Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/HMS Argus (I49)/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 19:10, 14 November 2012.

HMS Argus (I49)

 * Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Converted from an ocean liner during World War I, Argus was the first aircraft carrier with a full-length flight deck. Too slow to keep up with the fleet and too small to carry many aircraft, she spent much of her career on secondary duties like deck-landing training and as an aircraft ferry. Argus was one of only two out of seven British pre-war carriers to survive World War II, although she was scrapped shortly afterwards. This article had a MilHist A-class review back in February and shouldn't require much work to bring it up to FA standards.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Support
 * No dab or external link issues.
 * Reviewed and copyedited at MilHist A-Class Review earlier in the year and was happy with referencing, structure, prose, coverage and images (though alt text could be added).
 * No source spotcheck on my part but I'm yet to see any serious concerns in that regard in one of Storm's articles so up to other reviewers/delegates to determine if they need to see one. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Image review:
 * File:HMS Argus (1917).jpg - GDR is not the author but original uploader. Author should be noted as an unnamed Navy personnel.
 * Done.
 * File:H63028.jpg - Date should be in the date parameter
 * What date parameter are you talking about?
 * In the information template (i.e. under "description"). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Done.
 * File:Aircraft in hangar of HMS Argus (I49) c1942.jpg - I don't see the year in the source. Where does this come from? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:50, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You'd have to ask the uploader. The Seafire wasn't deployed until 1942, though. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:11, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If so, perhaps retitle to File:Aircraft in hangar of HMS Argus (I49) c1942-1944? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I see no need to rename the file since I've changed the dates in the template to 1942-1944.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:48, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * Consider disambiguating the Brown sources by date rather than first name, as you use a very similar format for multi-author cites
 * FN17: why the date? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:35, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Both done. Thanks for checking them out.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments Support My comments have now been addressed. Nick-D (talk) 07:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "the ship was heavily involved for several years in the development of the optimum design for other aircraft carriers, various types of arresting gear and general procedures needed to operate a number of aircraft in concert, and fleet cooperation" - this is a bit of a mouthful
 * Reworded.
 * "Existing carriers could launch wheeled aircraft, but had no way to recover them" - can you briefly describe the design of these ships? (I presume that they had a flying off ramp, but nothing which resembled a flight deck)
 * Clarified.
 * "and Beardmore began work on converting the ship" - should this refer to Beardmore developing plans for the conversion of the ship?
 * I'm not sure what you're concerned about here; Beardmore was the builder of the Conte Rosso and physically converted her into an aircraft carrier.
 * Read literally, the current wording states that Beardmore did all the physical work on the ship himself. Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Clarified.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "As it was originally designed for an ocean liner, her hull was built to minimise rolling and most of the changes made to the ship had added weights high in the ship, thus raising her centre of gravity." - this is a bit unclear. Splitting it into two sentences might help.
 * I'm going to have to look at my source again to see if I can clarify this.
 * How does it read now?
 * That's good. Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "The same month, the ship was used to evaluate the effects of an island" - this doesn't seem quite right; how about "The same month, the ship was used in trials to evaluate the effects which an island superstructure would have on flying operations" or similar?
 * Good idea.
 * It should be noted that the ship was commissioned too late to play any part in World War I
 * Done.
 * "Argus was inclined" - what does this mean?
 * Linked. More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Washington Naval Treaty classified her as experimental" - should 'ship' or 'aircraft carrier' be added at the end of this wording?
 * Seems kind of redundant as the reader already knows that she's a ship and an aircraft carrier.
 * Not many readers will be aware of the systems of classifications included in the Washington Treaty, so material to clarify this would be helpful to them. Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "In February 1936, it was decided to refit the ship as a Queen Bee tender" - you should note here what this involved
 * Sources don't specify, although I suspect that this really only involved radio equipment to guide the drones.
 * I'd suggest using the wording 'a tender for Queen Bee target drones' or similar to clarify this. Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Good idea.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "and New Zealander troops" - should read "and New Zealand troops" ('New Zealander' is the singular form, and isn't very common these days)
 * Done.
 * "space was made to land the Swordfish to load the torpedoes" - this is a bit awkward
 * How does it read now?
 * Still confusing I'm afraid (the ship couldn't make space; this was the role of her crew). Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Reworded.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Condors that patrolled the Bay of Biscay and the Western Atlantic" - this should be 'eastern Atlantic'
 * Indeed.
 * "On her return to the United Kingdom she began a lengthy refit." - a refit which lasted no more than two months can't really be called 'lengthy' (a 'lengthy' refit can last for years)
 * Agreed.
 * It's interesting that this ship successfully operated in some of the most submarine-infested waters in the Atlantic during 1940 to 1942. Can anything be said about how she escaped without (apparently) being attacked? - was she heavily escorted, or fast, or just lucky?
 * My sources don't deal with this, but German submarines were not very successful in attacking Allied warships unless they laid in wait outside a port or were escorting slower merchantmen. This was, I expect, because warships typically travelled at speeds that the submarines couldn't match, even on the surface.
 * "When Eagle flew off seven more Spitfires whilst Argus flew 10 Fulmars and two Sea Hurricanes of 807 Squadron covered the operation from Argus." - this is rather repetitive
 * Rewritten.
 * Should Operation Harpoon be linked?
 * Done.
 * The statement in the lead that "By 1942, the Royal Navy was very short of aircraft carriers and Argus was pressed into front-line service despite her lack of speed and armament." isn't directly supported by material in the body of the article (though I believe that it's correct) Nick-D (talk) 09:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * An indirect reference added after Ark Royal was sunk. Thanks for your thorough review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:43, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. (Edits may take days to show up on that page.) - Dank (push to talk) 05:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.