Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Yorktown-class gunboat
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.
- Promoted –Abraham, B.S. (talk) 03:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
| Toolbox |
|---|
This article is about the first class of steel-hulled gunboats of the United States Navy. The article has passed a GA review and I believe that it fulfills the A-Class requirements. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support with a few comments:
- "After a three-year hiatus from 1903 to 1906, ..." Define what you mean by "hiatus"?
- It was three years out of commission. I've reworded. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "After another stint in the Far East in 1894, Concord spent a year out of commission at San Francisco. In January 1898, Concord returned to the Asiatic Station, and joined Admiral George Dewey's fleet " What happened after she was recommissioned in 1896?
- I reworded Concord's summary to explain that she was out of commission from May 1896 to May 1897, and that most of the rest of 1897 was spent in Alaskan waters. I was trying to be too tight with the summary, I think. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It's alright; I just wanted to know what happened in those years without wading through the other article. :) Great article! —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I reworded Concord's summary to explain that she was out of commission from May 1896 to May 1897, and that most of the rest of 1897 was spent in Alaskan waters. I was trying to be too tight with the summary, I think. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Images look to be appropriately licensed.
- References and sources look good. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 05:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review, Ed. — Bellhalla (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "After a three-year hiatus from 1903 to 1906, ..." Define what you mean by "hiatus"?
- Support.
- Can turtleback deck be linked in Layout?
- From what I can surmise, I think it just means a deck with a crown in the middle (like a modern-day American football field with artificial turf with a slight slope to the edges). I don't have any source to back it up and would be reluctant to change the wording from the source.
- That's what I guessed from the description, but it'd be nice if there were some article on it if it's a common design. Oh well. – Joe N 23:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you say who the Secretary of the Navy who Yorktown hosted was?
- The Secretary of the Navy present at the Great White Fleet's entrance into San Francisco was Victor H. Metcalf. Ref: Albertson, Mark (2007). U.S.S. Connecticut: Constitution State Battleship. Mustang, Oklahoma: Tate Publishing. p. 48. ISBN 1598867393. OCLC 173513595. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 18:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Added. I also added the proper cite for that fact (which was not attributed to DANFS), so thanks for suggesting that and allowing me to catch my error. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The Secretary of the Navy present at the Great White Fleet's entrance into San Francisco was Victor H. Metcalf. Ref: Albertson, Mark (2007). U.S.S. Connecticut: Constitution State Battleship. Mustang, Oklahoma: Tate Publishing. p. 48. ISBN 1598867393. OCLC 173513595. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 18:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Bennington was attached to the Squadron of Evolution and for its cruise to South America." Awkward.
- Removed the extra and after "Squadron of Evolution" (and some other tweaks). — Bellhalla (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can turtleback deck be linked in Layout?
- Few more comments than normal, but still good. – Joe N 17:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments are good, though: they make the article that much better. Thanks, Joe. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Excellent article, no additional comments.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:40, 25 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.