Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of ironclad warships of the Ottoman Empire/archive1


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

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 23 October 2018 (UTC).

List of ironclad warships of the Ottoman Empire

 * Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 12:00, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

This is a list of the ironclad warships built for and by the Ottoman Empire in the 1860s-1880s; these ships had largely uninteresting careers as a result of Ottoman indifference to naval affairs, though some of them saw action during the various wars fought during this period. One, OTTOMAN IRONCLAD Mesudiye, survived long enough in active service to be sunk during World War I at the ripe old age of 40 (quite ancient for ships of the era). The list also includes ships that were either cancelled before completion or purchased by other countries. The list serves as the capstone for this good topic. Thanks for all who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 12:00, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for going through all of this, it's good to have a fresh set of eyes on an obscure topic like this. Parsecboy (talk) 01:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If it seems like I'm requesting overly much explanatory text, it's because I try to imagine how it would read to someone who sees this featured on the main page and decides to read it with little to no previous knowledge on the subject.TompaDompa (talk) 12:25, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support I went ahead and made a couple of minor edits myself; what remains unresolved is merely stylistic preferences that I do not consider deal-breakers for WP:Featured list status. TompaDompa (talk) 01:37, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

 Comments Support by PM I think there is a scope issue here. To me, vessels that never saw service with the Ottoman Navy shouldn't be listed here. Otherwise, this is looking good. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * you could tidy up the citation farm in the Osmaniye class table by just using fn 5 in the header for Service, the same goes for the other fields, this comment also applies to other tables
 * Good catch - I had written this list before I had thought of doing that. Parsecboy (talk) 10:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about the inclusion of Fatih, as she never entered Ottoman service
 * I'm not sure about the inclusion of Fettah as she was never built
 * Same for Hamidiye in the Mesudiye class
 * And also the Peyk-i Şeref class
 * Other reviewer here: I think you raise a valid point on the scope, but I also think that the list would not really be complete without those ships. Do you think it could be solved by reordering the list and adding sections for ships that weren't built and ships that never entered Ottoman service? TompaDompa (talk) 18:59, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I initially thought the same on including the other ships when I laid out the initial draft, but then I decided that the unfinished/sold off classes ought to be included, since they had at least been ordered by the Ottoman government. They're included in references like Conway's, and it's standard practice to include them in other similar lists (like List of battleships of the Ottoman Empire includes 3 ships that were cancelled and 2 that were seized by Britain and List of battlecruisers of Russia is almost entirely cancelled ships). Parsecboy (talk) 10:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If they're included under the Ottoman section/chapter in Conway's, then I think we're fine doing it as well. Delete all reference to this query. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:11, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Quick comment – In the last table, is Buruc-u Zafer meant to be non-italicized? It's the only ship that isn't italicized in the tables, and it does have italics in the text. That was the only issue I found. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 22:42, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Good catch - no, it was supposed to be italicized. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 12:33, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Support – Everything looks fine now. Good job on this one. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 22:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Source review passed (as much as it could be with all book sources); promoting. -- Pres N  16:21, 22 October 2018 (UTC)


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