Talk:Raid on Pula/GA1

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 18:33, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: PizzaKing13 (talk · contribs) 17:29, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

I'll review this article soon. PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 17:29, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Images

• All images appear to be properly sourced

Background

• What are the Compromise of 1867 and trialism and why are they relevant to the South-Slavs here?
• mention why Anton Korošec was relevant at the time
• "South Slav–inhabited lands" should use a regular dash "South Slav-inhabited lands"

Prelude

• Looks good

Forces involved

• Why did sailors mutiny?
  • None of the sources say. The source used to reference that the mutiny took place then and there also notes that muntinies were commonplace at the time, but says nothing specifically on the motivation or causes of the one in Pula/aboard Viribus Unitis. (T)
• Did the article mean "Italy was going to destroy the Austrian fleet but ignored that it was transfered to the South Slavs"? This wasn't clear to me upon first reading. There is also no prompt as to why Italy was going to destroy the fleet.
  • It appears from the sources used in the article that indeed Italy targeted what was believed to be (at the time the attacking force departed) Austrian fleet. A source used explicitly states that the frogmen were surprised to learn of the transfer of the fleet upon capture. It would appear that Italy received some information about the transfer while the attacking force was underway. As for Italian motivation, the current wording of the article says that the Italian navy wanted a successful naval operation at the close of the war to match the army's efforts (capture of territories). (T)

Timeline

• Link frogman

Aftermath

• The first 2 paragraphs of "Armistice" don't feel relevant to the article. This should be condensed.

Infobox and lead

• Allies of the World War I → Allies of World War I
• Missing space after "Kingdom of Serbia"
• Erroneous period after "common South Slavic state"

Other

• Article is stable
• Article passes Earwig copyright check
• Sources appear to be reliable PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 01:27, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Spot checks

• 1 – Y
• 2 – Y
• 5 – Not verified at source Y AGF
• 8 – Y
• 9 – Y
• 48 – Y

@Tomobe03: I couldn't access the major sources you used for a good chunk of the article, so I did some spot checks on a few of the sources I could access. There's only 1 citation I couldn't verify with reading the source. PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 02:29, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

@PizzaKing13: Fixed the mixup. (T)

I can't access page 118 on Google preview, but I'll assume good faith that the error was fixed.

Overall

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

@Tomobe03: I left comments for the review and will do spot checks soon. PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 03:13, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

@PizzaKing13: I addressed most of the concerns you raised above and replied to a couple of points in the review itself. Could you please take another look? Tomobe03 (talk) 12:42, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

@Tomobe03: Everything looks good to go. Congrats on the GA! PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 16:17, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.