Talk:Charles Richardson (Royal Navy officer)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 18:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

• I will do a little grammar and MoS copy editing as I go. Do shout if I mess something up or if you don't understand or disagree with a change.
• The lead seems maybe a little long for the length of the article. Possibly trim it a little?

• Have made an attempt. What do you think?

• "he was related to Sir Francis Lindley Wood of Yorkshire." Given this is a red link I am not picking up the significence of this (lack of) information.

• There is little concrete evidence as to Richardson's family or really provenance at all, I thought it useful to include what I could. As well as this, his biography really emphasises his relationship with Wood. (incidentally, I have a theory that his father was Captain Charles Wood of HMS Worcester who died of wounds in the East Indies on 3 September 1782, but there is little to nothing to back that up!)

I would delete it, but it's GAN so not a huge issue.

Have you tried asking for help at MilHist? They love this sort of thing.

• Yes, here, but sadly there really is very little and any answer would be purely a guess!

• "Richardson joined the Royal Navy as a captain's servant to Captain Sir Richard Strachan". 1. "... a captain's servant to Captain ..." - captain twice in four words is not ideal. 2. Perhaps spell out that a Captain's servant does not mean that he was a domestic worker?

•  Done

• "on board the 28-gun frigate HMS Vestal ". Richardson joined, or Strachen had served?

• Changed with the previous edit

• "promoted to midshipman and then master's mate by this time". What time?

• The source only says "On his return to England in 1793 he joined (he had previously attained the ratings of Midshipman and Master’s Mate) the Alexander 74, Capt. West"

Well, a natural reading of your "by this time" would suggest before "he re-joined Phoenix", that being the last thing mentioned. And certainly before Phoenix sailed for England. Suggest a tweak to the language here.

•  Done

• "File:Vice-Admiral Sir Charles Richardson.jpg" needs a US PD tag, as do "File:Daniel-Orme-Duncan-receiving-Surrender-at-Camperdown-jpg.jpg" and "File:Captain Charles Richardson.jpg".

• I had thought that the "This photographic reproduction is therefore also considered to be in the public domain in the United States." underneath works in the same way? Please do say if I'm totally wrong!

Are we both looking at the same page?

• Yes, the section starting "The official position taken by the Wikimedia Foundation..."?

Ah. What they mean is, if the 2D work is out of copyright, then photographing or otherwise reproducing it doesn't create a new, copyrightable image. Unlike, say, coins, which are 3D and so one need two PD or free use tags - one for the original work and one for the reproduction. Eg see [1] - "Coin" and "Photographs". So for a 2D reproduction you still need the normal, single set of tags, as eg here, where {{PD-Art|PD-old-100-expired}} is used.

Does that make sense? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks for the explanation! Have updated the three images.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

• Link ship of the line.

•  Done

• "in which Richardson saw some involvement." Not grammatical to my eye. Maybe 'saw some action' or 'had some involvement'.

•  Done

• "en flute". I think this needs an in line explanation.

•  Done

• "For his services in Egypt Richardson was awarded the gold medal second class of the Order of the Crescent." Consider adding 'by the Ottoman Empire'.

•  Done

• "continued in command of Alligator". At what point, if at all, were its guns reinstalled?

• Have to assume that it happened at some point but it's never specifically noted. On the other hand, he only commanded Alligator as a commander, and if she had her guns reinstalled she would have been the command of a post captain instead, so who knows?

As Alligator seems mostly to have been used as a transport I think we can definitely assume she remained ungunned, but if there isn't a solid source, OK.

• "he flanked behind". I suspect this won't mean much to most readers.

• Reworded

• "Caesar then became the flagship of Rear-Admiral Robert Stopford, and under him Richardson subsequently fought at the Battle of Les Sables-d'Olonne on 23 February 1809, where three French frigates were destroyed by the squadron against the shoreline, and at the Battle of the Basque Roads on 11 April of the same year, where the fleet's fireships assisted in destroying four ships of the line of the same fleet that the frigates had been attached to, although Caesar was little engaged in the latter battle because of her draught." perhaps a little long?

•  Done

• "Camvere surrendered and Richardson coordinated the terms of such". Maybe explain this a little more clearly?

• Does my rewording pass muster?

The town didn't "surrender" as a modern reader would understand it, as its garrison was allowed to leave and continue fighting. Mmm. Maybe something like 'Soon after this Camvere offered to surrender and Richardson went with the army's Lieutenant-General Alexander Fraser to negotiate terms'?

•  Done

• "coordinated the terms of such with the army's Lieutenant-General Alexander Fraser". This makes it sound as if Fraser is doing the surrendering.

• Ibid

• "to get close enough to". This is left hanging by your change to "which she".

• Reworded

• "having been while on half pay". I think either this needs amending or the concept of half pay for commissioned naval officers explaining. (Personally I would put the facts in chronological order, but that's your call.

• Reworded

That's all I have. Very nice. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:04, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Thank you for the detailed review; I believe I've responded to all your remarks. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:52, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

A great article. I hope that it is headed straight to ACR. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed