Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Russian battleship Borodino

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 Kges1901 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 01:20, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Russian battleship Borodino

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk)

Russian battleship Borodino (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Never intended to serve in the Far East, Borodino and her sisters were sent there during the Russo-Japanese War to replace the Pacific Squadron that had been sunk by the Japanese, although they had just been completed and hadn't had time to finish working up before they sailed. After an epic journey halfway around the world, the ship and two of her sisters were sunk during the Battle of Tsushima in May 1905 off the Korean coast. I'd like for reviewers to look for the usual suspects in preparation for an eventual FAC.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by PM

This article is in great shape. I have only a couple of comments:

• suggest putting o/a after the length in the infobox
• suggest "Pakenham observed two 12-inch hits on Borodino" just to make it clear, as another Russian ship has been mentioned

That's it. Nice work. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:48, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, PM.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

No worries, supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

Claim my seat here. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:29, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

• Borodino (Russian: Бородино) was the lead ship Unlink Russian here.
• In the note All dates used in this article are New Style maybe we shoule let the people know how many days the difference is between Old and New style especially before 1900 there were 12 days and after 1900 there are 13 days differences?
• Did the Russian Navy used their own units? Because I thought it already uses metric at the time?
  • The Russians didn't switch to metric until after the Revolution
• off the north-west coast of Madagascar on 9 January 1905 pipe Madagascar to French Madagascar.
• controlled by the Russians in the Far East Link Far East.
  • Linked in the lede.
• 3rd Pacific Squadron, commanded by Rear Admiral Nikolai Nebogatov Link Rear Admiral.

That's anything, I think. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

• • Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

• You're welcome, mate. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:23, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments from Parsecboy

• I'd like to see a bit more context on the class than you have here - you might add a line stating the reason they were built, the Russo-Japanese rivalry, etc.
  • As these were Baltic Fleet ships, they weren't part of the big build up of the Pacific Fleet; all those ships were sunk or captured before Tsushima.
    • Ah, I was going off what you had in the class article - perhaps that needs to be fixed then ;) Parsecboy (talk) 09:54, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
      • At the very least re-examined :-( Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:35, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
        • Rereading McLaughlin, he says that the "For the Needs of the Far East Program" initially authorized 10 battleships to be deployed there, which meant four new ships as 3 Pobedas and 3 Petropavlovsks were already there. As Russian shipyards were already backlogged, two of these became the foreign-built Retzivan and Tsesarevich and the Tsar subsequently authorized another pair, leaving four still to be built. The next ships authorized were the five Borodinos, but nowhere can I find an explicit mention them as part of the "For the Needs of the Far East Program". If I add that to the articles is that OR since I can't find anybody to actually say as much or is that a perfectly reasonable assumption?@Parsecboy: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
          • Yeah, that's probably a bit too much of a stretch - the Russians would've been concerned with strengthening the Baltic Fleet at that time too, so they might have been ordered for that instead. It's a shame that Russian ships are relatively poorly covered. Parsecboy (talk) 12:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
            • McLaughlin's pretty damn good, but I really wish somebody would translate the plentiful Russian-language sources which probably would answer these sorts of questions.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:02, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

V. Yu. Gribosky's 1995 monograph Эскадренный броненосец «Бородино» explicitly states that the Borodino class were to form the core of the Pacific Fleet. I'm guessing this is where McLaughlin gets his info from. Kges1901 (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kges1901:Can you add that cite and reference to the article and I'll expand on that like I did with the other ships built for the program? Thanks for checking on that for me, BTW. Very helpful.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:24, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

• You have Second Pacific Squadron but also 3rd Pacific Squadron
• One dupe link
• Both this and Russian battleship Imperator Aleksandr III (1901) claim to be the second ship in the line - the OOB suggests it was Imperator Aleksandr III
  • No, I say it was the third ship in line. You might be confused because Alex (2nd in line) charges the Japanese after Suvorov was forced to fall out while Borodino then becomes the head of the line.
• Any clue what happened to Yushin? Which is to say, who picked him up?

Parsecboy (talk) 19:50, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

• • Probably a Japanese torpedo boat or destroyer, but I can't find anything that identifies it. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
    • @Parsecboy:--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:15, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Images are properly licensed. Parsecboy (talk) 12:23, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Source review:

• Citations and references are formatted uniformly
• References appear to be reliable
• There's a short cite to Chesneau & Kolesnik but no full ref. Parsecboy (talk) 12:26, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Good catch.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:02, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

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.