Talk:French battleship Brennus

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Parsecboy in topic Photos
Featured articleFrench battleship Brennus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Good topic starFrench battleship Brennus is part of the Battleships of France series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 13, 2012Good article nomineeListed
September 14, 2019WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
December 12, 2019Featured article candidatePromoted
August 25, 2020Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

The name

edit

The article should perhaps mention that this battleship was named after the Gaulish chieftain Brennus (4th century BC), who took Rome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.8.98.118 (talk) 11:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:French battleship Brennus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 18:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

review
  • "After Aube's retirement, the plans for the ships were reworked entirely, for the ships that were actually completed, though they are sometimes conflated." - what does this sentence mean?
    • It means that the plans for the original Brennus were basically redone for this Brennus, but that some people think they're the same ship. See if what I added makes this clearer.
  • "This may be due to the fact that both of the ships named Brennus were built in the same shipyard, and material assembled for the first vessel was used in the construction of the second"
  • can this sentence be simplified? e.g. "Since both ships named Brennus were built in the same shipyard, the same material was used to assemble each?" or something similar?
  • Well, that wording would require merging it with the previous sentence, which would then be pretty long. Take a look at how it reads now.
  • "Brennus formed the basis for the subsequent group of five broadly similar battleships built to the same design specifications, begun with Charles Martel, though they reverted to the armament layout of the earlier Magentas.
  • Could this be clearer? What was the armament layout that they reverted to?
  • See how it reads now.
  • "water-tube boilers" - What is the significance of using these?
  • Water-tube boilers are a type of boiler, it's just a more specific link than boiler.
  • in the photo, which one is Admiral François Ernest Fournier?
    • Hmm, the image page doesn't say, and neither we nor the French wiki have an article on Fournier to compare images.
  • "At the time, Brennus was the flagship of the Mediterranean Squadron, under Vice Admiral Fournier. On 10 August off Cape St. Vincent, while returning from the maneuvers maneuvers, she collided with the destroyer Framée.
  • In the lede it sounds like the Brennus was relegated to the Reserve Squadron when the collision occurred.
  • Clarified
  • "By 1903, Brennus was transferred to the Reserve Squadron, along with three other battleships and three armored cruisers" whereas in 1900 she rammed the destroyer? Or am I getting mixed up?
  • "Fournier was the commander in chief of the annual summer maneuvers, which began in late June and concluded on 4 August" - does this refer to 1907 or also the years through 1907?
  • Just 1907.

MathewTownsend (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar: 
    b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:  
    b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:  
    c. no original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
  4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
    fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    no edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Pass!

Photos

edit

Here. Parsecboy (talk) 20:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Reply