Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lyon-class battleship/archive1

Lyon-class battleship

 * Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC) and 

The Lyon-class battleships were the 1915 tranche of a French naval expansion program begun in 1912. Their design had not been finalized before the beginning of the First World War in August 1914 and their consequent cancellation. Parsecboy and I have recently overhauled this article in preparation and it passed a MilHist A-class review earlier this month. As usual, we'd like for reviewers to check for any stray bits of BritEng, unlinked or unexplained jargon and infelicitous prose.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Image review


 * Suggest adding alt text. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:43, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

 * "Design work on the vessels to follow the Normandies began in 1912; the design staff submitted several proposals for the new battleships, with displacements ranged from 27,000 metric tons (26,574 long tons) to 29,000 t (28,542 long tons).[3] " likely "ranged" should be "ranging".
 * Good catch.
 * " In addition, the design staff determined the 38 cm gun would take too long to design, so the proposals that incorporated these weapons were cancelled and one of the two 34 cm proposals was selected." possibly "cancelled" should be "rejected" and I would change the end of the sentence "one of the two 34 cm proposals was selected." to "officials chose between the two 34 cm proposals" so as to lead into the next sentence better.
 * That is a better wording.
 * You are not consistent in whether you capitalise Normandie in "Normandie-class".
 * You sure? Searching for normandie showed all of them capitalized.
 * Oops, meant "italicise".
 * Is there any later or contextual information, such as similar ships built later, or did the designs influence later ships?
 * War experience had proven that their design was thoroughly obsolete and they had no influence on the subsequent Dunkerque class of the 1930s.
 * That's about it.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:56, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching these and your helpful suggestion.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:21, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:08, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by CPA-5

 * which was planned for the French Navy in 1913 Link French Navy.
 * Starting in 1910, the French Navy began a dreadnought battleship Unlink French Navy here.
 * and one of the two 34 cm proposals was selected You mean were?
 * No, "was" is correct ("one of ... was...") Brianboulton (talk) 14:37, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:06, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You mean that we caught all the excess naughts, etc.? Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:26, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * - another older review you might want to take a look at and see if there's anything that still needs to be addressed. Parsecboy (talk) 17:12, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Seriously? Your ping is like the 7th ping I got from you and PM about my comments in nominations today alone. I guess I was that busy with the drive. Change it as support. I have to try to come back to my routine of reviewing. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:37, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Sources review

 * No spotchecks carried out
 * Formats
 * Check publication date of Gardner. WorldCat does not list a 1984 edition (WorldCat is not infallible in these matters)
 * Crap, it's correct. That's going to be an error perpetuated all over our articles.
 * O'Brien 2001: WorldCat gives publisher location for this ibsn as Southgate
 * The book shows London and Portland, Oregon.

Brianboulton (talk) 14:37, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Quality/reliability: no issues, sources appear to meet the requisite FA criteria.
 * Not sure that I should really thank you for catching the problem with Gardner considering the amount of work that it's going to cause to find them all, but I will anyway.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:35, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that! Brianboulton (talk) 13:41, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Support by Gog the Mild
That's all I have. Your usual fine job of work. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * "the rest" seems a generous description of two of something.
 * Ed seems to have fixed this
 * Link displacement
 * Done
 * "prompting significant consideration to match the caliber" Optional: → 'prompting serious consideration of matching this caliber'
 * Works for me
 * Is there not a standard footnote which describes caliber? It would be useful here.
 * Added
 * "In light of such constraints" In British English one would write 'In the light of such constraints'.
 * We're using AmEng here
 * "like the Brétagnes." Optional: → 'such as the Brétagnes..
 * Works for me
 * "An unknown number of boilers were trunked" → 'An unknown number of boilers were to be trunked'.
 * Done
 * Thanks Gog. Parsecboy (talk) 18:13, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

The ed17

 * Support after some copyedits I made. Well done, I know how hard it can be to find adequate information on never-built ships. Was the choice of four different shipyards due to the need to pump out battleships as fast as possible? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:09, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen anything that addresses it, but it's fairly common for contracts to be divided between different shipyards, regardless of navy (apart from the foreign contracts like those with which you're familiar.) - in fact, it tends to be the exception, rather than the norm, that a single shipyard gets all the contracts (for instance, Blohm & Voss got all of the battlecruiser contracts in Imperial Germany up to SMS Lützow, and Ansaldo was not happy about being squeezed out of the Italian heavy cruiser projects in the 1930s by OTO and STT, so they pressured the government to build ITALIAN CRUISER Bolzano) Parsecboy (talk) 18:28, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Llammakey

 * One minor quibble. "Normandie-class ship" in the first paragraph of the characteristics section needs to be italicized.
 * Otherwise Support.
 * Done. Thanks for catching that.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 06:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)