Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of protected cruisers of France/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 23 August 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of protected cruisers of France edit

List of protected cruisers of France (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 15:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This list comprises all of the protected cruisers built by the French Navy in the 1880s and 1890s, some 33 ships in total, which filled a variety of roles. Their designs also represented the strategic and doctrinal fighting in the French naval command, between factions who favored a strong main fleet in French waters, those who preferred the long-range commerce raiders needed by the Jeune Ecole, and those who wanted a fleet based on colonial requirements. The list is the capstone to this topic, and it passed a Milhist A-class review earlier this year (here). Thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 15:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • "that relied heavy belt armor! - missing word
    • Good catch
  • Some of that first paragraph doesn't seem to be covered in the body so needs sourcing in the lead
    • I went through line by line, and I think the only thing that isn't explicitly mentioned in the body is the specific bit about strategic confusion, so I've added a citation for that - let me know if there's something I overlooked
  • North American station vs North Atlantic Station vs North Atlantic station - should the last word have a capital?
    • It's not the official title, so I don't think so
  • That's all I got on a first pass - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • All images need alt text
    • Added
  • All tables need a caption using either |+ your caption or |+ {{sronly|your caption}}
    • Added - forgot to put those on
  • Some armaments include measurements in inches while others don't – pick one format or the other
  • The units are converted at first use and not subsequently - this is pretty standard practice
    • Similarly, some propulsion measurements note km/h and mph while others don't
      • As above
  • Under Linois class, "2,285 to 2,318 long tons (2,322 to 2,355 t)" → "2,285–2,318 long tons (2,322–2,355 t)"
    • Done
  • If possible, find some type of identifier for Stowell & Munro, Glennon, and "The New Port of Bizerte"
    • Added all three
  • Navbox "Warships of France" has a redlink as the heading; the navbox should probably be removed or the redlink amended
    • Redlinks are fine per WP:REDLINK - at some point, we'll get around to creating the overarching list.
      • I would still suggest removing the link from the navbox; it kind of defeats the point of finding related articles if the article doesn't exist, and as the title, it probably doesn't need a link. But I won't haggle over this detail, it's just my opinion. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks RunningTiger! Parsecboy (talk) 16:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dank

  • Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing. I'm assuming that RunningTiger's review will be successful; I'll check back to make sure.
  • FLC criteria:
  • 1. The prose is fine in the lead, and you've already got two reviews on prose ... I'm assuming if another one is needed, someone will let me know. I added one word to the lead; although plural verbs with singular subjects are gaining in popularity every year, I'm still not completely comfortable with that. Otherwise, the writing is excellent (no surprise there). The coding at the top of the tables seems fine. I sampled the links in the tables.
  • 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
  • 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
  • 3b. The article is well-sourced, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review and I don't speak Polish). I know from many years' experience that your ship sources are reliable.
  • 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
  • 4. It is navigable.
  • 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
  • 6. It is stable.
  • Support. Well done. If you're looking for a list to review, you might want to skip my current nomination (it's got a long table) and take a look at List of plant family names with etymologies (much shorter); I'll be nomming that one as soon as the current nom gets one more support. (And you can even skip the rows that include namesakes if you like ... they will have been reviewed in other lists.) - Dank (push to talk) 18:36, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Correction: that will be the nom after my next nom. - Dank (push to talk) 19:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review The sources are all reliable (AGF on the Polish ones), and despite the age of some of the journals, and one or two books, there is no problem with that given the time period of the subject, nature of the refs and what they are being used for. Two minor things: Everett and Parkinson need locations for consistency, and it is Houghton Mifflin not Houghton Miflin. The first Brassey listed should probably be the one linked, as it is the same guy AFAIK. Is there a numerical identifier, location and publisher available for Ship Management International? What about a location for Twardowski? Spotchecks not conducted due to Nate's long history at FLC. Just a side issue, the Warships of France navbox has a redlink at the top? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Curiously, Everett doesn't have a location, not in the scan of the book or in Worldcat. And the first Brassey is actually the father - he's linked now. I think the rest are taken care of. As for the navbox link, RunningTiger mentioned that above, but I don't think it's an issue. I'll get around to doing that list at some point ;) Parsecboy (talk) 00:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weird. OK, this looks fine now. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_protected_cruisers_of_France/archive1&oldid=1040164686"