Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Soviet destroyer Nezamozhnik/archive1

Soviet destroyer Nezamozhnik

 * Nominator(s): and 

Sturmvogel 66 and I bring an article on a Soviet destroyer built by the Russian Empire during World War I. One of many given ideological names, she saw extensive combat during World War II and was sunk as a target afterwards. The articles has previously passed a GA review and Milhist ACR earlier this year. Kges1901 (talk) 18:08, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by PM
I looked at this article during its Milhist ACR, but have some additional points:
 * drop the bolding from the second mention of Nezamozhnik in the lead
 * Done


 * in the lead, suggest "She received the Order of the Red Banner for her actions during the war. Nezamozhnik was converted into a target ship at the end of the 1940s and sunk during the early 1950s."
 * Done


 * suggest "In early 1914, several months before the beginning of World War I, the Naval Ministry proposed the construction of a third series of eight destroyers, based on Novik, for the Black Sea Fleet. These ships were to be built in response to a perceived strengthening of the Ottoman Navy."
 * Done


 * suggest lk=on for the first displacement conversion
 * Done


 * suggest using standard rather than normal in the infobox for consistency
 * suggest lk=on for the power conversion in the infobox
 * use one spelling of Thornycroft
 * were the main battery behind gunshields?
 * No.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * (AA) after anti-aircraft
 * "the one distinguishing feature" does this mean her sisters had more than one, or none? The Design and description section refers to the armament of the class, so if there was a difference with this ship, it should be stated there that this was the ship's AA armament rather than the class armament
 * Clarified--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * is a ship fitted with depth charges, or modified to carry depth charges?
 * What's the difference?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * still nothing available for 1936 to 1941?
 * Regrettably, this period isn't covered in the sources.


 * comma after "Kamysh-Burun, Kerch"
 * Done


 * link light cruiser Kalinin and thereafter distinguish between the transport and light cruiser
 * Corrected own error, still also the transport


 * "delivering 1,150 reinforcements to the latter" isn't clear, which port are we talking about?
 * Rephrased


 * Bassisty/Basisty
 * Standardized

That's all I have. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * there are a lot of Further reading sources. Do none of these provide something unique?
 * Most of it is Cold War-era material and really isn't reliable, IMO.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good, supporting. Nice job. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Support from SN54129
Firstly, this is a nice looking article, more power to Sturmv and Kges for bringing it here. Kges, you actually drew my attention to it in your nom, where you call the ship's name "ideological"; yet that isn't mentioned in the text. Could you expand on that a little? How, why and who suggests themselves. Also, I am very much of a mind with Peacemaker; although the article is in no way insubstantial, it seems odd to have as many items in further reading as used in the text, particularly when FR is intended for more detailed treatments of the topic than WP:DUE can bear, yet some of the 'further reading' texts appear to be general works?Perhaps expand the lead slightly: the two existing paras are rather short, which puts the lead at the bottom of the 2 or 3 paragraphs for an article of this (21326 chars) size. Still, no ball breaking complaints so far! Cheers, ——  SerialNumber  54129  15:34, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

3433


 * As regards ideological naming, this was common to Soviet destroyers renamed in the 1920s, which were generally named for Communist heroes. The background of her name is covered in the body, where it is noted that a fundraising drive by the Committees of Poor Peasants helped provide funds for her completion. Kges1901 (talk) 16:28, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It's hard to stretch the lead because the ship did a lot of repetitious actions over long periods of time. I've severely cut down the further reading list.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:43, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. Nice work lads. ——  SN  54129  15:58, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Sources review (of sorts)
Since nearly all the sources are in Russian, and the two English ones don't have online links, there's not much here to review apart from basic formatting, which looks OK, though I think that "Oxford" is always taken as in the UK unless otherwise stated. I'll take your word that the Russian material is scholarly. I did see the point raised in the A-class review, about the Further reading list, which I see includes six English language books – was there no use that could be made of any of these in the article itself? Brianboulton (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * See my response to PM's comment about the same thing.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:22, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Dank

 * "99 102 mm and 35 76 mm shells", "468 102 mm shells", "one hundred seventy-three 102 mm shells": Arguably, the first two are WP:MOSNUM violations. But "four hundred sixty-eight 102 mm shells" doesn't look like an improvement to me, and I don't know how you'd rewrite it. So, bottom line, I don't know.
 * "nmi": Just noting that it's written out every time except for the very last one.
 * Abbreviated--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. I'm impressed, as always. Feel free to revert my copyediting. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 15:40, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Dank, your edits look good.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Support from Wehwalt
"but the destroyer ended up returning to Novorossiysk with the survivors of the tanker, which exploded after being struck by an aerial torpedo from a German bomber." I might throw a "had" before "exploded" and change the "of the tanker" to "from the tanker".
 * Done. Kges1901 (talk) 12:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Aside from that looks good.


 * Support--Wehwalt (talk) 03:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Image review - pass

 * "File:German Conquest of the Crimea.png" needs to be sourced to a RS. Currently it tracks back to an editor's "own work", which isn't.
 * Added sourcing data to the base file, File:Krym 42.png on Commons--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The Source for "File:Ww2 map23 july42 Nov 42.jpg" is broken.
 * Fixed link.


 * That leaves an RS needed for the first map. Do you have one to hand, or would you like me to do it? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:29, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 13:02, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments by CPA-5

 * Nezamozhnik (Russian/Ukrainian: Незамо́жник, lit. 'poor peasant') Unlink Russian here.
 * Link Black Sea in both lead and body.
 * First use only.
 * concluded that Zante's hull was 70% complete and her machinery 85% complete --> "concluded that Zante's hull was 70 percent complete and her machinery 85 percent complete"
 * The symbol is perfectly acceptable
 * Sevastopol on 18 September, they visited Istanbul, Turkey Unlink Turkey.
 * I think that one needs to be kept
 * In my view it's odd to see that Turkey isn't a common term but the nationality/ethnicity Turkish is by MOS:OVERLINK too common to link?
 * Unlinked.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:11, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:40, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Link Mediterranean.
 * This one's far more well known, IMO, than Turkey.
 * Among these was Zante, the Italian name for Zakynthos Pipe Italian to the Kingdom of Italy.
 * The Kingdom of Italy didn't exist at that time.
 * Messina, Italy (7 to 10 October), and Piraeus, Greece (11 to 14 October) Unlink Greece because specific government shouldn't have a link.
 * It doesn't; it links to the country
 * Firing 468 102 mm shells against shore targets Is it possible to avoid two numbers next to each other?
 * See the commentary on that issue above.
 * The destroyer departed for Tendra at 6:00 on the next morning --> " The destroyer departed for Tendra at 06:00 on the next morning"
 * Good catch.
 * which totalled 99 102 mm and 35 76 mm shells in addition Same as above and British totalled.
 * towed Zheleznyakov from the mouth of the Khobi river to Batumi --> "towed Zheleznyakov from the mouth of the Khobi River to Batumi"
 * with Nezamozhnik expending one hundred seventy-three 102 mm shells We do not use numbers with more than two words in it and try to avoid two numbers next to each other.
 * See above.
 * Appreciate the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  17:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)