Template:Did you know nominations/Philip and Son

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BlueMoonset (talk) 19:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Philip and Son[edit]

(

)

... that Philip and Son was Dartmouth's last industrial shipyard (pictured)?

Created/expanded by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 05:39, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Added an img.--Nvvchar. 23:02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Reviewed Levant Battery

Review:

Revised review:

Article: Date is good (seems to me to have been created on 4 November, not 3 November, but that might be due to different time zones and such), long enough by far, neutral, cites sources (not for one claim, but I found the info in one of the cited sources. and added it to the correct place), found no copyvio in the sources available online and did agf on the books.

However, with regards to the list of ships built at the yard, the cited source does not support all the vessels listed. Specifically, HMAS Teal, HMS Everingham, Le Batofar, Lightvessel No. 11, MV Royal Iris of the Mersey and MV Snowdrop are not in the cited source. This needs to be rectified. Philip and Son might be listed as the building shipyard in the individual ship articles, but this article needs a citation for the fact that the vessels were built by Philip and Son.

I've removed mention of HMAS Teal, HMS Everingham, Le Batofar, Lightvessel No. 11, MV Royal Iris of the Mersey and MV Snowdrop. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Then we're good to go. Nice work on this interesting article. Manxruler (talk) 10:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Hook: Short enough, interesting (at least for those of us who like ships, and I think that's quite a few), cited, accurate, neutral and no blp concerns.
Other: QPQ done (although I really would have liked a direct link to the review, rather than to the reviewed article), although I know that nowadays we're encouraged to explain our reviews in more detail than what is the case with the review of Levant Battery. The image is free, used in the article and looks nice and interesting to me. Manxruler (talk) 01:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)