Talk:Soviet destroyer Serdity (1940)

• Sadly no.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1. • "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)[reply]

1. • Dab links and external links show no problem. Fixed one dup link and no others are problems. Copyvio tool shows green.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. It is stable:

   Pass No problems there.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:

   Pass One image included under public domain tag where appropriate.

7. 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)[reply]

Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]