Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Maritime warfare task force/Archive 3

Good topic nomination for "German Type U 66 submarine"
The articles German Type U 66 submarine, SMS U-66, SMS U-67, SMS U-68, SMS U-69, and SMS U-70 are under consideration for Good Topic status. Interested editors may comment on the topic's entry at the Good Topic nominations page. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for U-5 class submarine (Austria-Hungary) now open
The A-Class review for U-5 class submarine (Austria-Hungary) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 18:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for USS Missouri (BB-63) now open
The peer review for USS Missouri (BB-63) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 23:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Leonard G. Shepard now open
The peer review for Leonard G. Shepard is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Turtle ship
Hello. There is a long-going dispute on this page between User:Melonbarmonster2 and me, whether the vessels featured iron armour or not. To solve the matter I recently asked User:Bradv for his Third Opinion. Following his suggestion, I then rewrote the section basing every single assertion on published references. Since Bradv seems currently in WP holidays, I am turning to some fresh and uninvolved minds to take a look at the matter. This is my version (section decking). Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Any input? Guess I have to turn to another third opinion then. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Ship Gun Fire Control Systems now open
The peer review for Ship Gun Fire Control Systems is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 23:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for U-20 class submarine now open
The A-Class review for U-20 class submarine is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 01:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Google Under the Sea
Yesterday, Google announced the latest version of Google Earth, which includes Ocean data, including shipwrecks. - Canglesea (talk) 15:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Google's going to show us The Little Mermaids natural habitat? :O — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs) ' 17:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Is there a patch one needs to download or anything? I tried looking for Bismarck and Titanic, but didn't see anything out of the ordinary (I used the geocoords in the articles). Parsecboy (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You need to download the latest version and turn on the Ocean layer. After updating, use the coords at U-185 or U-217, for example, to locate them on Google Earth. - Canglesea (talk) 03:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Mobile Bay now open
The peer review for Battle of Mobile Bay is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 19:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Timeline for aircraft carrier service now open
The peer review for Timeline for aircraft carrier service is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 01:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SM U-68 now open
The A-Class review for SM U-68 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 04:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Good topic nomination for "Yamato class battleships"
The articles Yamato-class battleship, JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Yamato, JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Musashi, and JAPANESE AIRCRAFT CARRIER Shinano are under consideration for Good Topic status. Interested editors may comment on the topic's entry at the Good Topic nominations page. — Bellhalla (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for USS New Jersey (BB-62) now open
The peer review for USS New Jersey (BB-62) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! TomStar81 (Talk) 00:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Braunschweig class battleship now open
The peer review for Braunschweig class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 21:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SM U-66 now open
The A-Class review for SM U-66 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 22:40, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Good topic nomination for "U-27 class submarines"
The following articles: are under consideration for Good Topic status. Interested editors may comment on the topic's entry at the Good Topic nominations page. — Bellhalla (talk) 22:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * U-27 class submarine (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-27 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-28 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-29 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-30 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-31 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-32 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-40 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-41 (Austria-Hungary)

Web forum about warships
The forum is here and requires registration, but it is free. Cla68 (talk) 06:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Two proposed category renames
There is an active proposal to rename the categories World War I Mediterranean shipwrecks and World War II Mediterranean shipwrecks. All interested editors are welcome to comment at this proposal's entry at the categories for discussion page. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Two maritime warfare articles on main page
USS Connecticut (BB-18) is today's featured article, and BRAZILIAN BATTLESHIP Minas Gerais is the lead DYK (the one with a picture meaning that it will probably get the most views). Eyes on the two would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  00:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Good topic nomination for "U-43 class submarines"
The following articles: are under consideration for Good Topic status. Interested editors may comment on the topic's entry at the Good Topic nominations page. — Bellhalla (talk) 20:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * U-43 class submarine (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-43 (Austria-Hungary)
 * SMU U-47 (Austria-Hungary)

A-Class review for Design 1047 battlecruiser now open
The A-Class review for Design 1047 battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

New template for use in infoboxes
I've finally gotten around to setting up a template for better conversions of ship endurance figures, typically given in the form distance @ speed. I've always felt that using Template:Convert for endurance conversions was very klunky:


 * → 1510 nmi @ 25 knots

With the new template it looks like this:



Details on usage, syntax, units supported, etc., can be found at Template:Endurance. — Bellhalla (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SM UB-45 now open
The A-Class review for SM UB-45 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 20:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Byzantine navy FAC
Hello to all! Following an unsuccessful attempt to get the Byzantine navy article to FA, all editors are invited in participating in the second nomination of a much expanded & improved article. Thanks in advance, Constantine  ✍  19:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Japanese battleship Haruna now open
The A-Class review for Japanese battleship Haruna is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 05:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Amagi class battlecruiser now open
The A-Class review for Amagi class battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [pf] 04:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Nassau class battleship now open
The A-Class review for Nassau class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 21:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SM UB-43 now open
The A-Class review for SM UB-43 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! --Eurocopter (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Australian light destroyer project now open
The peer review for Australian light destroyer project is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 23:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Move request
There is an active proposal to rename the article ITALIAN SUBMARINE Sciré (with acute accent) to ITALIAN SUBMARINE Scirè (with grave accent). Interested editors may comment on the proposal at the article's talk page — Bellhalla (talk) 16:12, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Wolfgang Lüth now open
The A-Class review for Wolfgang Lüth is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [pf] 17:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Australian light destroyer project now open
The A-Class review for Australian light destroyer project is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 07:56, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Nassau class battleship now open
The featured article candidacy for Nassau class battleship is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 15:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

All photos found on the Naval History & Heritage Command website are PD
Please see this for more. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  17:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Moltke class battlecruiser now open
The A-Class review for Moltke class battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 15:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Take Ichi convoy now open
The peer review for Take Ichi convoy is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 00:08, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Design 1047 battlecruiser now open
The featured article candidacy for Design 1047 battlecruiser is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  21:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion related to year- or decade-based categories for ships
There's an on-going discussion at WikiProject Ships about possibly implementing year- or decade-based categories for ships to parallel categories like Category:Establishments by year. All editors are welcome to comment. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for HMS Endeavour now open
The peer review for HMS Endeavour is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 00:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Brazilian battleship Minas Gerais now open
The featured article candidacy for Brazilian battleship Minas Gerais is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  04:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Question ?
Hi I have just happened upon this external web page


 * Sorry for the full list but can anyone expand on the entry for HODGE J.T. 1st Cl Vol. Belleisle - I presume 1st Cl Vol is first class volunteer but what was he ? --Jim Sweeney (talk) 06:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't be 100% sure in this case, but "1st class volunteer" was most often used for a boy under the age limit required to be a midshipman but destined (by virtue of social class), to be an officer once they did reach the required age. Such boys were usually the sons of serving naval officers and were not always actually present - their names would be carried on the ship's books so that they could gain "experience" and "seniority" while they were actually at school in Britain, although in this case he must have been aboard to be listed among the casualties. The phrase "volunteer" was also sometimes used for a commissioned officer on "half-pay" (in reserve) who volunteered for service at sea without pay in the hope of impressing a senior officer enough to be offered a position aboard a ship. However, few such officers would have chosen to serve on a ship of the line on blockade duty in 1805 as they opportunities for glory were relatively small (after all, Trafalgar was the only major fleet action of the Napoleonic Wars). Hope this helps.--Jackyd101 (talk) 07:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * THANKS --Jim Sweeney (talk) 10:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

New reference on US Navy fleet oilers posted online
An out of print book on the history of US Navy fleet oilers has just been posted online. The book is: Cla68 (talk) 04:48, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Nice find! I took the liberty of adding the printed versions ISBN and OCLC number to your citation in case anyone wants to copy it. — Bellhalla (talk) 05:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! The prices I saw for used copies of this book on Internet booksellers hovered around $100, so I, for one, am very happy that someone took the time to make this book available for free. Cla68 (talk) 05:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I personally am awaiting the upcoming Google Books system for out-of-print books. I figure whatever fee they're going to charge will be pretty reasonable, compared to out-of-print book prices, at least. — Bellhalla (talk) 10:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Good topic nomination for "Yorktown class gunboats"
The following articles: are under consideration for Good Topic status. Interested editors may comment on the topic's entry at the Good Topic nominations page. — Bellhalla (talk) 10:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yorktown-class gunboat
 * USS Yorktown (PG-1)
 * USS Concord (PG-3)
 * USS Bennington (PG-4)

WWII convoy listings
Copied from the WikiProject Ships discussion page:
 * The National Archives (UK) has recently improved their cataloguing of records of WWII convoys in the record series ADM 199, convoys are now searchable by ship name (escorts are not listed, any HM Ships shown were carrying some sort of cargo as well) and convoy number (no spaces or other separators are used), ports of departure and arrival may be given too, or there will at least be a general description such as UK to North Russia, dates of deaprture and arrival are also given. See for example a search for Empire Morn.  Hope this may be of use to project members.  I understand that the cataloguing team revisited all the original documents, and that the listings include all ships that sailed with a given convoy including those sunk or forced to retire (no indication of such fates is given in the catalogue), but not ships originally assigned to a convoy but which did not sail. David Underdown (talk) 14:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

copied by Bellhalla (talk) 16:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

World War II Naval History
Interesting external site found for anyone interested in WWII, but I don't know how reliable it is --Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:39, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Teddy Sheean now open
The A-Class review for Teddy Sheean is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Yorktown class gunboat now open
The A-Class review for Yorktown class gunboat is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Bellhalla (talk) 12:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for USS West Bridge (ID-2888) now open
The featured article candidacy for USS West Bridge (ID-2888) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Bellhalla (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Military career of L. Ron Hubbard open
I have recently rewritten Military career of L. Ron Hubbard (who served in the US Navy during WW2) from scratch. It is currently under discussion at WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Military career of L. Ron Hubbard. Any input would be appreciated. -- ChrisO (talk) 15:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson now open
The peer review for Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 02:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Action of 11 August 1778
I have proposed deletion of Action of 11 August 1778. If someone here thinks the action is sufficiently distinctive from the Battle of Rhode Island (which it is a prelude to) to warrant a separate page, feel free to de-PROD (and perhaps expand the details in one place or the other). Currently neither page indicates there is much "action" beyond a storm.  Magic ♪piano 02:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Otto Becher now open
The featured article candidacy for Otto Becher is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for AHS Centaur now open
The peer review for AHS Centaur is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review for List of destroyer classes of the United States Navy
A peer review for List of destroyer classes of the United States Navy is now open. Thanks, mynameinc (t|c| o |r) 22:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Helgoland class battleship now open
The A-Class review for Helgoland class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for German battleship Bismarck now open
The peer review for German battleship Bismarck is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 00:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for List of destroyer classes of the United States Navy now open
The peer review for List of destroyer classes of the United States Navy is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 00:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for List of aircraft carrier classes of the United States Navy now open
The peer review for List of aircraft carrier classes of the United States Navy is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 00:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Battle of the Coral Sea now open
The featured article candidacy for Battle of the Coral Sea is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 01:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Battle honours in ship articles

 * I am also cross-posting this question at WP:SHIPS, but will request that all discussin be kept here to minimise confusion.

Is there any guideline on the listing and inclusion of battle honours in Commonwealth ship articles? I know that all battle honours associated with a ship's name are forever carried by all ships of that name, but I've always been under the impression that only those awarded to a particular vessel should be listed in that ship's article.

As an example:
 * the shipindex HMAS Sydney lists the eight battle honours associated with the name.
 * the article on the aircraft carrier HMAS Sydney (R17) lists the two honours earned by that ship, but not the five honours inherited from the two previous Sydneys, or the honour awarded to the Sydney that came after.

I was cleaning up the articles for the new British Type 45 destroyers (prompted by an attempt to move articles in Category:Ships of the Royal Navy out of the main cat and into subcategories), and part of this cleanup included removing the list of inherited battle honours for each ship from the infobox. The honours for HMS Dragon (D35) were then restored by Mjroots, who appears to be under the opposite impression: as all of the honours are forever carried by all ships of the name, all honours should be listed in all ship articles of that name.

Does anyone have any thoughts or comments on this? Is there a guideline or a consensus on which way it should be? -- saberwyn 05:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * For reference this was previously discussed here. Benea (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I would suggest that in cases where there are a lot of battle honours:
 * that they are not all put in the infobox (with British Army regiments the battle honours section of the infobox is often a link to the section of the article)
 * that those battle honours awarded for action by the particular ship are added to the infobox with a link to inherited honours as a see....
 * that if they are not listed elsewhere where they can be linked to (eg the shipindex page) that the inherited honours are included in the article somewhere eg as a note after any statement about battle honours awarded - it would only be necessary to name prior honours. (Battle honours tend to awarded some years after any actual action, so the award wouldn't necessarily be in the same place in the text as the action itself)GraemeLeggett (talk) 09:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * We currently have no specific guidelines on the matter, so currently it comes down to whatever a particular editor feels like doing on a particular article. If we want to draw up some specifics I see there being a number of options as being possible for the infobox field.
 * All battle honours awarded go to that specific ship go in the infobox. No honours awarded to different ships of the name before or after included.
 * All battle honours awarded go to that specific ship and those awarded to previous ships of the name go in the infobox. No honours awarded to subsequent ships of the name included.
 * All ships carry all battle honours of the name irrespective of which ship they were awarded to. (This is not an entirely serious suggestion, I hope everyone would agree that HMS Warspite (1596) having 'Calabria 1940' in the infobox is a confusing anachronism of the highest order).
 * Battle honours to a specific ship in the infobox, except where the ship is currently in commission, when it carries all the battle honours currently assigned to the name. (I think this the crux of the previous debate over HMS Dragon (D35) and why these current ships are being viewed a little differently.)
 * Something like Graeme suggested, and seen at Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson in the 'titles' field for example. A 'see below' link from the infobox to a dedicated section included in the text. The only place I have seen this be an issue is the Type 45 destroyers. Battle honours are very rarely mentioned in articles, even for the ones won by that ship, so this will probably not be necessary for many ships. But this would hopefully allow a brief note about what battle honours are for readers who are confused as to why a ship not yet in commission has battle honours from 1653.
 * I personally would lean towards option 5 for the Type 45s, but the vast majority of RN/RAN/RCN, etc ships that bother to mention battle honours only include the ones they won, and I think there's no harm in keeping that the status quo in those cases. Benea (talk) 19:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Another option would be to modify just the royal navy disambig pages with an infobox of the accumulated awards of every ship to have carried the name, and then break down the individual awards on the individual ship pages. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd like to see some kind of clear consensus and/or loose guidelines hammered out on this...the last discussion (which I was suprised to find I participated in) didn't lead to any clear solutions, and a lack of clear solutions means the problem will continue to resurface. I'm leaning towards a combination of Grame's second and Benea's fifth idea... list all battle honours on the shipindex page, list the earned battle honours in the respective article infobox, and add a link below this to the full list at the shipindex ( "for the battle honours inherited by this ship, see the HMAS Foo index"  or  "plus X inherited battle honours" , or some other consensus-derived flavour of text). For an example of this, see the infobox at my HMAS Sydney userspace rewrite.
 * I agree that honours 'inherited' from later ships (what is the antonym of "inherit", anyway?) definitely should not be listed in earlier ships, because it would cause more confusion than benefit. I'm personally reluctant to list inherited honours in an infobox for similar reasons... those who don't know that battle honours are inherited from predecessors of the same name are going to think "Hang on, the ship didn't exist back in the x-teenth century, so it shouldn't have this award." and remove it as an 'error'.
 * I don't think there should be sections dedicated to battle honours in a ship's article. Linking out to the shipindex section would be sufficient for this unless a section is desirable for another reason (i.e. HMS Warspite (03) and her fifteen earned honours, or the ship is the only ship of the name).. -- saberwyn 04:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

American Amphibious Doctrine
Where is the main article for American Amphibious Doctrine? Hcobb (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think there is one as yet. Amphibious warfare (United States) is probably the closest thing we have to that right now. It's currently quite a mess, so any improvements would be good. Perhaps a specific amphib doctrine article could be split out of it later. - BillCJ (talk) 17:42, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Changes to popular pages lists
There are a few important changes to the popular pages system. A quick summary: -- Mr.Z-man 00:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The "importance" ranking (for projects that use it) will be included in the lists along with assessment.
 * The default list size has been lowered to 500 entries (from 1000)
 * I've set up a project on the Toolserver for the popular pages - ~alexz/pop/.
 * This includes a page to view the results for projects, including the in-progress results from the current month. Currently this can only show the results from a single project in one month. Features to see multiple projects or multiple months may be added later.
 * This includes a new interface for making requests to add a new project to the list.
 * There is also a form to request a change to the configuration for a project. Currently the configurable options are the size of the on-wiki list and the project subpage used for the list.
 * The on-wiki list should be generated and posted in a more timely and consistent manner than before.
 * The data is now retained indefinitely.
 * The script used to generate the pages has changed. The output should be the same. Please report any apparent inconsistencies (see below).
 * Bugs and feature requests should be reported using the Toolserver's bug tracker for "alexz's tools" -

Discussion of Swedish ship prefixes at WP:SHIPS
There is an ongoing discussion at WikiProject Ships regarding ship prefix use for Swedish Navy vessels. Input from all interested editors is welcome. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Category rename proposal
There's a proposal to rename to. All editors are welcome to comment at the discussion at the Categories for discussion page. — Bellhalla (talk) 21:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Blücher now open
The A-Class review for SMS Blücher is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 16:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Lexington class battlecruiser now open
The featured article candidacy for Lexington class battlecruiser is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 16:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMS Endeavour now open
The A-Class review for HMS Endeavour is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 11:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Kaiser class battleship now open
The featured article candidacy for Kaiser class battleship is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 19:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of Grand Port now open
The peer review for Battle of Grand Port is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 02:30, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Convoy GP55 now open
The A-Class review for Convoy GP55 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 03:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for König class battleship now open
The A-Class review for König class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Annnd the spotlight falls on ... [[USS Massachusetts (BB-59)|USS ''Massachusetts'' (BB-59)]]!
Hi all. An article within the scope of our task force, USS Massachusetts (BB-59), has been selected to receive the recently-reactivated Spotlight during the week of 1 August. Any help that could be offered would be greatly appreciated! Some sources availiable for use in expanding the article can be found here. Cheers, — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  05:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Endeavour now open
The featured article candidacy for HMS Endeavour is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 18:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS König now open
The A-Class review for SMS König is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 09:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Operation Pedestal now open
The peer review for Operation Pedestal is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Woody (talk) 14:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Convoy GP55 now open
The featured article candidacy for Convoy GP55 is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 10:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Battle of Grand Port now open
The featured article candidacy for Battle of Grand Port is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 00:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Battle off Texel now open
The A-Class review for Battle off Texel is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 04:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Massachusetts (BB-59) now open
The A-Class review for USS Massachusetts (BB-59) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 06:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for König class battleship now open
The featured article candidacy for König class battleship is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 14:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Derfflinger class battlecruiser now open
The A-Class review for Derfflinger class battlecruiser is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 00:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Hindenburg now open
The A-Class review for SMS Hindenburg is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 11:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMAS Sydney (1934) now open
The featured article candidacy for HMAS Sydney (1934) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 22:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battleship now open
The peer review for Battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 23:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Bayern class battleship now open
The A-Class review for Bayern class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! - Parsecboy (talk) 00:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Derfflinger class battlecruiser now open
The featured article candidacy for Derfflinger class battlecruiser is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher
FYI, the article Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher is under a rename discussion to pick the best article name for Admiral Jackie Fisher. 76.66.192.144 (talk) 05:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Collins class submarine now open
The peer review for Collins class submarine is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 14:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident now open
The peer review for 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 21:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Derfflinger now open
The A-Class review for SMS Derfflinger is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Operation Teardrop now open
The peer review for Operation Teardrop is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 05:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for North Carolina class battleship now open
The A-Class review for North Carolina class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  02:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident now open
The A-Class review for 1982 British Army Gazelle friendly fire incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! – Joe   N  15:34, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Brazilian cruiser Bahia now open
The A-Class review for Brazilian cruiser Bahia is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  19:56, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Lützow now open
The A-Class review for SMS Lützow is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 23:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for SMS Hindenburg now open
The featured article candidacy for SMS Hindenburg is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 23:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!

Many thanks,  Roger Davies  talk 04:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a reminder but, with about 18 hours to go until nominations close, you'll need to get your skates on if you're thinking of standing as a coordinator. The election is based on self-nominations, so please don't be shy in putting your name forward. The last elections will give you an idea of what to expect.
 * Otherwise, voting starts tonight at 00:01 (UTC). Any member of the project may support as many of the candidates as they wish. You should cast your votes here.
 * Roger Davies talk 06:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Midshipman now open
The peer review for Midshipman is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 20:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle off Texel now open
The peer review for Battle off Texel is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 20:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Renown's engagement with Gneisenau and Scharnhorst on 9 April 1940
During the Norwegian Campaign there was an engagement on 9 April 1940 between the new German battleships Gneisenau and Scharnhorst on one side, and the modernised British battlecruiser and some destroyers on the other.

Can anyone think of a suitable name for a short article on this engagement please?

The engagement is referred to in many sources - none of them suggest a name for the engagement. I think it is against Wikipedia policies to make one up, e.g Battle of Skomver, 9 April 1940.

Unless anyone can come up with a better title, I propose HMS Renown's engagement with the German battleships Gneisenau and Scharnhorst, 9 April 1940.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Although it is far from a perfect solution, the usual answer in these cases is simply to use to date (provided it is not in use elsewhere). On land you would attribute the battle to the nearest settlement, but since that is impossible in this case, Action of 9 April 1940 would be standard. However I personally would have no objection if you went with your proposal.--Jackyd101 (talk) 06:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think there were other naval engagements on 9 April 1940.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:45, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe something along the lines of Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran? -- saberwyn 06:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Its part of the aftermath of Operation Wilfred. Why not add it there. GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Toddy has a point about other naval actions; "Action of 9 April 1940" could easily refer to the sinking of Blücher. Parsecboy (talk) 13:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

(out) - going off saberwyn's suggestion, I think that "Battle between HMS Renown and and the German battleships Gneisenau and Scharnhorst" is the best solution, even if it is a little unwieldy. — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  14:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Nick-D (talk) 08:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm now open
The A-Class review for SMS Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 00:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Congress (1799) now open
The A-Class review for USS Congress (1799) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 06:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Tosa class battleship now open
The A-Class review for Tosa class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  22:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Escort carrier classes proposal
I've started a discussion on the possibility of renaming escort carrier ship class articles and ship class categories at WikiProject Ships. All editors are welcome to comment on the proposal here. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Convoy PQ 17 now open
The peer review for Convoy PQ 17 is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Roger Davies talk 15:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Nassau now open
The A-Class review for SMS Nassau is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 02:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for SMS Derfflinger now open
The featured article candidacy for SMS Derfflinger is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 02:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS President (1800) now open
The A-Class review for USS President (1800) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 02:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Collins class submarine now open
The A-Class review for Collins class submarine is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 05:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for HMS Graph (P715) now open
The peer review for HMS Graph (P715) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 00:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Operation Teardrop now open
The A-Class review for Operation Teardrop is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 03:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Brazilian cruiser Bahia now open
The featured article candidacy for Brazilian cruiser Bahia is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  19:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle of the Nile now open
The peer review for Battle of the Nile is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 21:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Chesapeake (1799) now open
The A-Class review for USS Chesapeake (1799) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 04:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for USS Constitution now open
The peer review for USS Constitution is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for USS Congress (1799) now open
The featured article candidacy for USS Congress (1799) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for Design A-150 battleship now open
The A-Class review for Design A-150 battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  06:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Operation Teardrop now open
The featured article candidacy for Operation Teardrop is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Nick-D (talk) 04:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for SMS Lützow now open
The featured article candidacy for SMS Lützow is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 00:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Mary Rose update assistance
I've been working on a major update of the Mary Rose-article for a few months now and I have been tinkering with it at a sub-page of mine that can be found at user:Peter Isotalo/novelties. The reason for my not doing the editing in article space is because I've wanted to submit it as a DYK. There's also the matter of waiting for a possible image donation from the Mary Rose Trust that is in the works. Anticipating that the update will be realized within a few weeks, I'm inviting anyone who's interested in improving the quality of the update (and to share DYK credits) to freely edit the above mentioned draft.

Peter Isotalo 10:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for North Carolina class battleship now open
The featured article candidacy for North Carolina class battleship is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 04:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The Incredible Hulk
Hello folks. I’ve started a thread here, where I’m trying to uncover the identity of a hulk moored off the Isle of Wight in 1853/54. Any help, or anyone who would know what direction to head in to find out more would be most welcome! Cheers, Ranger Steve (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Question on naming conventions
Hi a question on British warships which are normally called HMS Destroyer etc. What about smaller units. I am thinking about MGBs & MTBs they normally had a number such as MGB 64. Would they be properly known as HM MGB 64 ? --Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * To the best of my knowledge, all Motor Gun Boats, Motor Torpedo Boats, and any other commissioned ship would still be named via the WP:NC-SHIP naming convention. — Kralizec! (talk) 14:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia naming conventions indicate that the full HMS prefix should be used: i.e. HMS MGB 64. I don't know of any RN examples, but the RAN website lists two ships that follow the equivalent use of the full prefix: HMAS SDB 1323 and HMAS HDML 1347. -- saberwyn 08:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposal for new categories
A proposal regarding the creation of categories like "Ships sunk in [year]" (or some other wording to be determined) is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships. All editors are welcome to participate in the discussion. — Bellhalla (talk) 20:34, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for HMS New Zealand (1911) now open
The peer review for HMS New Zealand (1911) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 04:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for SMS Blücher now open
The featured article candidacy for SMS Blücher is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 02:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

A-class review for Florida class battleship now open
The A-class review for Florida class battleship is now open. All editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 02:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran now open
The peer review for Battle between HMAS Sydney and German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Hawaii (CB-3) now open
The A-Class review for USS Hawaii (CB-3) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! — Ed   (talk  •  majestic titan)  01:36, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Task force image not displaying
The Maritime warfare task force image is not displaying correctly in the WP:MILHIST banner. Mjroots (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks fine to me... — Ed   (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Peter Heywood now open
The featured article candidacy for Peter Heywood is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 06:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Request for image: battle honour boards
I'm drafting some information about battle honours as they are applied to ships, which will eventually become part of the battle honour article or a standalone subarticle. I'm wondering if anyone has a photograph of a ship's battle honour board that they would be willing to upload for illustrative purposes. Thanks in advance. -- saberwyn 04:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just uploaded a photo of HMS Belfast's honours board at: File:HMS Belfast honours board.JPG. It isn't a very good photo I'm afraid though. Nick-D (talk) 01:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Its a better photo than anything I can get of HMAS Vampire: there's support beams directly opposite, and it has a quasi-reflective plastic covering that ruins the shot. Would you have any idea why the Belfast board is of a different style to what I assumed was standard for Commonwealth ships (as described by Cassells in The Destroyers and The Capital Ships), like this image of a board on HMAS Sydney? -- saberwyn 02:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid not. The Imperial War Museum's HMS Belfast guidebook doesn't indicate that there's anything unusual about the design in the short section on it... The AWM has a few examples of different battle honour board designs - for instance, those of HMAS Manoora, HMAS Vengeance and HMAS Hobart (I). Nick-D (talk) 03:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hobart (I) is the style Cassells describes. I need to find some more sources on battle honours... see what they say -- saberwyn 05:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Nimitz class aircraft carrier now open
The peer review for Nimitz class aircraft carrier is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 22:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for USS Missouri grounding incident now open
The peer review for USS Missouri grounding incident is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 09:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Good Topic nomination for Gorgon class monitors
All interested editors are invited to comment at Featured topic candidates/Gorgon class monitor/archive1 as to its suitability as a good topic.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for HMAS Sydney (R17) now open
The peer review for HMAS Sydney (R17) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 06:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Mary Rose peer review
Mary Rose is up for peer review. Comments and suggestions for improvement would be greatly appreciated.

Peter Isotalo 21:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Would Lasakau sea warriors fall into this bailiwick?
This article has been a bit of an (intriguing) disaster, with a ton of info and footnotes/sources, but quite confusing: Lasakau sea warriors. Would this group of sea-raiders from Fijian history fall into this TF? Anyone want to help take a stab at making sense of this article? MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured Article Review for Imperial Japanese Navy
nominated Imperial Japanese Navy for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -MBK004 11:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for List of battlecruisers of Germany now open
The A-Class review for List of battlecruisers of Germany is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Bombardment of Papeete now open
The peer review for Bombardment of Papeete is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 21:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMS Lion (1910) now open
The A-Class review for HMS Lion (1910) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 01:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 03:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for German Type UB I submarine now open
The peer review for German Type UB I submarine is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 03:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured List candidacy for List of battlecruisers of Germany now open
The FLC for List of battlecruisers of Germany is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 11:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured Topic for Moltke class battlecruisers now open
The Featured Topic nomination for the Moltke class battlecruisers is now open. Editors are invited to participate here to determine whether it meets the Featured Topic criteria. Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Calliope (1884) now open
The featured article candidacy for HMS Calliope (1884) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

HMS Howe (32)
Upgraded this article, so could do with reassessment and comments. Folks at 137 (talk) 10:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Given it a copyedit. Comments on the talk page momentarily. -- saberwyn 11:46, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Bombardment of Papeete now open
The A-Class review for Bombardment of Papeete is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Anthony Roll at FAC
I've nominated Anthony Roll for FAC. The nomination can be found at Featured article candidates/Anthony Roll/archive1. You are most welcome to contribute to the review of the article.

Peter Isotalo 16:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Yazoo Pass Expedition now open
The peer review for Yazoo Pass Expedition is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 04:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for HMS Lion (1910) now open
The featured article candidacy for HMS Lion (1910) is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 05:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

HMS Whelp (R37)
This article has been expanded and comments/assessment would be appreciated. One minor picky point is that a wider infobox (400px) improves layout (IMO) but another editor insists that "300px is the accepted size". I'll go with the consensus. Thanks. Folks at 137 (talk) 21:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I was that other editor. I know of no other ship article that has an image larger than 300px, which dramatically stretches the infobox past its standardised size, and this standard has so far applied to tens of thousands of articles. The layout of articles is highly dependent on things like screen sizes and settings, so a page that looks better for one viewer may look drastically different for another with different settings. Benea (talk) 21:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Glad you're here, Benea. Yes, it does stretch the infobox - that was the intention. The contents of the wider infobox are "dramatically" more readable without spoiling the main text, IMO. I don't see a "standardised" size as carved in stone and, as editors, we are encouraged to "be bold" where we see an improvement. IMO, the alternatives are to either reduce the content in this infobox (they should be concise & readable) & transfer info into the main text or to reduce the text size in the box (but I don't know how to). Folks at 137 (talk) 10:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I see two problems with a 400px infobox image in this particular case, one personal and one technical. Personal: I'm one of the many poor fools in the world still working with a monitor that has 800x600 as the best resolution (If it ain't broke, why replace it?). At the moment, the infobox is large, but not overly so. An increase to 400px means the infobox now takes up half the width of my screen...a quick "preview" test shows this to be uncomfortable, and while expanding the available space in the infobox, starts cramping down on the text (which has many more words needing space.
 * Technical: For this particular image, the file's maximum resolution is 300px. Increasing a 300px file to display at 400px means that the image is going to start distorting. -- saberwyn 10:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with Saberwyn, and while I'm happy for you to be bold, the ship infobox is used on thousands of articles, and the maximum size used for the images is 300px. If there is going to be a shift away from having that as the largest size based to one on what ever data is in the infobox fields we are going to see infoboxes of all sorts of widths popping up. Though standardised procedures don't need to be set in stone, this clearly this needs consensus rather than being changed one infobox at a time. Manual of Style (infoboxes) in fact states - 'For consistency the following guidelines apply: Standard suggested width of 300 pixels or 25 ems (300px or 25em in CSS)'. Benea (talk) 11:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The Manual of style recommends no images larger than 300px unless absolutely necessary. If there's a problem with the amount of text in the infobox, look to simplify it. eg drop the Mark numbers of the guns or force line breaks. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Saberwyn's point about screen resolution is the show-stopper for me. 300 it is. Now - any general comments, advice about the article? Folks at 137 (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * See article talk. -- saberwyn 23:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for SMS Goeben now open
The A-Class review for SMS Goeben is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 15:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Mary Rose at FAC
I've nominated Mary Rose for FAC. The nomination can be found at Featured article candidates/Mary Rose/archive1. You are most welcome to contribute to the review of the article.

Peter Isotalo 23:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for USS Triton (SSRN-586) now open
The A-Class review for USS Triton (SSRN-586) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 02:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Bayern class battleship now open
The featured article candidacy for Bayern class battleship is now open. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 19:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for HMAS Sydney (R17) now open
The A-Class review for HMAS Sydney (R17) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! -MBK004 03:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

A-Class review for Sovetsky Soyuz class battleship now open
The A-Class review for Sovetsky Soyuz class battleship is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 09:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC)