Jump to content

Talk:HMS Tiger (1913): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎MIlitary time: new section
Line 92: Line 92:
[[User:Tupelo the typo fixer|Tupelo the typo fixer]] ([[User talk:Tupelo the typo fixer|talk]]) 14:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
[[User:Tupelo the typo fixer|Tupelo the typo fixer]] ([[User talk:Tupelo the typo fixer|talk]]) 14:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
:Good catch. The figure for Queen Mary included her [[sternwalk]], but I've replaced it with her hull's actual length.--[[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) 16:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
:Good catch. The figure for Queen Mary included her [[sternwalk]], but I've replaced it with her hull's actual length.--[[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) 16:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

== MIlitary time ==

Is there any particular reason that this article wasn't written using the accepted 24-hour military time? Or does the British military use 12-hour time for their documents? [[User:Magus732|Magus732]] ([[User talk:Magus732|talk]]) 21:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:28, 5 July 2019

Featured articleHMS Tiger (1913) 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.
Featured topic starHMS Tiger (1913) is part of the Battlecruisers of the world series, a featured topic. It is also part of the Battlecruisers of the Royal Navy series, a featured topic. These are identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve them, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 21, 2010Good article nomineeListed
December 17, 2010Good topic candidatePromoted
December 23, 2012WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
January 13, 2013Featured article candidatePromoted
October 31, 2013Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Maritime / British / European / World War I / Operation Majestic Titan 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
British military history task force
Taskforce icon
European military history task force
Taskforce icon
World War I task force
Taskforce icon
Operation Majestic Titan (Phase I)
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.

References

User talk:Parsecboy Thanks for adding "primarily from SMS Moltke, who scored 13 of those 15 hits." to the page on HMS Tiger (1913). However what was the source for this?

There is a big problem with many of these pages containing unsourced material. This would gradually be fixed if when people made additions they footnoted them giving the source. <ref>Author, ''Name of Source'', page number</ref> --Toddy1 07:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First World War, vs World War One

I reverted an edit that changed World War One into First World War. The reason for this is that there was already a wikilink in the introduction to World War I.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Talkin' Turkey

I read here Turkey bought some ex-Tiger 13.5s. Can anybody confirm? Worth a mention? (I'd also wonder what price was paid...) TREKphiler hit me ♠ 10:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They weren't delivered. See http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_135-45_mk5.htm Rcbutcher (talk) 11:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conan?

I recognize barbette is technically correct. However, "turret" is by far the more common usage, especially in position references. Should it be changed back? Is there a WP-standard usage? TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 10:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are you referring to?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:10, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MkV (H)

I'm led to understand that all later 13.5" BB/BC used the (H) version of the gun (1400lb rather than 1250lb shell) - isn't this also the case with Tiger? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.192.207.179 (talk) 09:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LOC image - quick note

Found this today Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:52, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Magic disappearing 'X' turret

The 'Armament' subsection begins "Tiger mounted eight 45-calibre BL 13.5-inch Mk V guns in four twin hydraulically powered turrets, designated 'A', 'B', 'Q' and 'Y' from front to rear." yet there are six references to an 'X' turret or barbette throughout the article. How should this inconsistency be resolved? 1RM (talk) 07:22, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch; sources disagree on the turret's name, so I've standardized on X.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Coronel

In this: After the Battle of Coronel and the deployment of three battlecruisers to hunt for the German East Asia Squadron, Tiger was ordered to cut short her firing trials off Berehaven[34] and was commissioned into the 1st Battlecruiser Squadron (1st BCS) two months later, on 3 October,[31] and began trials and working up.

Battle of Coronel was 1 November, so two month later is January, or I miss something? Demostene119 (talk) 13:32, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Roberts says she was commissioned for the 1BCS, not into. She didn't join the fleet at Scapa Flow until 6 November. Using Emperor of India as an example: Rear-Admiral Alexander Duff hoisted his flag aboard her on 22 October 1914, she commissioned on 10 November and joined the fleet on 10 December after travails with the dockyard and then working up off the coast of Ireland. —Simon Harley (Talk | Library). 18:28, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So we can write for sure

Tiger was commissioned for the 1st Battlecruiser Squadron (1st BCS) on 3 October.[31] After the Battle of Coronel and the deployment of three battlecruisers to hunt for the German East Asia Squadron, Tiger was ordered to cut short her firing trials off Berehaven[34] and began trials and working up. Demostene119 (talk) 15:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's not quite right either as her trials and working up were already in progress when they were cut short.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
English is not my native language so your corrections will be always welcome.--Demostene119 (talk) 15:03, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

length of the ship relative to HMS Queen Mary

Here it is stated that the Tiger was 704 feet long and was 4 feet longer than the Queen Mary. Yet the entry about the Queen Mary gives a length of 703 feet for that ship. These figures don't add up, so what is correct? Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 14:09, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. The figure for Queen Mary included her sternwalk, but I've replaced it with her hull's actual length.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MIlitary time

Is there any particular reason that this article wasn't written using the accepted 24-hour military time? Or does the British military use 12-hour time for their documents? Magus732 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]