Talk:SMS Gefion

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:SMS Gefion/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 17:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Parsecboy (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 17:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt review! Parsecboy (talk) 17:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

• a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
• b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

WP:LEAD:

Check for WP:LEAD:

1. Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  Done
2. Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  Done
3. Check for Introductory text:  Done
   • Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):  Done
   • Check for Relative emphasis:  Done
   • Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):  Done
     • Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):  Done
       • SMS Gefion was an unprotected cruiser of the German Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial Navy), the last ship of the type built in Germany.
     • Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):  Done
     • Check for Proper names and titles:  Done
     • Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
     • Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
     • Check for Pronunciation: None
     • Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):  Done
     • Check for Biographies: NA
     • Check for Organisms: NA
4. Check for Biographies of living persons: NA
5. Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  Done
   • Check for Non-English titles:
   • Check for Usage in first sentence:
   • Check for Separate section usage:
6. Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  Done
7. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None

WP:LAYOUT:

 Done

Check for WP:LAYOUT:  Done

1. Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  Done
   • Check for Headings and sections:  Done
   • Check for Section templates and summary style:  Done
   • Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):  Done
2. Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  Done
   • Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):  Done
   • Check for Works or publications:  Done
   • Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO):  Done
   • Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):  Done
   • Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER):  Done
   • Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL):  Done
   • Check for Links to sister projects:  Done
   • Check for Navigation templates:  Done
3. Check for Formatting:  Done
   • Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):  Done
   • Check for Links:  Done
   • Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):  Done

WP:WTW:

 Done

Check for WP:WTW:  Done

1. Check for Words that may introduce bias:  Done
   • Check for Puffery (WP:PEA):  Done
   • Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL):  Done
   • Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL):  Done
   • Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED):  Done
   • Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED):  Done
   • Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY):  Done
2. Check for Expressions that lack precision:  Done
   • Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM):  Done
   • Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM):  Done
   • Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME):  Done
   • Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
3. Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  Done

Check for WP:MOSFICT:  Done

1. Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  Done
   • Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI):  Done
   • Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT):  Done

WP:EMBED:

 Done

• Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):
• Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):

2: Verifiable with no original research

• a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
• b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with other FAs)

WP:RS:

 Done

Check for WP:RS:  Done

Cross-checked with other FAs: Kaiser class battleship, Helgoland class battleship, Nassau class battleship, SMS Von der Tann, SMS Moltke (1910), SMS Seydlitz, Moltke class battlecruiser, König class battleship, Derfflinger class battlecruiser, SMS Hindenburg, Amagi class battlecruiser, SMS Derfflinger, SMS Lützow, Bayern class battleship, SMS Helgoland, SMS Blücher, SMS König, SMS Westfalen, SMS Goeben, SMS Baden (1915), SMS Kronprinz (1914), SMS Rheinland, SMS Markgraf, SMS Bayern (1915), SMS Friedrich der Grosse (1911), German battleship Tirpitz

1. Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (contentious)  Done
   • Is it contentious?: Yes
   • Does the ref indeed support the material?:
2. Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  Done
   • Who is the author?:
   • Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
   • What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
   • What else has the author published?:
   • Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
3. Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  Done
4. Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

WP:MINREF:

 Done

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:  Done

1. Check for Direct quotations:  Done
2. Check for Likely to be challenged:  Done
3. Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP): NA

• c. No original research:  Done

WP:NOR:

 Done

1. Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  Done
2. Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  Done
3. Check for original images (WP:OI):  Done

3: Broad in its coverage

a. Major aspects:

 Done

Cross-checked with other FAs: Kaiser class battleship, Helgoland class battleship, Nassau class battleship, SMS Von der Tann, SMS Moltke (1910), SMS Seydlitz, Moltke class battlecruiser, König class battleship, Derfflinger class battlecruiser, SMS Hindenburg, Amagi class battlecruiser, SMS Derfflinger, SMS Lützow, Bayern class battleship, SMS Helgoland, SMS Blücher, SMS König, SMS Westfalen, SMS Goeben, SMS Baden (1915), SMS Kronprinz (1914), SMS Rheinland, SMS Markgraf, SMS Bayern (1915), SMS Friedrich der Grosse (1911), German battleship Tirpitz

1. Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
   1. Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
   2. Check for Out of scope:
2. Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
   1. Check for All material that is notable is covered:
   2. Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
   3. Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
   4. Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
   5. Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

b. Focused:

 Done

1. Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
2. Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

WP:NPOV:

 Done

4. Fair representation without bias:  Done

1. Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  Done
2. Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  Done
3. Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  Done
4. Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  Done
5. Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  Done
6. Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  Done
7. Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  Done
8. Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  Done
9. Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  Done
10. Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  Done
11. Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  Done
12. Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None
13. Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images  Done (PD)

Images:

 Done

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Done

1. Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  Done
2. Check for copyright status:  Done
3. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  Done
4. Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  Done

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Done

1. Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  Done
2. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  Done
3. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  Done

As per the above checklist, there are no issues with the article and it’s a GA. Thanks, Parsecboy, very much for your diligence in writing such great articles.

Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! And it's taken me quite a long time to get to the point where I can write an article that needs minimal edits to reach GA :) Parsecboy (talk) 13:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

File:S.M. kleiner kreuzer Gefion - restoration, borderless.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:S.M. kleiner kreuzer Gefion - restoration, borderless.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 30, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-11-30. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:37, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Picture of the day

A 1902 lithograph showing SMS Gefion, an unprotected cruiser of the Imperial German Navy completed in 1895. Gefion was involved in the Battle of Taku Forts (1900) before being modernized. During World War I, Gefion served as a barracks ship. In 1920 it was sold for service as a freighter, only to be scrapped three years later.

Though Gefion was intended for service in the German colonial empire and as a fleet scout, the design was unsuccessful in both roles and soon replaced by the newer Gazelle class of light cruisers.Lithograph: Hugo Graf; restoration: Adam Cuerden

Photo

here. Parsecboy (talk) 16:41, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

And here. Parsecboy (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Korvettenkapitän Waldeyer

According the german "Ehrenrangliste der Kaiserliche Marine" from 1930 a german Korvettenkapitän Waldeyer is not listetd. I think, its a mistake and a confusion with the later Fregattenkapitän Hugo von Waldayer-Hartz. MfG URTh (talk) 10:42, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

No, it's one and the same person. Waldeyer's father was elevated to hereditary nobility in 1916, thus the change in name. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 18:23, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Gefion classification as an unprotected cruiser

The reference to this ship as a an unprotected cruiser appears to be a mistake, it is definitionally a protected cruiser as it has an internal armored deck. The usage of unprotected cruiser is not cited in the article, with the citations using other terms like light cruiser. The ship should be moved into either the protected cruiser or light cruiser category and referred to as such in the description.

Gardiner & Gray refer to it as a 'light protected cruiser' being a smaller version of previous protected cruiser designs and a precursor to the Gazelle class light cruiser. Not a development of the Bussard class unprotected cruiser as this article indicates. Erich Gröner refers to the ship a Kreuzerkorvette, a classification unique to the German navy and shared with the Irene class protected cruiser, both Gefion and the Irene class were later re-classed as a Kleiner Kreuzer (light cruiser), Gröner also emphasizes that Gefion was similar to the Gazelle class. The German language version of this same article also does not use the term unprotected cruiser (Ungeschützte Kreuzer), but rather Kreuzerkorvette and Kleiner Kruezer. Joermungandr (talk) 14:46, 26 October 2022 (UTC)