Talk:HMS Mindful (1915)

HMS Mindful (1915) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 27, 2022. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War I task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Mindful (1915)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 23:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

The M class were an improvement on the previous L-class...: suggest either "The M class destroyers (or ships) were an improvement on those of the previous L-class..." or "The M class was..."
- Amended.
...jointly sinking the German...: having read the portion of the article that deals with this action, I think it is better to say "helped sink" rather than jointly (which I read as two ships being involved).
- Good spot.

Design and development[edit]

...the greater performance was appreciated...: suggest, for greater specificity, "the greater performance of the M-class was appreciated".
- Happy to add.

Construction and career[edit]

...the name had been used in the Royal Navy.: I may be overthinking this, but to me it seems this should be "by the Royal Navy."
- No problem. I have amended that.
I'm pretty certain you would have included it if known, but for sake of completeness, I have to ask: is the name of the captain, or any of her captains, known?
- I have some names, but no one that seems of significance.
At 6:29 PM, the destroyer...: the construction of this section, particularly the starting sentence, suggests that this is still 30 May, but I think it may have been the following day?
- Good spot.
so did not follow Faulkner.: typo in the ship's name here.
- Another good spot.
...was sold to Cohen...: needs more context as to who/what Cohen is.
- G. Cohen is a shipbreaker. I have added the initial.

Other stuff[edit]

Sources themselves look OK. However, doing some source checks, I can't see that cite 12 supports the point that V48 specifically was the ship destroyed, and that the Shark was involved. The source just refers to a destroyer being sunk, not a torpedo boat. Cites 16 and 18 also checked and support the material that they are used for - however, in the case of the former I feel it may be worthwhile adding where the action took place and that the sub had already attacked a trawler.
- Well noted. The Royal Navy used the term destroyer for the German torpedo boats. I have added another reference that mentions the names of the other vessels explicitly. I have also added the detail for the action on 20 August.
Image tags check out OK
No dupe links

A nice solidly put together article otherwise. Zawed (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Zawed: Thank you for your kind words and excellent review. I think I have addressed your concerns. simongraham (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This looks all good. I'm passing as GA as I believe that the article meets the necessary criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]