Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Soviet cruiser Admiral Oktyabrsky

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 Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Soviet cruiser Admiral Oktyabrsky edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Kges1901 (talk)

This article continues my series on Kresta II-class cruisers. Admiral Oktyabrsky served with the Pacific Fleet for a fairly undistinguished twenty years. The article passed a GAN several months ago, and I have updated with the suggestions from the review on Admiral Isakov. Kges1901 (talk) 18:13, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~

underwent a lengthy refit between 1982 and 1986, being sent to the Persian Gulf in 1990 Needs a transitional word after 1986, instead of "being". Something like "and was then"

Added 'before'.

before the ships began to be built, commander-in-chief of the Soviet Navy Admiral Sergey Gorshkov changed Might be better phrased as "before the ships began to be built, Admiral Sergey Gorshkov, commander-in-chief of the Soviet Navy, changed" with links to commander in chief and Admiral

Done

As a Kresta II-class cruiser, Admiral Oktyabrsky Reads oddly to me. Either rework it as a class description "The Kresta II-class cruisers were..." or particularize it to the ship as "Admiral Oktyabrsky was..." I generally do the description as a class thing as it's easier when you intend to do all the ships in the class, and then just mention any specific info related to the individual ship, which might be speed during sea trials or whatever. But that's just me and definitely not a requirement.

Done the first option.

1,754.86 nmi (3,250.00 km; 2,019.46 mi) Round to the nearest whole number.

Done

two RBU-6000 12-barrel and two RBU-1000 6-barrel Having all the digits in close conjunction might be confusing. Suggest moving the barrel count in front of the designation.

Done

early warning air search radar hyphenate early warning. Air search is kinda redundant because all early-warning radars are air search by their nature.

Done

For anti-submarine warfare she had improved "an" improved

Done

hyphenate hull-mounted

Done

named for Soviet World War II "the" Soviet

Done

Add a link for Captain 2nd Rank, General Secretary, etc., Defense Minister

Done.

You need to watch more carefully for missing articles like "the" and "a". I added a couple to the 1970s paragraph. But some are still needed here: destroyer Sposobny, frigate Razyashchiy

Done

Move the link for sister ship to the first use and you needn't use the full term after the first use. And add "her" to sister or sister ship when using either term.

Done

I'd recommend adding the country and linking to it when referring to obscure cities like Berbera and Aden

Done, partially, but I'd rather not link country per WP:OVERLINK as the existence of Somalia and Yemen is now well known due to recent events.

You have a far higher opinion of the geographical literacy of our readers than I do, my friend.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tell the reader when the Soviet Union dissolved.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Support Comments: G'day, I have the following comments/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 09:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

as the Construction section is very small, I suggest combining it with the career section, in a manner similar to how it is presented in French battleship Courbet (1911)

Done

Brigade of the fleet's -- "Brigade of the Pacific Fleet's" (and move link to here)

Done

she discovered seven United States --> "she detected seven United States"?

Done

Between August 1990 and February 1991 she operated in the Persian Gulf during the Gulf War: is it possible to expand upon what the ship did during its deployment?

Regrettably, there is no information on this in my sources.

Is there anything about the generic position of the Soviet Union WRT the conflict? I guess, my concern here is that this is the closest the ship came to war service so it seems pretty important to provide some context. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:07, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This image caption claims that it was part of the routine Soviet naval presence in the Gulf after the end of the Iran-Iraq War, but I can't find anything to back that up. Kges1901 (talk) 22:35, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pages 39–40 of this document provide some context: Muraviev, Alexey (2007). The Russian Pacific Fleet: From the Crimean War to Perestroika (PDF). Papers in Australian Maritime Affairs, No. 20. Canberra: Sea Power Centre – Australia, Department of Defence. ISBN 978-0-642-29667-2. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:28, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Rupert. Unfortunately I cannot expand on this further as Muraviev's sources are offline, and I do not think I can obtain them in America. What I have found on the runet about Admiral Oktyabrsky's service in the Gulf sheds no light on why she was there. I have added context and the citation. Kges1901 (talk) 00:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, that looks fine to me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

to the Russian Navy, though her career...: suggest splitting this sentence after "Navy"

Done

in the Bibliography, the title of the Gardiner work should have an endash

Done

~~Comments~~Support by PM

link Soviet Navy at first mention in the body

Done

link beam and draught

Done

the length and beam conversions don't match between the body and infobox

Fixed

suggest amending the infobox to read 2 × shafts and 2 × steam turbines on separate lines if you prefer, as 2 × shaft steam turbines doesn't gel

Done

in general provide measurements in full first in the body, shaft horsepower instead of shp and nautical miles instead of nmi, as you have done with knots and kn

Done

worth mentioning that the RBUs were anti-submarine rocket launchers

Done

suggest "search for and destruction of"

Done

the twin AK-725s were dual purpose, so were for surface and aerial threats

Done

vary "She also mounted two quintuple mountings" had?

Done

I think in each para you can state "NATO code name" for the first item, but drop it after that and just use the code name.

I'd rather preserve the original designation in these cases.

suggest "She mounted two Grom fire-control systems for the SA-N-1 and two MR-103 Bars systems for the AK-725s."

Corrected. SA-N-1 was a typo.

link ship commissioning

Done

what are state tests? Are they like sea trials? link?

Indeed, same thing. Have rephrased to be more familiar.

is there any independent verification that she detected seven US subs during Piton? If not, perhaps it should be mentioned as a claim rather than in Wikipedia's voice?

No, have rephrased.

is there an isbn or similar identifier for Berezhnoy?

Added OCLC. This is an appendix to a modelling magazine so there does not appear to be an ISSN or anything.

That's me done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:14, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:16, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review edit

The English-language sources, plus Pavlov, which I have in translation, are know to me as high-quality sources.
Images appropriately licensed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:01, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Almost forgot, put the translated title of Berezhnoy in title case.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Kges1901 (talk) 00:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And we're good here.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:53, 26 November 2018 (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.