Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SMS Mecklenburg/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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2016.

SMS Mecklenburg

 * Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Another of my articles on German battleships, this one had a fairly uneventful career, including during the first year and a half of the First World War. The article was substantially re-written after it passed a GA review all the way back in 2010, passed a Milhist A-class review in 2014 (and I don't think any dust has gathered in the mean time), and has been waiting around for me to have the time for FAC. Thanks to all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:S.M._Linienschiff_Mecklenburg.jpg: what is the author's date of death? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:55, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's 1914 - added to the description page. Parsecboy (talk)

Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. The name Mecklenburg is probably repeated too often for FAC standards, but I wasn't sure where to trim it. - Dank (push to talk) 14:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Support -- recusing from coord duties... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:54, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Copyedited, so let me know any concerns there, but happy with prose as it stands.
 * Structure and coverage seem reasonable.
 * I'll take Nikki's image review as read.

Source review Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:54, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Not an expert on the references but none look suspect, and couldn't spot any formatting errors, except perhaps...
 * I don't think you need OCLCs when you have ISBNs, but not a huge deal.

Commissioning
 * The date of commissioning (25 May 1903) is definitely wrong. It is my understanding from Gardiner, p.248 that Mecklenburg was completed on 25 June 1903 and handed over to the navy that day, The date given in my copies of both Hildebrand et. al. and Gröner is also 25 June. While Hildebrand mentions sea trials, Gröner points out that ships built by a private yard, were only commissioned after sea trials. Maybe there is another source for the date of commissioning. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 05:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Huh - you have the German version of Gröner, right? My English version gives the May date - I wonder if something happened during the translation process. Changed to June per Gardiner and Hildebrand. Parsecboy (talk) 12:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's right. Should be fine now. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 08:47, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Comment: G'day, looks pretty good to me. The only suggestion I have is that potentially the titles of the German language sources could be translated using the "trans_title=" parameter of the cite template. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:42, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Good idea, added to both. Parsecboy (talk) 13:05, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

 Comments Support by Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * This article is in fine shape, I just have a few quibbles:
 * There is mention of the belt being 100 mm at its narrowest in the infobox, but no mention of that detail in the body
 * Added a bit on that
 * I'm not sure about the initial caps used for Squadron when used alone? In the WWI section.
 * Good catch, I think you're right.
 * suggest re-wording Furthermore, the loss of the armored cruiser Friedrich Carl to Russian mines[10] and the increasing threat from British submarines and Russian mines by 1916 in the Baltic convinced the German navy to withdraw the elderly Wittelsbach-class ships from active service., "by 1916" seems out of place. Perhaps break up the sentence?
 * See if how I restructured it works. Parsecboy (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks good, supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * – don't really like the first comma there, but I don't want to mess up your referencing.
 * It's fine to move it to after the bit on AG Vulcan.
 * – when did they start? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Will have to look at HRS later to see if they give an exact date. Parsecboy (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds great. That's not integral to my support, though. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:49, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  17:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.