Bleep Bloop, I'm a template.
[ x ] 1. The destination URL should be a page in the appropriate namespace and titled lower_case_with_underscores
[ ] 2. The article is in the appropriate format and article template
[ ] 3. The article follows our wiki style guidelines, including: No forced line breaks, text after each section header, etc.
[ x ] 4. The article is easily read and free of errors in spelling and grammar
[ x ] 5. Links to other wiki articles are present as appropriate
[ x ] 6. The article fits into the Star Army universe's space opera theme and technology levels
[ x ] 7. Images in the article are hosted on Star Army's wiki and sourced responsibly (contact Wes privately if there's a concern)
[ x ] 8. The article is original and doesn't contain copy-pasted content from other articles.
[ x ] 9. The article complies with Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.
[ x ] 10. The Faction Manager(s), if applicable, have posted approval for this article in this thread.
Here's some fixes this article still needs:
1. I think you should break the about section of the page up into an 'about' and a 4='s header for history.
2. Under statistics and info SARP prefers you use the * **title:** info format so that this information is in bullet points rather than a table. I can do the change if you want me to show you what I mean by that.
3. Some slight spelling changes were made. I also don't think we have a convention on how to spell starship. Is it star-ship? star ship? starship? I can't really fault you for that as its something I'd probably need to bring up with Wes. Similarly you're using the British spelling for color and caliber which we don't have a rule against but is probably something we should bring up for the style guide.
4. We have a rule about no new FTL systems and I think we're trying to phase out wormholes but that changes so often that I'm not sure we can really count it as a rule. You're using 0.2 ly/min for speed now though and this matches up with 'hyperdrive'. Wes also gave the approval once already for more wormholes so ultimately I don't think this is a problem (but is still something to note)
Really I just would like to see those minor edits. Wes already approved this once and the only reason it was rejected was for the speed limitations. Now that those speeds are in line with what we already have it should be good to go once the style edits are made.