# Talk:Russian monitor Rusalka

Why did she sink? Mmartins (talk) 22:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Since she went down with all hands, even a careful study of the hull might not reveal a definitive answer. Bigturtle (talk) 00:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I have added more material in the form of the sections "Loss of the Rusalka", "Cause of the sinking", and "Monument", as well as additional details to the infobox, and elsewhere, mostly from the corresponding articles in Russian and Estonian Wikipedias. Since my knowledge of these languages is nil, I have relied on machine translators (Google and Babelfish), and online dictionaries. As far as I can tell I have added nothing that is factually inaccurate. --dawkeye (talk) 03:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Russian monitor Rusalka/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 19:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
There's a mix of BrEng and AmEng, particularly in the units in the discovery section.
The lead is a bit short - might want to include her class, that a monument was built for her crew, and perhaps a line about the exact cause of her sinking to be unknown (and perhaps that a new theory has been put forth following the discovery of the wreck)
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
In the monument section - Reval wasn't Tallinn until 1917
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
File:Rusalka1890Helsimgfors.jpg - needs a US PD tag
Why not add a picture of the Rusalka memorial and merge the two Commons boxes?
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

I think that I've fixed all of these, although I'm not sure what you mean about combining the Commons boxes.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Like so. Looks good now, passing for GA. Parsecboy (talk) 22:23, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Didn't know you could do that!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)