Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Italian battleship Leonardo da Vinci

Article promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 04:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Italian battleship Leonardo da Vinci
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

Like all of the Italian dreadnoughts in World War I, Leonardo da Vinci was not very active as they were kept in reserve in case the Austro-Hungarian fleet came out to play and the Adriatic was too dangerous for large ships. She was sunk by a magazine explosion in 1916, possibly Austro-Hungarian sabotage or just another propellant explosion as were common in this era. After a heroic salvage effort the ship was refloated upside down and then flipped right-side up in the early 1920, but the Italian navy lacked the money to rebuild her and she was scrapped shortly afterwards. I hope that the reviewers will look for the usual suspects in the article in anticipation of an eventual FAC.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:19, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by CPA-5
Hey Sturm what an interesting article you got, for now, I can tell you that I see the British draught in the infobox. I'll continue in the near future. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:44, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Dammit, I even remembered to check that the specs in the infobox and main body matched! Glad you liked it.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:57, 25 August 2019 (UTC)


 * The Italians blamed Austro-Hungarian saboteurs for her loss Pipe Italians to the Kingdom of Italy.
 * turbines was provided by 20 Blechynden water-tube boilers What is a Blechynden?
 * Uncertain, probably some boiler designer.
 * maximum speed of 22.5 knots (41.7 km/h; 25.9 mph) from 31,000 shaft horsepower (23,000 kW) Link knots.
 * reached a speed of 21.6 knots (40.0 km/h; 24.9 mph) Is it possible to round the nought here?
 * When using number ranges the template won't let me
 * ships had a complete waterline armor belt that had a maximum Link armor belt.
 * increased to 40 millimeters (1.6 in) on the slopes that Link slopes.
 * Why?
 * Shouldn't it be linked? I think it should because I sloop is a kind of ship and not everyone knows this kind of ship. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 17:47, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You're confusing sloop with slope, like the slope of a hill.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh my bad. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

That's anything that I've got. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:08, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * that Austro-Hungarian submarines and minelayers could Link minelayers.
 * Link Adriatic Sea.
 * See some British metres here.
 * In the infobox "Conning tower: 180–280 mm (7.1–11.0 in)" Is it possible to round the nought here?
 * See above.
 * Thanks for catching these.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:31, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think this one ready to go in my opinion. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 11:49, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by PM
This article is in great shape. Just a few minor quibbles: That's all I could find. Nice job. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * decap Water in "Water-tube boilers" in the infobox
 * fix the rounding between the body and infobox for the 3 in guns and TTs
 * use the designed speed (or actual speed) in the infobox
 * isn't 80 mm the minimum on the belt? See infobox range
 * the lower range of the conning tower armor isn't supported by the body
 * add a ISSN for Warship International
 * Thanks, good to hear.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:04, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * the sources look of high quality and reliable. Do the Further reading books add anything not already in the article? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:04, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by Zawed
Just a few comments: That's it for me. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 08:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * "which caused them to be slower and more heavily armored than the first Italian dreadnought, Dante Alighieri".?
 * Indeed
 * "thirteen of these could be mounted on the turret tops, but they could be mounted in 30 different positions...": the close repetition of "could be mounted", suggest rewording.
 * Armor in the infobox; should the lower number for the turrets be 85mm (the thickness of roof/rear) rather than 240mm?
 * "use the fleet in an active way": seems a passive way of phrasing. Perhaps "actively deploy the fleet"?
 * The Halpern and Hore references are not in alphabetical order.
 * Thanks for the review. See if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good, have added my support. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 11:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Images - all three look alright to me. Parsecboy (talk) 14:41, 7 September 2019 (UTC)