Jump to content

Talk:Helgoland-class battleship: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 32: Line 32:
Hey, "Dreadnought" was a British class of warships. How can a German vessel be member of the Dreadnought class while sailing under the German flag?
Hey, "Dreadnought" was a British class of warships. How can a German vessel be member of the Dreadnought class while sailing under the German flag?
[[Special:Contributions/93.104.40.40|93.104.40.40]] ([[User talk:93.104.40.40|talk]]) 18:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/93.104.40.40|93.104.40.40]] ([[User talk:93.104.40.40|talk]]) 18:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

:From the first sentence of the [[dreadnought]] article:
:''The dreadnought was the predominant type of 20th-century battleship. The first of the kind, the Royal Navy's Dreadnought had such an impact when launched in 1906 that battleships built after her were referred to as 'dreadnoughts', and earlier battleships became known as pre-dreadnoughts.''
:Dreadnought can refer to more than just the British class of warships, but the new pattern of battleship design that many nations followed copying it.--[[Special:Contributions/86.129.7.162|86.129.7.162]] ([[User talk:86.129.7.162|talk]]) 20:10, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:10, 25 October 2009

Featured articleHelgoland-class battleship is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 25, 2009.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 14, 2009Good article nomineeListed
June 25, 2009WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
July 21, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Maritime / European / German / World War I FA‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.WikiProject icon
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on the project's quality scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Maritime warfare task force
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Taskforce icon
German military history task force
Taskforce icon
World War I task force
Additional information:
Note icon
This article has passed an A-Class review.
WikiProject iconShips FA‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.WikiProject icon
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

GA Review

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

GA review of this version:
Pn = paragraph nSn = sentence n

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    • Since the article seems to be in American English, I've changed the tonne measurements to metric tons. If my assumption is correct, then, the two infobox items should be armor and draft, as well
    • There were a lot of little niggling things (missing unit conversions, punctuation, etc.) that would take longer to note in a list, so I have fixed them. I did notice some inconsistency to conversion of gun sizes given in inches: in the lead they were converted to mm but cm everywhere else, so I changed those in the lead. If that's not right, please feel free to change.
    • General characteristics, P1, S2: the they after the semicolon is ambiguous. I'm sure it refers to the Helgolands, but coming right after the mention of the Nassaus, it's not clear. Also, since the Helgolands displacement is compared to the Nassaus, what is it?
    • Propulsion, P1, S2: same as above: These could be taken to refer to RN steam turbines
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments (which don't affect GA nomination):

  • In the Design section, there's almost an assumption that the reader has read and/or is familiar with the Nassau class, which may not be the case. Perhaps the Helgoland class details could be discussed and all of the comparisons to the Nassau ships could be consolidated into a separate section. Also, you might consider comparisons between the Helgoland ships and to the later German dreadnought classes, too.

Just the few prose issues above keep this from passing. I'm placing on hold for seven days, but I'm sure you'll be able to address them easily enough. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've got the prose issues you pointed out fixed, and I switched the conversions to all be metric-first (since the Germans used the metric system). I was thinking that at some point (when I have the free time), I'd write a section similar to this one that would expound more on the design process (i.e., how the Nassau class design was improved/reworked into the Helgoland design). Comparisons to the later designs would also be helpful. That'll have to wait at least until next week though; papers for school to write and whatnot :) Thanks for your review. Parsecboy (talk) 16:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I didn't add the Oldenburg photos since they don't really show the ship; they're more about the Kaiser and his entourage, the ship is more of just the background. Especially since there isn't any mention in the text of the Kaiser's visit to the ship. Parsecboy (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

German Dreadnoughts???

Hey, "Dreadnought" was a British class of warships. How can a German vessel be member of the Dreadnought class while sailing under the German flag? 93.104.40.40 (talk) 18:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the first sentence of the dreadnought article:
The dreadnought was the predominant type of 20th-century battleship. The first of the kind, the Royal Navy's Dreadnought had such an impact when launched in 1906 that battleships built after her were referred to as 'dreadnoughts', and earlier battleships became known as pre-dreadnoughts.
Dreadnought can refer to more than just the British class of warships, but the new pattern of battleship design that many nations followed copying it.--86.129.7.162 (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]