lübeck was outfitted with such different machinery in that section.
It's mentioned earlier in the design section.
The draft and displacement numbers in the prose differ from those in the infobox.
The infobox gives the figures for Bremen - including all seven displacements and drafts would make it far too cluttered.
"he ships' guns were protected by 50 mm thick shields." -- You note these shields in the prose but none of the images seem to show a good depiction of what they are. Maybe a link is needed, or an image?
If you look at the photo of Bremen in the US at full resolution, you can see the gun shields on the stern pair of guns.
All of the dates in "Construction" will need to be cited, as they appear nowhere else in the article.
They're covered by the citation in the sentence for that section.
"Hamburg was sunk by British bombers in 1944,[18] and later broken up for scrap in 1948–1949." -- I assume she was raised first?
Good point, added.
"Berlin survived World War II and was loaded with chemical weapons and scuttled in the Skaggerak after the war.[7]" -- You note in the lead that this was to dispose of the weapons but it isn't clarified here.
Added.
I've never asked for this on ship-class articles, but what subsequent classes of cruiser followed this one, and what kind of improvements were made on them? It would go a great length towards establishing continuity in German ship design.
Added a couple of lines on this.
Dab links tool is returning one redirect. Please fix.
Done.
Dup links tool indicates no issues with repeated links. Check links tool shows no problems with external links.
I am placing the article on hold pending the above improvements. —Ed!(talk) 13:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article, Ed. Parsecboy (talk) 14:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Great work, I think all of my questions have been answered then. Passing the GA now. —Ed!(talk) 14:28, 17 December 2012 (UTC)