Talk:Charles Fryatt/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Skinny87 (talk) 13:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Lede should be expanded to a full paragraph, per WP:LEDE. It is also quite staccatto at the moment, and could do with flowing slightly better, to aid reading comprehension.

'In 1881, Fryatt's family lived at 22 Trinity Terrace (St Mary's parish), Southampton,' - Having the parish in brackets in the middle of the sentence doesn't quite seem right; does it need the brackets? And does Parish need a capital 'P'?

'On leaving school, Fryatt entered the Mercantile Marine, serving on County Antrim, Ellenbank, Marmion and Harrogate.' - Unclear to those not of a nautical bent exactly what these are; would suggest appending 'SS' or whatever their prefixes are, and possibly what kinds of vessels they were if possible.

In fact, I'd ask for the same with all ship names, unless they're all 'SS' or something similar, in which case I'd imagine the previous suggestion would suffice. Knowing what kind of vessels the redlinks were would be helpful, but not essential.

'In 1913 he took command of Newmarket.' - Repetition of 'command', would suggest rewriting slightly.

'On 3 March 1915, Fryatt's ship, Wrexham, a Great Central Railway ship, was attacked by a German U-Boat'- Do we know which one?

'Later that month he was in charge of Colchester when it was unsuccessfully attacked by a U-boat.[1]' - Any details on this other attack - torpedo or gunfire, for example? Any damage?

'On 28 March, he was ordered to stop by U-33.' - Where was the ship at this time?

'Fryatt was also presented with a certificate on vellum by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty. He was also praised in the House of Commons' - Repetition of 'Also' and could easily be merged into one, longer sentence.

'Fryatt was tried at a Court Martial on 27 July.[6] The court martial was held at Bruges Town Hall.[7]' - It should either be 'Court Martial' or 'court martial', please choose one.

'On 31 July 1916, Herbert Asquith issued a statement in the House of Commons' - Who was Asquith at the time, please clarify.

'A wing at Dovercourt Cottage Hospital was named in Fryatt's honour,[12] The scrap value of Brussels was donated towards the cost.' - Rogue comma there.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
'With deckhands assisting the stokers, the ship made 16 knots (30 km/h) when it would normally have been pushed to make 14 knots (26 km/h). Wrexham arrived at Rotterdam with burnt funnels.' - It's not hugely controversial, but this could do with a citation itself, I think.

'This action was in obeyance of orders issued by Winston Churchill to captains of merchant ships. These orders included treating the crews of U-boats as felons and not as prisoners of war. White flags were to be ignored. Churchill's order also stated that survivors from U-boats may be shot if this was more convenient than taking them prisoner.' - Definitely going to need a citation for something so controversial

'If a captain was to surrender his ship he would be prosecuted. The Germans were aware of these orders, having found a copy of them when they captured Ben Cruachan in October 1915.' - And this as well. Also, who would prosecute the captain - British or Germans?

'On 16 July, it was reported in De Telegraaf that Fryatt had been charged with sinking a German submarine. The basis for the charge was the inscriptions on his watches.' - But the submarine he rammed wasn't sunk, but just forced to dive, as your account says prior to this. Were the Germans aware of this and were mistaken? Did the British believe the sub had been sunk, hence the reward with that particular inscription? Either way, this confusion needs to be clarified.

'He was buried in a small cemetery just outside Bruges which the Germans used for burying Belgian traitors.' - What was a 'Belgian traitor'? Belgian saboteurs, or Belgians helping the Germans who had double-crossed them? Please clarify.

'The grave was visited by diplomat Sir Walter Townley and his wife' - Who is this, and why are they important?
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The 'Capture' section is rather short and abrupt in places. I can't put my finger on any single problem, however. Are there any further details that can be added to oit? At the very least, I would massage the text.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Intriguing article, but needs prose and source work in order to be passed as a GA> Look forward to doing so, however. Skinny87 (talk) 13:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on GAR[edit]

In reply to Skinny87's review, I will take each point and comment on it.

1. It is reasonably well written.

Lede should be expanded to a full paragraph, per WP:LEDE. It is also quite staccatto at the moment, and could do with flowing slightly better, to aid reading comprehension.

'In 1881, Fryatt's family lived at 22 Trinity Terrace (St Mary's parish), Southampton,' - Having the parish in brackets in the middle of the sentence doesn't quite seem right; does it need the brackets? And does Parish need a capital 'P'?

This has been rewritten.

'On leaving school, Fryatt entered the Mercantile Marine, serving on County Antrim, Ellenbank, Marmion and Harrogate.' - Unclear to those not of a nautical bent exactly what these are; would suggest appending 'SS' or whatever their prefixes are, and possibly what kinds of vessels they were if possible.

In fact, I'd ask for the same with all ship names, unless they're all 'SS' or something similar, in which case I'd imagine the previous suggestion would suffice. Knowing what kind of vessels the redlinks were would be helpful, but not essential.

All ships were steamships, All ship names now displayed with the prefix.

'In 1913 he took command of Newmarket.' - Repetition of 'command', would suggest rewriting slightly

Rewritten

'On 3 March 1915, Fryatt's ship, Wrexham, a Great Central Railway ship, was attacked by a German U-Boat'- Do we know which one?

Not known from online sources.

Later that month he was in charge of Colchester when it was unsuccessfully attacked by a U-boat.[1]' - Any details on this other attack - torpedo or gunfire, for example? Any damage?

Not known from online sources.

'On 28 March, he was ordered to stop by U-33.' - Where was the ship at this time?

Added location to article.

'Fryatt was also presented with a certificate on vellum by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty. He was also praised in the House of Commons' - Repetition of 'Also' and could easily be merged into one, longer sentence.

Rewritten slightly.

'Fryatt was tried at a Court Martial on 27 July.[6] The court martial was held at Bruges Town Hall.[7]' - It should either be 'Court Martial' or 'court martial', please choose one.

Altered to Court Martial as it's a Proper Noun.

On 31 July 1916, Herbert Asquith issued a statement in the House of Commons' - Who was Asquith at the time, please clarify.

Clarified, he was PM at the time.

'A wing at Dovercourt Cottage Hospital was named in Fryatt's honour,[12] The scrap value of Brussels was donated towards the cost.' - Rogue comma there.
fixed.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

With deckhands assisting the stokers, the ship made 16 knots (30 km/h) when it would normally have been pushed to make 14 knots (26 km/h). Wrexham arrived at Rotterdam with burnt funnels.' - It's not hugely controversial, but this could do with a citation itself, I think.

All statements are referenced. One reference per paragraph is fine if all the info in that paragraph comes from the same reference.

'This action was in obeyance of orders issued by Winston Churchill to captains of merchant ships. These orders included treating the crews of U-boats as felons and not as prisoners of war. White flags were to be ignored. Churchill's order also stated that survivors from U-boats may be shot if this was more convenient than taking them prisoner.' - Definitely going to need a citation for something so controversial

'If a captain was to surrender his ship he would be prosecuted. The Germans were aware of these orders, having found a copy of them when they captured Ben Cruachan in October 1915.' - And this as well. Also, who would prosecute the captain - British or Germans?

See previous reply re refs. Clarified who would prosecute the captain.

'On 16 July, it was reported in De Telegraaf that Fryatt had been charged with sinking a German submarine. The basis for the charge was the inscriptions on his watches.' - But the submarine he rammed wasn't sunk, but just forced to dive, as your account says prior to this. Were the Germans aware of this and were mistaken? Did the British believe the sub had been sunk, hence the reward with that particular inscription? Either way, this confusion needs to be clarified.

The Germans knew full well that U-33 had not been sunk, but they withheld this fact from Fryatt.

He was buried in a small cemetery just outside Bruges which the Germans used for burying Belgian traitors.' - What was a 'Belgian traitor'? Belgian saboteurs, or Belgians helping the Germans who had double-crossed them? Please clarify.

As far as I can tell, these were Belgians who had been executed by the Germans.

The grave was visited by diplomat Sir Walter Townley and his wife' - Who is this, and why are they important?

Townley was the Dutch Ambassador in 1917-19. Added to article.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

The 'Capture' section is rather short and abrupt in places. I can't put my finger on any single problem, however. Are there any further details that can be added to oit? At the very least, I would massage the text

Rewritten slightly.

Mjroots (talk) 14:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent rewrites, congrats on the fast response. My only gripes would be the lede - not entirely sure if it adequately summarizes rhe article, but I won't impede promotion for that - and the U33 bit. You state that the Germans knew that U33 hadn't been sunk and withheld that information, but that isn't in the article. That is rather vital information, as it clarifies why they executed Fryatt for sinking a sub when he didn't; at the moment it is in an ambiguous state - the Germans might have lost contact with U33, or the sub might have sunk later before returning to port, hence leading them to think Fryatt had sunk it. Once that's addressed, I think the article will be fine to pass. Skinny87 (talk) 15:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added in the fact that the Germans knew that U-33 hadn't been sunk. Mjroots (talk) 15:38, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely convinced by the source you've used. Following that user's travails throughout wikipedia, it seems that those documents are British accounts of where German U-boats were. The source used doesn't seem to be a German account of where the U-Boat was, and I'm also unsure as to whether it's completely reliable. I'd rather see a secondary source used to fill in this gap. Skinny87 (talk) 16:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also missed that reference four (1881 census) is linked to a wikipedia article, which isn't acceptable as a source. I think you just wikilniked it out of courtesy and used the actual census, but I'm sure it needs to be cited a different way to be correct. I'm not entirely sure how, though. Skinny87 (talk) 16:17, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the 1881 census citation with a link to the online census records. The U33 claim still needs to be sorted out. Road Wizard (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've sorted out the U-33 reference. Mjroots (talk) 18:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(od)Excellent, in which I have no further problems and I will promote the article. Well done to you both! Skinny87 (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]