Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/SMS Preussen (1903)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Kges1901 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 12:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

SMS Preussen (1903)

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk)

Featured article candidates/SMS Preussen (1903)/archive1

Another German battleship article - we're getting to where we can see the light at the end of the tunnel! This ship served with the High Seas Fleet during World War I, but saw limited action. She was serving as the guard ship for the Danish straits during the Battle of Jutland, so she missed the largest naval battle of the war. She was one of the few battleships that Germany retained after the war, but she was converted into a tender for minesweepers, and never served again as a warship. A section of her hull was retained for weapons testing, and it was eventually sunk by Allied bombers in 1945! Thanks for all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 22:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by PM

This article is in fine shape. A few comments from me:

link ship commissioning at first mention (first section re Dreadnought)
- Done
the beam conversion isn't consistent between the body and infobox
- Fixed
are naval boilers also Scotch boilers, as the boilers in the infobox are listed as Scotch, but some were naval? Perhaps I'm confusing myself...
- I would assume so, but Groener doesn't elaborate, unfortunately.
the horsepower measurements don't match between the body and infobox
- Fixed
the cruising speed conversions in the infobox don't match the body
- Fixed
the conversions on the 8.8 cm guns don't match between the infobox and the body
- Fixed
do we know where the TTs were located?
- Not specifically, but the article does say they were in the hull below the waterline - I'd assume one in the bow, one in the stern, and two on each side.
link ceremonial ship launching
- Done
move link to Helgoland up to first mention
- Done
link Kiel
- Done
link IX Corps (German Empire)
- Done
maybe add "in the Canary Islands" to Las Palmas?
- Works for me
Friedrich von Ingenohl is misspelled and therefore double linked (the redlink and the blue one) and the second mention can just be Ingenohl
- Fixed
link dry dock
drop the von from von Ingenohl when mentioning him again
- Done
suggest linking guard ship in the body
- Done

That's me done. Great job. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:29, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PM! Parsecboy (talk) 12:07, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

All sources are of high quality and reliable. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:29, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

All images are PD and appropriately licensed. Kges1901 (talk) 00:46, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Sturmvogel_66

I cleaned up the infobox a little, but you need to link ihp, nmi and knots there.
- Thanks, and done.
I also cleaned up the cylindrical/Scotch marine boiler business
- Thanks
What's a fleet advance? Perhaps a sortie?
- Yes - I picked that up from Staff, who I think was probably using a too-literal translation of "vorstoss"
encountered and briefly clashed The first two words are redundant
- Good point
link capital ship, torpedo boat, flotilla
- Did the first one, torpedo boat is already linked, and I don't know about linking a word in a proper name
Watch your rounding on torpedo tubes
- Fixed
Spell out and link VAdm
- It is - in the Design section
Danish king Christian IX Capitalize king--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Thanks Sturm. Parsecboy (talk) 12:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Zawed

In the infobox, shouldn't the number of torpedo tubes be listed?
- Good catch
Design: "...funding was allocated for a new class of battleships, to...": should the comma following battleships be there?
- Nope
1908-1914 section: For context, who is Prince Heinrich?
- Good idea.

It was a struggle to find the above issues, this is looking in pretty good shape. Zawed (talk) 08:00, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Zawed! Parsecboy (talk) 11:57, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking good, adding support. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 08:10, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.