A fact from SNLE 3G appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Milhist comments
editThere are several terms and phrases such as "towed array" that may be too difficult for the average reader to understand (B4). Also, sentence structure is awkward at times. Needs an infobox, or an image if an infobox isn't practical for B5. Shotgunscoop (talk) 17:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
edit- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:27, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the upcoming SNLE 3G-class nuclear ballistic missile submarines could remain in service with the French Navy until 2090? "« Nous sommes sur des élongations longues », a résumé un conseiller de Florence Parly. Effectivement, les futurs SNLE ne quitteront le service actif qu’en « 2080, 2090 »" which I translate as: "'we are looking long-term' stated an adviser to Florence Parly. Effectively the future SNLE [ballistic missle submarine] will remain in active service until '2080-2090'" from: Chapleau, Philippe (19 February 2021). "Quatre nouveaux sous-marins nucléaires lanceurs d'engins pour la France en 2035". Ouest-France.fr (in French). Retrieved 20 February 2021.
- Reviewed: First of three credits from Template:Did you know nominations/Mother to Son
Created by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 10:31, 20 February 2021 (UTC).
- Long enough, new enough, earwig is all good. Good to go. I find it fascinating to think that anyone will even have boomers in 2090, let alone plan for it now. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2021 (UTC)