Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tucker-class destroyer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Tucker class destroyer[edit]
- Promoted --Eurocopter (talk) 10:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator(s): Bellhalla (talk)
Toolbox |
---|
This article is about one of the classes of World War I "thousand tonner" destroyers of the United States Navy. The article has passed a GA review and I believe that it fulfills the A-Class requirements. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Where's Friedman in the references? You have him cited, but there's no reference. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support with a few comments:
- Second sentence, second para, lead. Link to battle fleet for those who do not know what it is?
- Edit: is there even a decent link for that? If not, oh well. (I'm assuming that Battle Fleet doesn't work here) —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 00:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It looked to me that Battle Fleet is specifically about the 1922–1941 USN unit. Other than this ACR, battle fleet is not linked anywhere else; and battlefleet has only one link. Should there be a generic battle fleet/battlefleet article somewhere? — Bellhalla (talk) 06:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Edit: is there even a decent link for that? If not, oh well. (I'm assuming that Battle Fleet doesn't work here) —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 00:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Last sentence, second para, lead. What were previous destroyers' weights prior to the Cassin's? I know that some in the early 1900s were 250 t, so to 1000 t is a large jump—however, a casual reader won't know that.
- "
The surviving members of the class had all returned to the United States by early 1919 and been decommissioned by June 1922. " - to me, this makes it sound like a majority of the class had sunk, but only one was. "The Sampsons were the only group originally equipped with anti-aircraft guns, a pair of 1-pounder (0.45 kg) guns [with a caliber of 37 mm/1.46 in].[11]" - why brackets?- I had followed a similar format in Yorktown-class gunboat where I was enumerating 1-, 3-, and 6-pounders with the calibers for each in brackets to try and avoid information overload in the text. Here, there's really not that problem, so I've eliminated the brackets. — Bellhalla (talk) 06:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"All but Tucker were returned to the U.S. Navy in 1933; Tucker followed in 1934" - how about "All were returned to the U.S. Navy in 1933 with the exception of Tucker, which followed in 1934.""She was the first U.S. Navy vessel named in honor of U.S. Navy officers Jonathan Wainwright, his cousin, Commander Richard Wainwright, and his son, Jonathan Wainwright, Jr." - son of J. Wainwright or of R. Wainwright?There seems to be rather wide spaces between each of the ship summaries. Is that just me?- Cheers Bellhalla! —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 23:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Second sentence, second para, lead. Link to battle fleet for those who do not know what it is?
- Support. — AustralianRupert (talk) 08:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.