Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/SMS Roon

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 08:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

SMS Roon[edit]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk)

SMS Roon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

As part of my commitment to keeping the A-class page from being entirely occupied by battleships, I bring you...an armored cruiser! This is another dusty old article I started all the way back in 2007 - it's obviously come a fair way since then. This is one more step toward turning this Good Topic in a Featured one. Thanks in advance to all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 14:38, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5[edit]

Great to see you again PB. Thanks for the help, mate, I need 27 nominations before I reached the 100th review before October. It is also really hard to review GANs due everyone wants to claim those since the drive is active. This would be a challenge to reach my goal and work on the drive itself too. I'm lucky to have the peer reviews (which are six left) to review. I assume there wouldn't be a lot of ARCs nor GANs. :p Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I'll do my best to help you out ;) I'm halfway through SMS Loreley (1859), so keep your eyes peeled for when that goes to GA ;)
  • being laid down in August 1902, launched in June 1903 Just a question, but do we have to add the specific dates like the infobox? It looks more right to add the specific dates in the lead and body but that's just my view of reading.
    • I don't generally give the specific date in the lead (and actually, I've gotten away from much specificity in the lead lately)
  • and made several cruises in the Atlantic Ocean Unlink Atlantic Ocean due common term.
    • Done
  • Infobox: "Commissioned:2 Aguust 1914" "Aguust"? Nice try to cover this one to us. ;p
    • Haha, whoops!
  • Looks like you forgot to add that she was scrapped in 1921 in the body.
    • No, it's there - "...struck from the naval register on 25 November 1920 and scrapped the following year..."
  • You forgot to mention how many screw propellers and triple-expansion steam engines she had in the body.
    • Fixed
  • "21.1 knots (39.1 km/h; 24.3 mph)" Link knots.
    • It's linked earlier
  • "4,200 nmi (7,800 km; 4,800 mi)" Link nmi.
    • Done
  • You forgot to mention how many officers and enlisted men she has in the body.
    • Added
  • which increased horsepower by 2,000 indicated horsepower (1,500 kW) Link kW.
    • Fixed this to standardize on PS/ihp
  • She displaced 9,533 t (9,382 long tons; 10,508 short tons) as built and 10,266 t (10,104 long tons; 11,316 short tons) fully loaded This sentence uses short tons while the rest doesn't.
    • Fixed
  • developed a total of 19,000 metric horsepower (14,000 kW) and yielded a maximum Unlink kW.
    • As above
  • range of up to 4,200 nautical miles (7,800 km; 4,800 mi) at a cruising speed of 12 knots (22 km/h; 14 mph) Unlink both km/h and mph.
    • good catch
  • the lower edge of the belt by 40–50 mm (1.6–2.0 in) thick sloped armor Is it possible to round the nought?
    • Not without rounding the 1.6" up to 2", unfortunately.
  • Pipe German with the German Empire.
    • Done
  • on 8 April and crossed the Atlantic to Hampton Roads, Virginia Link Virginia and unlink Atlantic.
    • Done
  • included contingents from Great Britain, Japan, Austria-Hungary, France, Italy, and several other nations Pipe/link Japan, Austria-Hungary and Italy with the Empire of Japan and Kingdom of Italy.
    • Done
  • ship went on a major cruise into the Atlantic Ocean from 7 to 28 February 1908 Unlink Atlantic Ocean.
    • Done
  • caught them by surprise and damaged one of them.[22][18] Re-order the refs here.
    • Fixed

That's anything from me. Now excuse me but I have some work to do here. :) Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CPA. Parsecboy (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're welcome mate. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:08, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Indy beetle[edit]

  • Like many of the late armored cruisers, Yorck was quickly rendered obsolescent by the advent of the battlecruiser; as a result, her career was limited. Err, typo?

-Indy beetle (talk) 03:55, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by PM[edit]

This article is in great shape. I have a few comments:

  • in the lead, was the lack of manpower also a reason for her decommissioning in 1916?
    • Hildebrand didn't mention it this time - I'd suspect that Roon would have otherwise still been useful in the Baltic if not for the submarines
  • "which increased horsepower by 2,000 metric horsepower" repetition of horsepower here, could the first one be changed to "power" or "output"?
    • Changed to "power"
  • suggest linking armored cruiser at first mention in the body
    • Good idea
  • suggest abbrev=off and lk=on for the first displacement conversion
    • Done
  • should the speed be as designed, or trial speed because she didn't manage it?
    • Usually I go with design speed, but in this case I think trial makes more sense
  • perhaps be consistent with the armour measurements in the body and infobox, one is mm, the other cm
    • Good idea
  • perhaps link flagship at first mention in the body
    • Done
  • no first name for KAdm Jacobsen? and redlink?
    • There's a hidden note in the article there - <!--which one, Hermann or Leo?--> - Hildebrand don't give us a first name, and both Hermann and Leo Jacobsen were active at the time. I'd guess Hermann, since he was promoted to Vizeadmiral in 1911, while Leo was attained that rank in 1916 (so a Konteradmiral billet in 1908 makes more sense to me for the former), but I can't say for certain
  • just for clarity, suggest " IV Group"→" IV Scouting Group"
    • Works for me
  • "Commander Jones"→"Commander Loftus Jones"
    • Done
  • "Beatty"→"<rank> David Beatty"
    • Done
  • "while Hopman relocated to Roon while his flagship" could you vary the wording to get rid of the while... while?
    • Reworded
  • "was under repairs for a torpedo hit to cover a minelaying operation"?
    • Split that sentence up
  • move the description and link to Albatross to first mention
    • Done
  • "by four Russian cruisers" is sort of made redundant by then listing four cruisers, suggest dropping it
    • Done
  • any info about casualties from the hits during the Battle of Åland Islands?
    • No
  • link training ship, accommodation ship, seaplane carrier and ship breaking
    • Done

That's all I have. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks as always. Parsecboy (talk) 17:08, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, supporting. Great work on this. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:52, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are of high quality and reliable, just what you would expect on a German ship of this vintage. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:34, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
the images are all appropriately licensed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

  • Ampersand for Polmar and Noot
    • Good catch
  • Footnotes and References otherwise properly formatted.
  • All sources are highly RS.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:59, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments & support by Pendright[edit]

Lede:

  • ... and had a top speed [was] 20.4 knots (37.8 km/h; 23.5 mph).
[?]

Pendright (talk) 06:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, good catch Pendright. Parsecboy (talk) 11:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing on by adding a few minor cmments! Pendright (talk) 06:14, 2 October 2019 (UTC) Lede:[reply]

  • ... in September 1911, she was decommissioned and placed in reserve.
The word reserve is used as a noun here; ordinarily it would be preceeded by either the definite article "the" or the indefinte article "a"?

Service:

  • Two days later, the international fleet, which also included ...
Isn't it "an" international fleet, not "the" international fleet?
No, I think "the" is correct here
  • From 11 September to 28 October, Roon briefly resumed her role as deputy flagship while Friedrich Carlrelieved Roon's sister Yorck while the latter vessel was being overhauled.
This sentence seems a little rough around the edges?
See how I reworded it

World War I

  • ... Admiral von Ingenohl ordered the High Seas Fleet to turn to port and head for Germany.
" turn to port" - won't a reader need a little help with this phrase?
Reworded

Operations in the Baltic:

  • The light cruiser Augsburg and three destroyers were escorting Albatross when they were attacked by the armored cruisers Bayan, Admiral Makarov, and light cruisers Bogatyr and Oleg.
Add "the" before light cruisers.
Done

Finished - Pendright (talk) 06:14, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Pendright. Parsecboy (talk) 15:41, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Supporting - Pendright (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Harrias[edit]

  • Why does the article use the German name (Libau) for Liepāja, rather than the version favoured on Wikipedia?
    • Generally I use the name in use at the time - the city was known as Libau in those days (same with Danzig instead of Gdansk, Constantinople instead of Istanbul, etc.)
  • The body has "19,000 metric horsepower (19,000 ihp)", but the infobox uses "19,000 metric horsepower (14,000 kW)", why the difference?
    • I forgot to specify the output in the box - good catch
  • Add an English translation for "Fregattenkapitän", like you did Kapitän zur See and Kommodore.
    • Done
  • "They stopped in Vigo, Spain, to replenish their coal for the voyage home." Is this detail necessary?
    • My thought is, it's helpful for readers to get a sense of the logistics involved
      • Personally, it seems superfluous, but it's not a major issue. Harrias talk 12:45, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On 23 September, KAdm Jacobsen replaced Kalau von Hofe, and the following month FK Georg Scheidt." Can you clarify what this means? Did Jacobsen replace von Hofe, then Scheidt? Or did Jacobsen replace von Hofe, then Scheidt replaced Jacobsen? Or something else I'm missing?
    • Jacobsen and Hofe were the squadron commanders, Scheidt was the new commander of Roon (though I had forgotten to finish the sentence, so that bit was missing)
  • "The operation was cancelled in 27 August.." "on", not "in".
    • Good catch
  • "E9 fired five torpedoes at the German flotilla; two passed closely astern of Roon while the other three missed their targets as well." The "as well" jars at the end of the sentence for me. How about reworking it completely to something like "E9 fired five torpedoes at the German flotilla, all of which missed; two passing closely astern of Roon."
    • Done
  • "..Hopman hauled down his flag.." Did Hopman literally do this himself?
    • No, but it's a fairly common expression
      • It feels like a bit of a colloquialism to me, but it's not enough for me to withhold my support. Harrias talk 12:45, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "..replaced with only six 15 cm guns and six 8.8 cm anti-aircraft guns.." Remove "only".
    • Done

Overall, a very nice article, and it's good to read about something other than a battleship from time to time ;) Harrias talk 16:11, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - what should I do next, an 1880s aviso? One from the 1850s? Or maybe an 1840s paddle steamer? ;) Parsecboy (talk) 12:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it has to be the paddle steamer! Anyway, good work; I commented above on a couple of points that I'm not 100% happy with, but ultimately they are more personal preference than anything else, so I'm happy to support nevertheless. Harrias talk 12:45, 30 September 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/SMS_Roon&oldid=919357218"