Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/HMS Mallow (K81)

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment

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 Parsecboy (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 12:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

HMS Mallow (K81) edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

HMS Mallow (K81) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

HMS Mallow was a Flower-class corvette designed to be a small and nimble escort for convoys, mainly in the Atlantic in WWII. Mallow participated in nearly 100 convoys between 1940–1945, played a part in the sinking of a U-boat, and ended up in Yugoslav hands towards the end of the war, which is why I am interested in her. She is part of a Good Topic I am slowly moving towards Featured. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:41, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nikkimaria! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5 edit

  • Link long tons (don't forget the infobox too).
  • Link kW (don't forget the infobox too).
  • Link knots in the infobox.
  • a draught of 13 ft 7 in (4.14 m) extending to 15 ft 9 in (4.80 m) at deep load 4.80 m is too specific (don't forget the infobox too).
  • top speed of 16.5 knots (30.6 km/h; 19.0 mph) 19.0 mph is too specific.
  • 0.5-inch (12.7 mm) machine guns and two twin 0.303-inch (7.7 mm) This "0.303-inch" looks too specific.
  • That's a really specific number for a gun, but okay. Also is there a link for the gun? Same with the 0.5-inch gun?
  • Hey PM Can you confirm are there wiki links for the 0.5-inch and the 0.303-inch guns? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 06:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • G'day CPA-5. The sources aren't clear, only giving the calibre, not the make and model. I suspect they were .50 cal Vickers Mark IIIs, and possibly .303 cal Vickers, but don't know for sure. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • proved inadequate as air defence weapons, and were replaced by heavier guns.[3] In 1944, Mallow's anti-aircraft armament included In this sentence there are two links to the Anti-aircraft warfare's article.
  • In 1944, Mallow's anti-aircraft armament included Sturm always uses "AA" after the first anti-aircraft as its short form.
  • total of six single 20 mm (0.79 in) Oerlikon cannons In British English they use cannon instead of cannons, however I personally don't know or Australians use cannons or cannon as cannon's plural form?
  • remaining with the 37th Escort Group covering the United Kingdom – Mediterranean and Sierra Leone Unlink United Kingdom and Mediterranean because UK is a common term and it is the second time we use Mediterranean here.
  • convoy escorts between Gibraltar and Port Said to October Maybe add Egypte after Port Said?
  • After the conclusion of the war, Nada was taken over by the fledgling Yugoslav Navy and renamed Partizanka Do we know when she was renamed?
  • In 1949, she was returned to the Royal Navy and reverted to HMS Mallow Until 28 October 1949 was it British but do we know what happend in that period?
  • She was in British hands from sometime in 1949 until handed over to the Egyptians in October. Nothing about where she went or did during that period is in sources. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

  • Why is the Design, description and construction section a mix between metric units and English units? She was designed and made in the UK so it'd make sense to use English units in the section.
  • While her standard displacement was 925 tonnes (910 long tons) Unlink tonnes because of common term.
  • Mallow and the Shoreham-class sloop HMS Rochester sank By MOS:SEAOFBLUE please try to avoid placing at least three links next to each other. I think you can unlink sloot here because a prior sentence uses a sloop link too.
  • was ordered on 19 September 1939, laid down on 14 November 1939 Remove the second 1939.
  • launched on 22 May 1940, and commissioned on 2 July 1940 Remove the second 1940.

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello PM They look fine to me but I just added some more comments. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think we're done here. I'm out of comments right now. Which means this article earned my support here. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 08:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Gog the Mild edit

  • The infobox ship image needs alt text.
I had forgotten. It frustrates me no end that the template doesn't permit one to comply with the MoS.
  • "until she was discarded in 1975" Is there a more encyclopedic word than "discarded"? Ditto in the final sentence.
  • "Hedgehog (Anti-Submarine Projector)" The A, S and P should be lower case.
  • "The engine drove a single propeller and she could reach a top speed of" Perhaps "she" → 'Mallow', to avoid a reader thinking "she" relates to "the engine"?
  • "Later in the war, ships of the class received" "ships of the class" → 'they'. ("ships of the class" is used in the previous sentence.)
  • "Mallow was quickly put into service as a convoy escort from July 1940 onwards, her first convoy" A new sentence from "her first ..." or replace the comma with a semi colon please.
  • Sloop is linked to the sailing boat. Is that correct. Or should it be Sloop-of-war? Or a red link?
  • "UK – Mediterranean and Sierra Leone" The dash should be a no space en dash. The phrase should read 'UK–Mediterranean and UK–Sierra Leone'.
  • "She sailed with a nucleus crew in convoy" "nucleus crew" is not, IMO, inherently clear. Could this be rephrased?
  • Nucleus crew has a very specific meaning of around 60%, the minimum necessary to operate basic ship systems, but it is a bit jargony so I've changed it to "reduced". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 11:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look, Gog! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Postscript & support by Pendright edit

  • The speed shown in the Infobox differs from that of the text.

Pendright (talk) 20:44, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67: I've added a few more comments to my PS. Pendright (talk) 05:14, 20 June 2019 (UTC) Infobox:[reply]

  • The infobox says Mallow was "loaned" to the Yugoslav Navy, the text says it was transferred?
  • I think transferred is best, the sources don't say if any money changed hands or what the legal basis of the transfer was. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! Pendright (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox indicates the Mallow was "acquired" by Egypt, the text says it was transferred. Can it be determined if it was loaned, sold, or gifted?
Okay! Pendright (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Design:

  • By 1945, Mallow's armament had been further enhanced with two 6-pounder Hotchkiss mounts.
Since the word mount(s) is often associated with a protective housing or support for a gun, Would substituting "guns" for mounts clarify this a bit?
Good point, fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Career:

  • During the balance of 1940 she was engaged as an escort for 24 convoys as they left from or arrived at Liverpool.
"During the balance of 1940" is an introductory element or phrase and is usually followed by a comma.
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pendright (talk) 05:14, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Pendright! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Peacemaker67: Supporting - Pendright (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sturmvogel 66 and Parsecboy: would one of you two gents be willing to look at the sources used for this one? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:20, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, provided that I can stay out of the clutches of Civilization VI.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:34, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, you whippersnappers and your newfangled games - I still play CivIII :P Parsecboy (talk) 12:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

  • Sources are formatted consistently, except for McIvor, which needs hyphens in the ISBN
  • I don't know where we are on uboat.net - there are a couple of ancient (by wiki terms) threads on RSN about it, neither of which are particularly conclusive (and even if they were, standards have risen in the 9 years since the last discussion). I'd be inclined to say it's ok, but I don't know how reviewers at FAC will feel about it these days. Have there been any recent FAs that use it?
    • I think that it's considered good enough for GA, but not for anything higher.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:12, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think this is the only ship article I have which uses uboat.net, so I think it will have to go. My libraries only have this edition of Rohwer, and none have Elliott, so either this info have to go, unless someone here has access to books that cover the detail. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I recall from my grad school days working on a thesis on the U-boat campaign, convoyweb is A-OK. Parsecboy (talk) 12:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are only a few books dedicated to the Flowers and those are mostly technical histories with coverage only in broad strokes. I might be able to replace some of the information that you'll lose from uboat.net from what I have on hand if you remind me if you can't find it with what you have access to. There's a 3rd revised edition of Rohwer which might have more information on the ship's activities; if nothing else, the various escort groups that the ship was assigned to are covered. Allied Escort Ships of World War II: A Complete Survey by Peter Elliott is supposed to be the best book on the escort ships, though I haven't seen a copy yet. It's supposed to cover operations as well as the technical stuff in detail.
    • I'd appreciate anything you can find to replace the uboat.net material, Parsecboy, as it has some of the most interesting aspects of the ship. I won't lose sleep over losing the captains names, but her ordering, keel laying, launch and commissioning dates, the incident where she picked up survivors, the sinking of U-204 and her transfer to the Yugoslavs are pretty important. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • I was able to salvage some of the material with what I have on hand and I've ordered Elliot, which will hopefully have the exact date for the transfer to the Yugoslavs. Otherwise you'll have to use the vague date in Chesneau. I also wasn't able to find the last little bit from the 1992 of Rohwer in the newer one, which will look odd, but so be it.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for those additions, Sturm! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:18, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • OK, @Parsecboy and Sturmvogel 66:, have removed/replaced the last uboat.net refs. I had to delete the survivor pick-up, and be less specific with the transfer date, but that's pretty good I think. I think this is good to go except for anything Sturm can find in Elliott. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:45, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
            • You might consider adding access dates to the Navy List links, but I don't know that it's strictly necessary. Everything else looks fine to me. Parsecboy (talk) 11:43, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Nigel Ish edit

  • Elliott doesn't cover operations of individual ships in great detail, although it is good on technical detail and on things like shipbuilding strategy.
  • The claimed initial armament of 2 twin .5 in guns seems unusual - Elliott suggests an initial anti-aircraft armament of one quad 0.5 in (presumably the Vickers) and two .303 Lewis guns, while Lambert and Brown in Flower Class Corvettes (2008) states that early Flowers basically had to take what was available - often Lewis guns, but sometimes oddities like old .303 inch Hotchkiss machine guns, ex-American Savage machine guns or Holman Projectors. Is McPherson and Miller talking about Canadian-built ships when it talks about twin .50 inch guns?
    • As I recall, they were speaking generically about the class, but it is possible. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:39, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Friedman, in British Destroyers & Frigates: The Second World War and After (2008) on p. 137, specifically refers to the 2x twin .50in outfit as being fitted to Canadian-built flowers instead of the single pom-pom which was the design anti-aircraft armament of the British-built ships.Nigel Ish (talk) 13:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of the U-boat.net cites:
    • The ship's commanding officers should be able to be sourced by digging into the ship entries in the appropriate Navy Lists, which give dates of appointments (for example [1]). Similarly, Mallow not being listed as active in December 1943 can be sourced to the December 1943 Navy List [2].
    • The sinking of U-204 can be sourced to Blair and/or Paul Kemp's U-Boat Destroyed (or lots of other books), as can the point about U-564 sinking three ships from HG75 (and Blair has Mallow helping to drive away U-563 and U-564 from HG75 on 26 October 1941. Blair also has U-204 being sunk before HG75 get out from Gibraltar.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks Nigel, I'll work through these. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:39, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • I was a little confused by Rohwer's account of HG 75, but he also says that U-204 was sunk before the convoy left Gibraltar. Check Hague to validate the convoy's dates.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • Blair (pp. 591–592) has Mallow and Rochester taking part in sweeps west of Gibraltar to deal with the concentration of submarines waiting for the convoy - the convoy's departure was held back for a week because of the threat of these submarines, not sailing until 22 October. As an aside, this newspaper article has Mallow's CO awarded the DSO for "skill and enterprise in dealing with submarines while serving in HMS Mallow".Nigel Ish (talk) 13:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
            • G'day Nigel, can you clarify which book of Blair's you are talking about? title and year? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:02, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
              • The book is Blair, Clay (2000). Hitler's U-Boat War: The Hunters 1939–1942. London: Cassell & Co. ISBN 0-304-35260-8.Nigel Ish (talk) 09:21, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                • Thanks Nigel. OK, have added that material from Blair, and also a mention of the DSO for Noall. Check if I've reflected Blair accurately? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                  • The page numbers were off a bit (391–392 rather than 591–592 in my copy), but otherwise it reflects Blair.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Same pages for Mallow helping drive away the two other U-boats on 26 October? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                      • That would be p393.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:57, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                        • Done, thanks very much for your help, Nigel! Anything else that needs doing in your view? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:32, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                          • Check on the boilers - virtually all the British-built Flowers had cylindrical boilers rather than Admiralty 3-drum boilers - they seem to have been reserved for Canadian construction and Modified Flowers. Of course, something more on Egyptian use would be nice, but may be difficult to find.Nigel Ish (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                            • Thanks Nigel. Sturm, could you please check on the British Flower-class boilers when Elliott turns up? Unless you have another source that provides this info? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:20, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lenton confirms that Mallow had cylindrical boilers, but be sure to use this link: cylindrical boilers. I'll double check that against Elliot when it arrives.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:32, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Page 275? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:48, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry, pp. 271–272. Elliot arrived today and is a bit of a disappointment for your purposes. Only gives the year for the transfer to the RYN and says that "most" of the Flowers had cylindrical boilers.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:56, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Conway's (p. 63) lists 15 regular Flowers that had watertube boilers, all Canadian-built (Calgary, Charlottetown, Fredericton, Halifax
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/HMS_Mallow_(K81)&oldid=955198414"