Talk:HMS Boreas (H77)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Ships (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This 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
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST This 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.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Boreas (H77)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CrowzRSA (talk · contribs) 18:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Lead

Cleaned up, looks fine now.

Description
  • Why is millimeter spelled out sometimes but othertimes abbreviated? ("Boreas had two 40-millimetre (1.6 in) QF 2-pounder Mk II AA guns" vs. "quadruple torpedo tube mounts for 21-inch (533 mm) torpedoes"). Shouldn't it be abbreviated to maintain consistency with the rest of the article?
    • The conversion template always abbreviates the second unit.
  • "The ship was fitted with a Type 119 ASDIC set to detect submarines by reflections from sound waves beamed into the water." this sounds odd to me. perhaps reword to "The ship was fitted with a Type 119 ASDIC set to detect submarines by sound wave reflections beamed into the water."
    • How can you beam a reflection into the water?
      • ...Regardless its really the word "from" that reads badly. "of" sounds much better than "from".
  • You are inconsistent with the anti aircraft abbreviation as well. The line "By October 1940, the ship's anti-aircraft armament was increased when the rear set of torpedo tubes was replaced by a 3-inch (76.2 mm) (12-pounder) AA gun and 'Y' gun was removed to compensate for the additional depth charges added." contains both the word and abbreviation.
    • Done.
Construction and service
  • Should £221,156 not be converted to American dollars?
    • It's a capital cost and really can't be converted into a meaningful figure using price indexes and the like.
  • "Her service in the Mediterranean was uneventful until shortly before she returned home when Boreas evacuated civilians at the start of the Spanish Civil War in July 1936 before beginning a refit at Portsmouth that lasted until 26 September." This sentence needs to be broken up.
    • Agreed.
  • Shouldn't Greek Navy be Hellenic Navy? It also needs to be wikilinked.
    • It's spelled out and linked in the lede.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
      • The lead doesn't specify to readers that the Hellenic Navy is the Greek Navy. Even though it is linked, it has potential to be confusing to readers.
References
  • link all locations (except where it is noted twice [i.e. Annapolis, Maryland and Naval Institute Press])
    • I never link publisher locations in bibliographies. Thanks for looking this over.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • link World Ship Society
  • link Naval Institute Press to United States Naval Institute
    • Just about every major publisher has an article, why link to just these? In fact, why link to any? I think that you're going overboard with the idea of linking stuff in the bibliography. It's not a GA or FA requirement and I don't think that it improves the article any.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Final thoughts
  • I'm placing this article on hold until the issues are addressed. CrowzRSA 20:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  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: Good to see another HMS at GA