Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of battlecruisers/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Giants2008 21:06, 21 December 2012 [1].
List of battlecruisers edit
List of battlecruisers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
This is a list of every battlecruiser completed, cancelled, or planned, by all of the world's navies. The list underwent a MILHIST A-class review here in July, and it's been waiting for me to have enough free time to shepherd it through FLC. It is part of this nearly-finished Featured Topic, the result of collaboration between at least four editors. I feel the list is at or close to the FLC criteria, and I look forward to working with reviewers to ensure that it meets our highest standards. Thanks in advance to those who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 15:49, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments
- Very nice introduction.
- You're inconsistent in the Fate column. Often you used the format of "fate, date" other times you use "fate on date". Pick one and stick with it. Watch for the unbuilt ships as they're fate is often in another column.
- The Kronshtadt entry should be centered vertically like all the other entries.
- Why are the estimated completion dates for the Japanese ships italicized? And why don't they all say projected in parentheses?
- I wonder if there's a way to make the border between ship classes bolder to more clearly distinguish them? And if that's worth doing?
- How many screws for the B-65s?
- Is a note discussing how the Germans classified the Scharnhorsts as battleships necessary to prevent quibbles?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't this already dealt with in footnote one? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- <Blush> Oops, I missed that. I made one small tweak in that note, but otherwise good.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I copied the British table from your list :P
- Fixed
- Yeah, I don't know - I didn't catch that when I took the tables from the Japanese list. I just removed the projected dates entirely - seems to be no reason to include them here.
- I had thought the same thing, but my table skills leave much to be desired, so I don't know what we could do. Anyone else have ideas?
- Added. Thanks for reviewing the list, Sturm. Parsecboy (talk) 11:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- <Blush> Oops, I missed that. I made one small tweak in that note, but otherwise good.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't this already dealt with in footnote one? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – I've copyedited the lead; I hope those edits look good. Otherwise I think that most of the content is from the related country battlecruiser lists, so there are only minor quibbles to be addressed (eg Sturm's comments above). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Fine work on the lead, Ed. - Dank (push to talk) 21:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose per standard disclaimer. I've looked at the changes made since I reviewed this for A-class. These are my edits. (Edits may take days to show up on that page.) - Dank (push to talk) 21:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.