Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Halifax Explosion

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.

Article promoted by Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 04:06, 6 July 2015 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Halifax Explosion edit

Nominator(s): Nikkimaria (talk)

Featured article candidates/Halifax Explosion/archive1

The Halifax Explosion was one of the largest non-nuclear explosions of all time. This article recently passed GAN and I'm hoping to take it to FAC at some point in the future. Any and all comments are welcome. Thanks, Nikkimaria (talk) 15:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

"with the recently formed Canadian National Institute for the Blind, Halifax "became internationally known as a centre for care for the blind".": WP:INTEXT may be a problem here, and more so because the source may not tell us who said it. Also, more is quoted than is indicated by the quote marks.
"$35 million": This might be a dumb question, but ... Canadian or American?
"It has now become a "fashionable neighbourhood" and shopping district.": I'm not a fan of unexplained quote marks in Wikipedia (except in my reviews!). Readers who know the context might not get confused, but many readers will get tripped up. (Are you quoting someone? The meaning and value of a short quoted phrase like this one tends to vary depending on who's saying it. Are you giving us the name the area was known by? Expressing skepticism?)
Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. Great work, as always. - Dank (push to talk) 00:24, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dank! I think I've addressed all of these issues, let me know if not. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great. I'm used to seeing C$, but I'm sure you know better than I do. - Dank (push to talk) 00:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand it's always C$ in the US but Canada uses both, or at least I've seen both here. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley edit

"Mont-Blanc was under orders from the French government to carry her highly explosive cargo to Bordeaux, France" Maybe "cargo from New York via Halifax to Bordeaux"
"The two main points of departure were on the East Coast at Sydney (HMCS Landsdowne) in Cape Breton and Halifax." I would link Sydney and Cape Breton, and what does the ship in brackets mean.
"Hospital ships returned the wounded, and a new military hospital was constructed in the city." What does "returned the wounded" mean? Transported people wounded in U-boat attacks?
"guarded by patrol ships of the Royal Canadian Navy." You say above that the RCN had virtually no ships - maybe mention that they had acquired some by 1917.
" "special protections" for the ship" What does this mean?
I found the explanation of the collision confusing:
1. Comparing the map with an atlas, It appears Bedford Basin is in the north-west, and ships proceed south-east between Dartmouth to the north and Halifax towards the open sea. If this is correct it would be helpful to explain it.
2. "Navigating from the inner harbour into Bedford Basin required passage through a strait called the Narrows." This appears to mean that ships proceeding to sea had to go from the inner harbour through the strait and Bedford Basin and on the Atlantic, but presumably this is wrong - the inner harbour is between the basin and the sea. I suggest "Navigating from Bedford Basin towards the Atlantic required passage through a strait called the Narrows"
3. *"The Mont-Blanc started moving at first light on 6 December" What time was first light? Was the Imo overtaking the Mont-Blanc or were the ships coming from different directions.
4. I think it would be better not to mention geographical locations which are not explained (or which do not help to explain what happened), such as inner harbour, George's Island, Pier 9 and McNabs Island.
More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:08, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your comments, Dudley - I think I've addressed all except the last. I'm trying to track down a reliable source describing how far apart the two were when they first saw each other, and will sub that in for Pier 9 when I do. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More comments
Caption: "Map of present-day Halifax; Bedford Basin is in the northwest and is accessed via the Narrows between the North End and Dartmouth." Maybe "Map of present-day Halifax. Bedford Basin is top left and the Narrows between Dartmouth and Halifax leads towards the Atlantic off the bottom on the right."
"but was likewise too late to venture up the harbour before the nets were raised" I see that I misread what the Mont-Blanc was doing - I thought it was coming out of the harbor like the Imo. My carelessness but "likewise too late to venture up the harbour" may have made me think they were going in the same direction, so perhaps this could be amended.
"Mackey gave a short blast of his ship's signal whistle to indicate that his vessel had the right of way" - right of way because the Imo was on the wrong side of the channel?

Yes, that's correct. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did all the crew of the Mont-Blanc escape?
"was felt as far away as Cape Breton and Prince Edward Island" "caused an earthquake as far away as"?

That would not be technically accurate - this was a shock wave but not an earthquake. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The commission would continue until 1976, participating in reconstruction efforts.[" Did reconstruction really take 60 years? If so, why?
A very interesting article, but I am puzzled why the Mont-Blanc was (initially) blamed, as the article appears to show that the excessive speed and refusal to give way of the Imo was the cause. Could this be explained?
Interesting that the article also provides further examples of how WW1 led to advances in medicine.
Did Coleman get any posthumous award or other recognition? Dudley Miles (talk) 14:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Except as noted above, I've addressed these. Thanks! Nikkimaria (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A fine article. I would however add the explanation that the Mont-Blanc had the right of way because the Imo was on the wrong side. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Body and Refs
- Duplicate links to Rockingham and the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic.
- 4 external links have problems with connection.
- Standardize hyphens in the isbns

Hi Tomandjerry211, I've corrected these, thanks for your comments. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support: great work, Nikki, I only have a few suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 04:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the lead there seems a little inconsistency in presentation, e.g. "twenty minutes later" v. "20 minutes later". I'd actually suggest removing one of these, as it seems like repetition, but if kept it should probably be consistent
"the north end to rescue survivors", should this be "the North End to rescue survivors"?
"Germans had mocked victims of the Explosion", this probably should be "Germans had mocked victims of the explosion";
There is some date format inconsistency in the article: for instance "5 December" v. "December 13, 1917" Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks AustralianRupert, I've addressed all of these. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support

I felt the prose could stand some trimming/tweaking here and there, so let me know if any concerns with the result, but overall I found it a very impressive read -- detailed but not overly so, neutral, thoroughly referenced, and well illustrated.
Images generally appear properly licensed but should File:Halifax Explosion - harbour view - restored.jpg have a US PD tag, like the others? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian, I've added that. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.