This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the
Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page where you can join the project or contribute to the
discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Jackyd101, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments for me in the meantime. Thanks again! --
Caponer (
talk) 15:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)reply
GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)
Jackyd101, I have completed a thorough review and re-review of this article and I assess it to meet all the criteria for Good Article status. I do, however, have a few comments and questions that should be addressed prior to its passage to Good Article status. Thank you again for your incredible efforts in completing this article! --
Caponer (
talk) 16:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)reply
Per
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article stands alone as a concise overview and summary of the article. The lede defines the naval engagement, establishes context for the naval engagement, explains why the naval engagement is notable, and summarizes the most important points of the naval engagement.
The info box is beautifully-formatted and its contents are sourced from internally-cited references.
The lede is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.
Background
This section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.
Battle
Batavian captain and Dutch captain seem to be used interchangeably here. For consistency's sake, select either Batavian or Dutch to describe the captain and fleet throughout the article's prose.
Otherwise, this section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.
Aftermath
This section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.
Batavian and Dutch were used interchangeably in the sources, but I appreciate it is confusing and have settled on Batavian as the more technically accurate term. Thanks for the review!--
Jackyd101 (
talk) 16:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)reply
Jackyd101, upon my review and re-review of your article following your edits, I find that this article meets the criteria for Good Article status and hereby pass it to a GA! Congratulations on a job well done! --
Caponer (
talk) 16:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)reply