Talk:HMS Archer (D78)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Archer (D78)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   the article needs a substantial copy-edit

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   File:HMS Archer (D78).jpg needs a source; it does not appear at history.navy.mil.

 Done

1. B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

2. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Second para, "Mormacland" section. What is GRT?

  Gross register tonnage, linked on first mention in infobox. Mjroots (talk)

• "USS Archer" section
  • What makes Navsource and the Royal Navy Research Organization reliable?

    I'd say that they are reliable. Info given there is corroborated by other sources Mjroots (talk)

  • What does BAVG mean?
  • I added a clarification tag. Which aircraft dove into the sea? First, second, third...?

    Clarified, it was the first one. Mjroots (talk)

  • Plagiarism issues:
    • Text: "The conversion consisted of a lightweight wooden flight deck on a truss frame being added on top of the ship which covered about 70% of the ships' length. The deck was serviced by a single lift aft where the aircraft hanger was situated."
    • [1]: "Her conversion consisted of a lightweight wooden flight deck on a truss frame being added on top of the ship which covered about 70% of the ships' length, [...]"
    • Every sentence cited to the Research archive is really close to the original wording, with many of the sentences just having been reordered or some details removed. This needs to be addressed...
• "Tasmania" says "She was sold to a Taiwanese buyer in 1961". But then you give the company that she was sole to right below it? Doesn't flow, IMO. (same thought with the end of "Anna Salén" and the beginning of "Tasmania")
• To me, the "Propulsion" and "Official Number and Code Letters" sections are unneeded; the former is covered in the infobox, while the later doesn't seem to have much to do with this ship.

  I'd say that the propulsion section is relevant because of the unusual method of drive, which gave so much trouble during the war years. The Official Number and Code Letters section allows the infobox to remain uncluttered with loads of refs, which looks ugly IMO. Mjroots (talk)

• I'm going to fail this for the reasons above, but please feel free to renominate it when you feel that the above issues have been dealt with! Cheers, —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 05:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

• The Royal Navy Research Archive reference was erroneous in stating that Brazos was a "Peruvian merchantman" as a number of other references make very clear the frighter was U.S. flagged, New York, N.Y., operating with Atlantic, Gulf & West Indies Lines (Agwilines). Correction made with cites on 27 April 2021. Palmeira (talk) 15:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Further source

Can any Swedish speaking editor use this source to expand the article?

Have you tried Google Translate? —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 05:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Out to launch

"Launch accelerator"? Is that the official term, or did somebody change it from catapult? If it's just changed, I suggest changing it back; otherwise, will somebody add the more common term? TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 23:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

At the time when fitted to an aircraft carrier they were termed 'accelerators'. When fitted to a capital ship or cruiser they were termed 'catapults'.

A capital ship or cruiser-carried aircraft was fitted with floats so the 'catapult' included a cradle for the support of the float(s)/hull. A carrier-based aircraft was a land plane that used it's own undercarriage and hence only needed to be accelerated rather than also being supported by the device as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.52 (talk) 16:57, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Sunk or scrapped?

The article says that she was scrapped - but wikiminiatlas shows her lying near the remains of USS America off the American east coast. Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!} ^(Whisper...) 12:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Definitely scrapped. The miniatlas actually gives two locations for Archer, taken from the article. One is the location of the collision with Brazos, the other is the location at which planes from Archer sank U-752. It's an odd weakness of the atlas system that it plucks these details from the article automatically, without contextualisation. Benea (talk) 12:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on HMS Archer (D78). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090303181116/http://acepilots.com/ships/archer.html to http://www.acepilots.com/ships/archer.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)