Wikipedia:Peer review/HMS Sultan (1775)/archive1

HMS Sultan (1775)[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

.

I've listed this article for peer review because… Considering taking this to WP:GAN and perhaps even beyond. I'm usually lambasted for my prose and "wordiness" so any pointers there will be useful but any general advice will also be most welcome. Thanks, Ykraps (talk) 08:41, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Honours and awards" isn't typically used to simply list battles - also looks a bit odd that some include dates and others don't
I agree, "Honours and awards" is an odd place for them but it did appear to be the style when I checked HMS Victory, HMS Triumph (1764), HMS Leviathan (1790). However HMS Agamemnon (1781), a Good Article, has the battles listed under notes, and HMS Bellerophon (1786) and HMS Temeraire (1798), both Featured Articles, don't list them at all. I have listed them under 'Notes', as per Agamemnon but I'll be just as happy to delete them altogether. The dates were given where disambiguation was required but I have added the years for the other battles.--Ykraps (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest unpiping "war in America"
Not arguing, just wondering why. Do you think it is obvious enough to not be linked or is this to do with WP:Easter egg? I'm unsure whether you want me to remove the link, change the wording, or link elsewhere in the article.--Ykraps (talk) 09:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
American Revolutionary War is fine to link and clearer, as that wasn't the only war to happen in the US. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:43, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Three of 74-guns" -> "Three 74-guns"
"Three 74-guns" didn't sound quite right to me. What about "Three 74s"?--Ykraps (talk) 09:36, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:43, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Beam measurement is inconsistent between text and infobox. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:11, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Much of the infobox was inherited and to tell the truth, I didn't check for inconsistencies. I don't have Lavery's book so can't comment but Winfield definitely says 46' 11". I have changed measurements in info box and removed reference to Lavery.--Ykraps (talk) 09:57, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]