Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/SMS Yorck

< 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 Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 21:20, 23 October 2022 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

SMS Yorck edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk)

SMS Yorck (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

After quite a long time away from formal reviews, it's probably long past time I get back into things. So I've brought this article on a German armored cruiser for your consideration. Yorck was one of the first major warships lost by the German fleet during World War I, and as such the ship's service history was fairly short. Thanks to those who take the time to review the article! Parsecboy (talk) 11:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to get to this over the next few days. Hog Farm Talk 20:54, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do the sources state how many torpedoes she carried?
    • Added
  • "Yorck was ordered under the provisional name Ersatz Deutschland" - With Deutschland linked to a specific ship, I just want to verify that the sources do indeed make that connectiona
    • Yes - if you look in the chapter on that Deutschland, it lists this cruiser a the "ersatzbau" (replacement build). German ships were either ordered to replace existing, worn-out or obsolete vessels, or as new builds (i.e., the fleet previously had 5 cruisers, and was now authorized to maintain 6). The former were designated "Ersatz [name of ship to be replaced]" and the latter were given single letters.

Neither of these are major issues; supporting. Hog Farm Talk 01:44, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hog Farm! Parsecboy (talk) 18:22, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Indy beetle edit

  • A footnote on the replacement ordering style of the German Navy would be nice to include here.
    • Added the standard note I've used on this
  • Like many of the late armored cruisers, Yorck was quickly rendered obsolescent by the advent of the battlecruiser; as a result, her career was limited. Outclassed though it was, I think the major limiting factor to this ship's career was the explosive mines it struck, not the existence of other ships.
    • This referred more to the fact that Yorck was laid up less than 8 years after commissioning, which is fairly brief. I've clarified this.

-Indy beetle (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Indy! Parsecboy (talk) 20:18, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • All the images look fine (expired copyright or freely licensed courtesy of the German archives) except the last one. The photo source does say "Copyright Owner: Naval History and Heritage Command". As per their disclaimer though, "Most of the photos found in our collection are in the public domain and may be downloaded and used without permissions or special requirements (those which are not will be noted in the copyright section of the image description)." So my question is, do they note if something is in the "public domain" in the Copyright Owner parameter, or do most of these photos have their "copyright" attributed to the command? Because if this photo's copyright status is a break from the norm, I do not think we should defer to the standard disclaimer. If it is the norm, then we're probably okay. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's the normal way they list photos, so I'd think it's ok. Parsecboy (talk) 19:43, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there's much else here which warrants comment. Supporting. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:19, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Ian edit

Wow, if ever a ship seemed jinxed...

  • Copyedited as usual, let me know any concerns.
  • Structure and detail/comprehensiveness seem fine.
  • I might leave image review to someone else for now but...

Source review -- formatting and reliability look satisfactory. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:32, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian - it sure gives Old Hoodoo a run for its money, I'd think. Your copyedit looks good as usual. Parsecboy (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Couldn't resist a final tweak of prose but now the image review is done I reckon we're go to go... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Four images.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:10, 23 October 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/SMS_Yorck&oldid=1117839181"