Talk:SS Quanza

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee SS Quanza was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
December 16, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 21:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for agreeing to review--looking forward to working with you. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:53, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Khazar. I review a lot of warship articles, so I thought I'd review this one. Generally, warships are some of MILHIST's strongest areas of coverage. I know you're an experienced editor who knows what he's doing, so I thought I'd just point you to some of the articles of users like User:Sturmvogel 66 for a template of what our Warship GAs look like, and what I mean with my comments. —Ed!(talk) 22:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. After a bit of reflection, I'll cheerfully admit that I can't answer most of your questions here; I don't have access to most of the shipping history sources added to this article by other users, unfortunately. My focus was largely on the immigration event that the Quanza is known for in secondary sources, but I recognize that WP Ship guidelines may require more detailed digging into primary sources like ship registries, etc.
I'm fine with your closing this as a fail for now, and I appreciate your thoughtful review. I will use your suggestions to try to clarify what I can (such as the Long statement) in the next few days, so please don't think I'm just blowing your comments off! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem at all. If you need any kind of assistance, feel free to ping me. Take care. —Ed!(talk) 03:44, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Lead & infobox

  • The prose needs a substantial expansion of the ship's design and construction specifications. I see a lot of that stuff is cited in the infobox. The infobox generally should summarize, not replace, the content of the prose. Normally, there is an entire section of text just dedicated to specifications about size, design, and propulsion.
  • When was she designed? When was she authorized? When was her keel laid?
  • What was her capacity? How much cargo could she carry? How many passengers?
  • What was her crew complement?
  • Cost of the ship would also be helpful, though that isn't always available.
  • What class of ship was she? Did she have any sister ships?
  • You'll need to include the name of the group that designed her in the prose also, and cite it with a reference.
  • These items in the infobox will need citations: Length, bean, depth, propulsion, speed, and builder.

Early history

  • Again here you'll need to write in and provide a source about when she was launched and completed.
  • Why was she renamed?
  • How often did she travel her route, and what sorts of items was she known to carry?
  • The history of her trips between 1929 and 1940 really do need to be elaborated on. Any other notable trips or anything?

August-September 1940 voyage

  • "after a difficult crossing that included a hurricane" -- which hurricane?
  • Under what basis were the visas denied by the US and Mexico? Because they were fake?
  • "The ship was then ordered to return to Europe," -- who ordered that?
  • "Jewish leaders, including Rabbi Stephen Wise of the World Jewish Congress and Cecilia Razovsky of the National Council of Jewish Women, lobbied for the remaining passengers' admittance." -- Who did they lobby?
  • What was the name of the ship captain on this voyage?
  • Why was Long upset?
  • Also, you'll need to expand greatly what occurred to the ship from 1940 onward. I see there are sources describing its eventual fate, those will need to be included as well.

The article needs some pretty substantial improvements before I can pass it for GA. I'm placing it on hold pending improvements. —Ed!(talk) 22:29, 16 December 2012 (UTC)