Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Valcour Island

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.

Battle of Valcour Island[edit]

Promoted Parsecboy (talk) 23:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator(s): Magic♪piano
Toolbox

Following on the heels of my recent ACR, I present another item from the 1775 Canadian invasion (and one of the first naval battles of the American Revolutionary War) for your consideration. Magic♪piano 15:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments
    • No problems reported with dab links, external links, or alt text. Well done.
    • More to follow... TomStar81 (Talk) 03:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Although most of the ships in the American fleet under the command of Benedict Arnold were captured or destroyed, the American defense of Lake Champlain delayed until 1777 the British attempt to divide the colonies by gaining control of the upper Hudson Valley." This reads weird, can you reword it?
      • Actually, in light of the above comment, I think this whole article could do with a copy edit. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've rephrased the above sentence; if you give additional examples of problematic writing, it may give me an idea of what's bugging you about the writing. Magic♪piano 00:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • As you wish. To keep this manageable I will go through each section individually. Note that these are my comments on the matter, so if you have a good reason for keeping something worded the way it is then please say so.
      • From the lead:
        • General Carleton had a 9,000 man army at Fort Saint-Jean, but needed to build a fleet to carry it. Carry it where?
        • By early October, the British fleet, which significantly outgunned the American fleet, was ready for launch. Launch from where?
        • After being drawn to Arnold's carefully-chosen battle position on October 11, the battle was engaged. This read ackwardly, see if you can fix it.
        • That night Arnold boldly sneaked the American fleet past the British one, and began a retreat toward Crown Point and Ticonderoga. This reads ackwardly, and has tense problems and NPOV problems (boldy is POV, sneaked should be snuck, if its going to appear here)
        • More of the fleet was destroyed when Arnold decided he could not hold Crown Point, and retreated back to Ticonderoga. This reads ackwardly.
        • The British forces included four officers who later became admirals in the Royal Navy: Thomas Pringle, James Dacres, Edward Pellew and John Schank. Was there more than force? Up till now, the article seemed to suggest there was only one force, so to have forces seems odd. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your useful feedback; writing all the way up to A/FA standards is probably my weakest point, so I appreciate your time and effort. I've made changes to address the above. Magic♪piano 13:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments:
    • in the Arnold patrols the lake section "twenty miles" should have a {{convert}} added to it;
    • there is some inconsistency in the format you use for time. In the Battle section you have "6:30 pm", then in the Retreat section you have "2 pm". I think for consistency, 2 pm should be "2:00 pm";
    • in the Aftermath section "three miles" should have a {{convert}} added to it;
    • in the Commemoration section, the citations for the last sentence are out of numerical order (i.e 40 then 39). If you reorder them to be "39, 40", they would look better IMO, but I don't think this is a MOS requirement, so it is just a suggestion. — AustralianRupert (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your comments; I've made changes to fix this things. Magic♪piano 15:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've struck my comments as they've all been dealt with, but want to see how you address Tom's comments before supporting. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 22:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Support have questions.

  • BTW, I'm okay with boldly snuck. Or audaciously, or whatever. A spade is a spade.
  • Lead seems contradictory, but perhaps I don't understand the battle, so we'll get back to that ,okay?
  • Carleton then launched his own offensive intended to gain control of the Hudson River Valley, which extends southward not far from Lake Champlain.
    • The Hudson River begins just south of Lake Champlain? Or the valley only extends a little bit south of Lake Champlain? (I'll argue with you on that). Some of this could be solved by describing the strategic importance of Lake Champlain and the Hudson valley in a separate subsection.
  • These tactics effectively denied the British any hope of immediately moving onto the lake.
    • How?
      • Answered in the previous paragraph (existing fleet in American hands, and too small). Magic♪piano 14:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...HMS Inflexible, a 180-ton warship they disassembled and rebuilt on the lake.
    • they took it apart on the lake and rebuilt it? How interesting and pointless an exercise!
      • Indeed. I would think it obvious that it was disassembled in one place and rebuilt in another. I have rendered the text more obvious... Magic♪piano 14:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ..carried enough firepower to threaten the entirety of Arnold's fleet by themselves.
    • carried enough firepower to outgun the entirety...?
  • Benedict Arnold's flagship during his patrols of the lake was the Royal Savage, a two-masted schooner carrying 12 guns, commanded by Captain David Hawley.
    • BA regularly patrolled the lake in his flagship, the... (wouldn't this work better as a chart? Line of Battle, or something? There are such charts used often in naval battle articles (see Battle of Pulo Aura.)
      • I can probably assemble a tabular order of battle, but need to work in some of the explanatory text... Magic♪piano 14:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the previous section you have forces assembled, and in the section on Arnold patrols the lake... you have them building the ships still.
    • I've switched the order of these sections; I don't think the flow of the article is significantly affected. Magic♪piano 14:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More later. Auntieruth55 (talk) 00:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's much improved. I made a couple of minor copyedits--easier than listing a bunch of things here, etc. There was one sentence that was entirely repetitive (re Pringle). You may want to put it bac, but I don't think it's necessary.
    • Looks fine to me, but I fixed a few minor things in your changes. Magic♪piano 03:46, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like this article. There is one thing that could help clarify some of the toings and froings. Many Americans have no idea what Lake Champlain is like. Most Europeans won't have seen a lake of this size--I guess it's bigger than lakes in western and central Europe--there might be some in Finland of this size. Possibly a brief description of the lake would help. I know you've included maps, but these old black and white maps are sometimes not as pictorially specific as we might wish. I made a note in one of the edit summaries, for example, asking how a part of the lake could be rocky. I know, it had rocks. But most people won't have been to Lake Champlain, and may not understand its geography, its size, and its many inlets and islands. Auntieruth55 (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • This point is well taken; I will see about pulling together a suitable description of the lake. Magic♪piano 03:46, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've added a description of the lake. Magic♪piano 15:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've added some dimensions--the text didn't do the size of the lake justice. See if that works for you. Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Looks good, especially with a citation and a few small changes. (I know, some of the numbers now disagree with the Lake Champlain article; but those are not cited.) Magic♪piano 16:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
            • works for me. I made "this number" to these numbers, because both the surface area and the number of islands changes, and "this number" was ambiguous. Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments: I've taken another look and have some more suggestions:
    • there is some inconsistency in how you treat numbers greater than nine (for example 15 miles in Battle section; but twenty miles in Arnold patrols the lake section). Per the WP:MOS, numbers greater than nine should usually use numerals;
    • is it possible to add in a few more wikilinks, some of the sections have very few (midshipman is one term that could be linked, some of the types of ships such as gundalow could also be linked);
    • in the Battle section, can you please clarify the time "Around 12:30" - is this am or pm? I assume it is pm, but it needs to be stated;
    • suggest wikilinking Philadelphia (the ship) in the Battle section and removing the wikilink to it in the Aftermath section. — AustralianRupert (talk) 08:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • One consequence of going to the tabular order of battle was that a lot of ship links disappeared from the text, since they were introduced in the textual order. I've now added ship links back in, as well as a few others that seem applicable. It hink I've also addressed your other items... Magic♪piano 19:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: looks good in my opinion. All my concerns have been addressed. — AustralianRupert (talk) 00:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Overall IMO this is a fine article. Only one comment:
    • Should the article be renamed to Naval Battle of Valcour Island as the wording in the leads suggests this is possibly a more appropriate name (I'm neutral either way)? Anotherclown (talk) 04:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • The battle is referred to most histories (e.g. in chapter titles) without the prefix "Naval"; this is true of a great many naval battles. (Thanks for your support!) Magic♪piano 12:41, 26 April 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Battle_of_Valcour_Island&oldid=358947694"