Talk:Soviet destroyer Sokrushitelny (1937)

Soviet destroyer Sokrushitelny (1937) 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: January 28, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / Russian & Soviet / World War II

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
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II 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

Soviet Union Low‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Soviet destroyer Sokrushitelny (1937)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 08:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 08:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Reads OK, no issues identified

Design and description

I think it should be made explicit that the Gnevny-class ships were the modified Folgores
- None of my sources directly state that as the Soviets changed quite a bit from that design. The Type 7s were around 200 tons lighter and had an entirely different armament arrangement than the twin 120 mm gun turrets of the Italians ships.
Are the speed and range figures in the infobox specifically for Sokrushitelny? They are inconsistent with the figures given in the text, which I understand to be for the Gnevny-class ships
- Is the header in the infobox "General characteristics (Gnevny as completed, 1938)" not clear enough?
  - The point is the figures are inconsistent between text and infobox. Zawed (talk) 07:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:30, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Construction and service

Redlink 'Convoy QP 12'?
with all fourteen German torpedoes missing: this kind of lacks antecedence. How about: "with all fourteen torpedoes launched by the German aircraft missing their targets"
The ship unsuccessfully searched in early for ships from Convoy PQ 17: "in early"? Looks like a date/time period missing here
and were able to rescue 191 men, although 29 sailors died during the rescue operations.: the lead says 35 men were lost
- 6 when the stern broke free and 29 while being rescued--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Duh, I missed the bit mentioning the six that died when the stern went. Zawed (talk) 07:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
which sank after their departure, with a skeleton crew of 16 men.: to me, this reads as though the 16 skeleton crew went down with the ship but it is later stated the lieutenants were given their own commands so presumably at least some survived
- Let me see if I can get details.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - My error, have corrected. Kges1901 (talk) 23:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other stuff

Sources look OK, happy to AGF given history of nominator
No dupe links
Image tags look OK

That's my comments for now. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:06, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Status query[edit]

Zawed, Sturmvogel 66, and Kges1901, where does this nomination stand? It's been a month since the last post here; what is left to be completed? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just one final matter requiring feedback in the design/development section. Zawed (talk) 03:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is all fine now, passing as GA as I believe it meets the necessary criteria. Zawed (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]