Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/HMS Ledbury (L90)
- 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 page.
HMS Ledbury (L90) edit
Hi, I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to nominate an article of my own so bear with me if I broke some rule; I wish to nominate this article because destroyers are usually passed over by most histories of the Second World War in favour of more glamourous capital ships, so I thought these workhorses deserved a little more recognition for their contribution...I chose the Ledbury because it was active in many theatres during the war, even if its main action occurred in the Mediterranean. I hope I've satisfied the requirements of this encyclopaedia, but as I've said I'm still new here. Reuv 15:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Looks very good - a ships with an interesting war story and some comedy moments! A couple of minor improvments you can make:
- Throughout, ship names should be in italics. As it stands they are mixed (particularly Ledbury).
- When introducing Tirpitz etc it is worth describing what they were - capital ship raiders or if you felt imprecise pocket battleships.
- 'The Ledbury found the Ohio and the Dorset with the Bramham standing by the Dorset and the Penn dropping depth charges' - this sentence could be clearer, the Dorest appears to be in two places.
Well done! (Self-nominations are quite allowed, by the way. Often they are both an important way of keen editors getting feedback for 'their' articles and of making sure that quality work is recognised) The Land 20:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I've addressed the issues raised so far; I described the German surface elements as commerce raiders, with a link to the Kriegsmarine nearby. I also removed the double Dorset reference...I have referred to it twice by mistake. Thanks for the support and help!! Reuv 21:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak support. A good all round article, but I've got some very nit-picky things that you should look at over the next couple of copyedits. In no particular order:
- As above, ships names should be consistently italicised. However, prefixes should not. HMS Ledbury (1940) ([[HMS Ledbury (1940)|HMS ''Ledbury'' (1940)]]), not HMS Ledbury (1940) (''[[HMS Ledbury (1940)|HMS Ledbury (1940)]]'')
- Check where wikilinks go. Several lead to disambiguation pages, or to irrelevant topics. Also, at some points you've linked concepts in multiple words. One of the ones I fixed in my brief copyedit was [[escort]] [[destroyer]]. By taking out the middle brackets, the link becomes escort destroyer, which is more specific.
- References should be listed in author surname alphabetical order.
- Don't be afraid to use German names like Kriegsmarine or Luftwaffe, instead of pipe-linking over them with "German Navy" or "German aviators".
- Question, should this page be at the pennant number (HMS Ledbury (L90))?
- I hope you take these on board, and that your article makes it to A-class. -- saberwyn 05:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I sorted out the references and the links to the German names, and I also improved the wikilinks to other topics. I agree with the pennant number HMS Ledbury (L90) move, and I had created a redirect to this page previously, but I haven't the slightest idea how to 'move' the page there. Thanks for your help and ideas to improve this article! Reuv 11:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I have moved the page for you and renamed the reviews involved accordingly. Pages can be moved using the icon in the top right of the browser entitled "move". Help can be found at Meta Help on moving page Woodym555 13:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I sorted out the references and the links to the German names, and I also improved the wikilinks to other topics. I agree with the pennant number HMS Ledbury (L90) move, and I had created a redirect to this page previously, but I haven't the slightest idea how to 'move' the page there. Thanks for your help and ideas to improve this article! Reuv 11:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as peer reviewer of the article. Support as per above,
as long as the references are sorted,i see no reason why it cannot be A-Class. Well done Woodym555 10:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Really nice and interesting article. Per peer review and above, it deserves to become an A-class article. --Eurocopter tigre 08:52, 2 July 2007 (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 page.