Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of battleships of Austria-Hungary during World War I


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promoted EyeSerene talk 10:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

List of battleships of Austria-Hungary

 * Nominator(s): Buggie111 (talk), White Shadows talk

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because White Shadows and I think it's ready. He has two others open, but I think he is about to close them. Buggie111 (talk) 22:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As for me, I spent literally hours writeing this thing and Parsec has done some minor fixes to the images and grammar. Everything should be in order. As for my other two noms, I've withdrawn them so this is the only one that I'll be working on for now.-- White Shadows you're breaking up 23:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments
 * I see a lot of repetition of facts given in the tables, like armament, size, etc.; the text should cover stuff that's not presented in the tables.
 * I'd like to see launch dates added to the tables.
 * Why hasn't Sokol been consulted?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for not opposeing right away :) ONce Parsec get's a copy of Sokol, I'll ask him to add info into the article from it. As for the repitition, do you want me to remove the stuff in the text that is covered in the tables? The last thing, the launch dates, I'll add those in once I get home today. (I may have to experiment trying to get the table to enlarge without screwing it up) Thanks.-- White Shadows you're breaking up 10:24, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added in the launch dates and made some typo corrections as well as fix a few false dates in the Erzherzog Karl section. I've also tried to find anything about these ships in Sokol's book from the limited view that I get from google books but could'nt find anything. As for the repetition, should I just remove identical info? What do you want me to do with this? Thanks.-- White Shadows you're breaking up 18:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you should remove redundant info.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Done.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 21:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Comments:
 * no dab links, ext links all work (no action required);
 * images seem appropriately licenced;
 * alt text could be added to the images (just a suggestion, though, as it is no longer a requirement);
 * Citation # 16 needs publisher information if you can get it. — AustralianRupert (talk) 07:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added in the publisher. I'll try to get to the Alt text soon as I plan on going for a FL with this.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 15:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Support I wold like to see alt text used for the images, but I will not oppose for this. I cursory glance suggests that the article is in good working order, but seeing as how I am falling asleep writing just this little blurb I think I'll wait until after I've had some sleep to fully review the article and suggest other more important points for fixing (assuming that I actually find some). TomStar81 (Talk) 20:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyway thats it for me now as I have to head off to work, more to follow. Good work so far. Anotherclown (talk) 03:19, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments Support
 * There are no dabs, external links check out, and the citation checker tool reveals no errors (no action required);
 * You might consider adding alt text to the photos, although this is not an A class requirement;
 * I'm not an expert on lists, but shouldn't this article still be categorised (i.e. ? etc);
 * No such category currenly exists. When and if one is ever created, I'll add it to this article.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 01:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added it to now. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph of the lead seems overly long, and could possibly be split;
 * I've broken the lead into three seperate paragraphs now.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 01:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I've tweaked this a little further, please confirm your happy with it and revert if you're not. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You mention World War I twice in the first sentence of the last paragraph in the lead, should be reworded;
 * Reworded to say "conflict".-- White Shadows stood on the edge 01:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Happy with that. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * In the Habsburg class section, your sentences are a little out of whack chronologically speaking, i.e. you mention the modernization of 2 ships in 1911 (last sentence 1st para), before you mention the lead ship of the class being laid down in 1900 (1st sentence, 2nd para).;
 * I've moved that sentence to after the sentences about the construction of the ships. Should make since chronologically speaking now.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 01:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Happy with that. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The first two sentences of the Radetzky class seem a little repetitive, and could probably be worked into one ("The Radetzky-class battleships were the third group of pre-dreadnought battleships to be constructed by Austria-Hungary.[8] The Radetzky-class was the last class of pre-dreadnoughts that were built by the Austro-Hungarian Navy.)
 * I've merged them togeher.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 01:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me now. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The 2nd para in the Tegetthoff class section seems too long, and could probably be split;
 * I've split the paragraph in two.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 02:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good work. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I've added in alt text to all images.-- White Shadows stood on the edge 18:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good work (personally I hate adding alt text to my articles as its so tedious). Striking all issues as satisfied and moving to support. IMO this is an interesting list, that is attractively laid out, well written and succinct, while at the same time comprehensive. Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support. I plan on takeing this to FLC once this ACR is finnished. I also approve of the changes that you made as well. Thanks :)-- White Shadows stood on the edge 00:40, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.