Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Plum Point Bend

Article promoted by Donner60 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 23:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Battle of Plum Point Bend
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

A fairly confusing ACW naval action. The Confederates launch a surprise attack against early riverine ironclads using "cottonclad" ramships. The plan actually worked because the Union vessels were largely unprepared. While two ironclads were sunk, the action accomplished nothing of long-term significance and the two ironclads were back in service in less than two months. Hog Farm Talk 01:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Support by Nick-D
This article is in great shape, and is an interesting read. I have the following comments: Support Sorry for my very slow response here. My comments have been addressed. Nick-D (talk) 00:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * "had pushed downriver to Fort Pillow." - I'd suggest giving a rough location for the fort
 * Added
 * "and had developed a routine of having a single mortar boat guarded by an ironclad take a position further downriver to bombard the fort, while the rest of the fleet was upriver" - this is a bit hard to follow
 * rephrased
 * "The naval component of the Federal effort was commanded by Andrew H. Foote" - did he hold a military rank? If so, please add it
 * Added
 * I'd suggest moving the map into the 'battle' section, and/or left justifying it: it appears in the section after the battle on my monitor
 * Have moved this around a bit; both the map and the Currier & Ives image were added by another editor and I never got around to re-arranging
 * The para starting with 'A shot from Carondelet' is somewhat lengthy
 * Split
 * I'd suggest swapping the order of the second and third last paras of the article. Nick-D (talk) 03:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that I agree with this one - at least to me, it makes sense to finish all discussion of Plum Point Bend before moving on to the rest of the campaign for control of the upper Mississippi, but I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise. Hog Farm Talk 01:53, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Image review - pass
Hawkeye7  (discuss)  21:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * File:NavalBattleOfFortPillow.jpg, File:The photographic history of the Civil War - thousands of scenes photographed 1861-65, with text by many special authorities (1911) (14576178149).jpg, File:The photographic history of the Civil War - thousands of scenes photographed 1861-65, with text by many special authorities (1911) (14760373384).jpg - incorrect tag - should be PD-US-expired
 * File:Engagement of the Union and Rebel Gunboats near Fort Wright, May 10 1862.jpg, File:Currier & Ives - Brilliant naval victory on the Mississippi River, near Fort Wright, May 10th 1862.jpg - copyright expired - okay
 * - Thanks for taking a look! I've fixed the licensing. Hog Farm Talk 23:05, 10 February 2024 (UTC)


 * All good - passing. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  23:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Source review - pass

 * The articles uses reputable sources that accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge
 * All sources are well-formatted
 * Spot checks: 6, 7, 22a, 50 - okay

Hawkeye7  (discuss)  21:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Nominator comment - I am aware that based on discussions elsewhere, I need to change the nomenclature used here from "Federal" to "Union". I intend on doing this but I am in the process of moving so I won't be able to get to this right away. Hog Farm Talk 23:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Pendright
Placeholder - aware of Federal vs. Union Pendright (talk) 22:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Second thoughts: Would you rather I waited until you substitute Union for Federal, or I could do it during the course of my review? Your call! Pendright (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * - either one works for me. I'm out of town for work this week and won't be able to get to anything until late Saturday or maybe even Sunday. I still need to finish up work at Big Black River Bridge too. Hog Farm Talk 00:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, then, I'll substitute them as I progress through the review.
 * I have decided to renege on my offer to review this article. I've changed Federal to Union for only the Lead and Background sections. All the best - Pendright (talk) 22:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No worries! I'll get this switched over myself. Hog Farm Talk 23:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Support by Pickersgill-Cunliffe
To follow. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Why don't you just add the location in main text? Would be a useful addition somewhere, surely
 * Done
 * "Union forces commanded captured" something missing here
 * Oops, fixed
 * A word or two as to the relevance of the Tennessee River and Cumberland River to the Mississippi, for the non-American reader?
 * I've rephrased and rearranged some text to try to make it clearer that the fall of these positions forced the Confedertes to withdraw further down the Mississippi
 * "position was captured on April 8"?
 * Done
 * "which was 50 miles (80 km) on the river north of Memphis, Tennessee" this seems a little awkward. Perhaps "which was 50 miles (80km) north of Memphis, Tennessee, on the river"?
 * Done
 * "Foote's Union vessels pursued." Pursued what? You've said that the works the Union just captured were already abandoned
 * Done
 * "Captain Charles Henry Davis took command"
 * Done
 * "The Union ships were known as the Western Flotilla." I feel like this should be mentioned earlier on, feels out of place here
 * This has been moved up to the first paragraph, where Foote is first mentioned
 * Beginning of third background paragraph could be simplified to "Captain James Montgomery and eight cottonclad rams, known as the River Defense Fleet, were located off of Fort Pillow. They were faster..."
 * partially done, although I've kept the reference to vessels being siphoned off elsewhere as I think that is useful
 * Would be useful to mention the size of the Union force, as you do for the Confederates
 * I've indicated the count of ironclads. I'm having trouble finding a source for the total number of auxillary vessels but that's less important as only the ironclads and one of the mortar boats were innolved in this battle
 * While I think cottonclads have been referred to as gunboats, for the sake of consistency in the article I think they should be referred to as cottonclads throughout
 * Done
 * Give M. Jeff Thompson's rank
 * Done
 * Suggest noting that Bragg is one of the cottonclads, as it might be thought that this is a separate vessel for Thompson
 * Done
 * "Confederate vessels passed through Plum Point Bend" this is the first mention of the article namesake. Needs a word or two explaining that (I assume) this is one of the bends in the river which the Union were bombarding from behind. Might be useful to add the location, per infobox, at this point
 * I've tried to elaborate on this a bit
 * "quarter" is naval terminology that needs a link or explanation
 * Linked
 * "The damage forced the vessel out of the action"...because she could not manoeuvre?
 * Yes, added
 * "Union lookouts had spotted"
 * done
 * "third Confederate ship, CSS General Sumter to ram her." comma after Sumter
 * Done
 * "The commander of General Sumter had offered"
 * Done
 * Link boarding
 * Done
 * Give Stembel his rank
 * Done
 * "General Sumter was also badly damaged by a Carondelet shot and forced to withdraw from the battle ; the fire came from Carondelet "
 * Done
 * "intending to ram it", "badly damaging it" you generally use the female pronoun
 * Fixed here, and at several other places in the article
 * "badly damaging it. The blow badly damaged the ironclad's bow" overly repetitive
 * I've rephrased this part a little bit
 * "The commander of General Earl Van Dorn was wounded during the action.[42] General Earl Van Dorn's commander, Captain Isaac Fulkerson" again repetitive, surely this could be merged
 * Rephrased/consolidated some
 * "from both the Confederate vessels" somewhat suggests that she is being fired on by two, rather than three, ships. Suggest removing "both"
 * Removed
 * "and accidental undershots"?
 * Done
 * "The former and Cairo attempted to save Mound City" this suggests you have already mentioned the arrival of Cairo, but you haven't
 * I've clarified a little bit - this was pretty much the first thing Cairo did upon arrival
 * "but Cincinnati was unable to reach the shore and sank in 11 feet (3.4 m) of water" > "but before she could do so sank in 11 feet..."?
 * Done, with a slight variance
 * "the fighting had lasted about 70 minutes"
 * Done
 * " the Cairo, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis"
 * Done
 * "...and St. Louis for their minimal roles in the action." Did St. Louis do anything at all?
 * Not really; I've mentioned in the article now that by the time St. Louis showed up, the Confederates were gone
 * "one sailor was killed"
 * Done
 * "instead of exploding within them" Suggest this change for clarity for the less military-minded reader
 * Done
 * "compared the appearance of the River Defense Fleet's smokestacks after the battle to nutmeg graters." need a word or two more to clarify that this is relation to damage they received, the following sentence doesn't totally manage this
 * I've added a clause
 * "cottoncladding" should this be two words?
 * Maybe? I've split it into two words as Google searching seems to indicate that this does not exist in the one-word form
 * "at the waterline s "
 * Done
 * "except for General Earl Van Dorn"
 * Done
 * Link Union on first lede and main text mention
 * Done
 * "in hopes of" > "in the hope of"
 * Done
 * "Two further Union ironclads were able to steam from the main group upriver"
 * Done
 * "it was later run aground on a shoal, where it sank." pronoun change again
 * This has been fixed
 * Main text says Corinth was abandoned by the Confederates, while lede says it was captured by the Union. These are slightly different events, so suggest going with one or the other description
 * I've tried to clean it up a bit - is this better
 * A word or two in main text about why the loss of Corinth made Pillow untenable?
 * Added
 * Add the names of the commanders to the infobox, as well as the strengths of the fleets engaged
 * Done


 * - Thanks for the review! Apologies for how long it took me to respond to everything. Hog Farm Talk 01:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Happy with your changes, supporting. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Support Looks good to me too. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  00:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Promoted to A class. Awaiting bot confirmation. Donner60 (talk) 22:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)