# Talk:Soviet destroyer Serdity (1940)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Soviet destroyer Serdity (1940)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 01:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Looking at this one. —Ed!(talk) 01:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)
It is reasonably well written:
Pass A few quibbles:
"after receiving a message that a German convoy had been spotted." -- Any idea of where that convoy was or how far away?
Sadly no.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
"Postwar, the wreck was raised in pieces and towed to Tallinn for scrapping between 1949 and 1952.[6]" -- does this mean it was towed from 1949 to 1952 or scrapped from 1949 to 1952, or both?
Both, I think.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Dab links and external links show no problem. Fixed one dup link and no others are problems. Copyvio tool shows green.
It is factually accurate and verifiable:
Pass Offline sources accepted in good faith. A cursory check of the source material on Google in English sources backs up material cites in the article.
It is broad in its coverage:
Pass Appropriate context included from ship class article; additional detail really only has a place there for consistency.
Would prefer to have a unit cost, but records on this subject aren't common in the source material as I understand it.
It follows the neutral point of view policy:
Pass Healthy mix of book sources, in both Russian language and English text. No over-reliance on any one historian or source material.
It is stable:
Pass No problems there.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Pass One image included under public domain tag where appropriate.
Other:
Pass A few smaller details that could be clarified, but overall not by themselves enough to place the article on hold. So, passing for GA with comments noted above. Well done. —Ed!(talk) 05:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)