Talk:German submarine U-710

Latest comment: 3 years ago by SL93 in topic Did you know nomination
Good articleGerman submarine U-710 has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 15, 2020Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 2, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that U-710 was sunk only ten days after beginning her first patrol?

Picture

edit

Pic of this U boat would be great - anyone????— Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathlibrarian (talkcontribs) 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Probably not; this particular U-boat is less notable than the aircraft which sank it… Xyl 54 (talk) 06:10, 6 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Did you know nomination

edit
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk02:23, 21 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • * ... that U-710 was only operational for ten days before being sunk? Hitler's U-Boat War: The Hunted 1942–1945 – page 275
    • ALT1: ... that U-710 was sunk only ten days after beginning her first patrol? Hitler's U-Boat War: The Hunted 1942–1945 – page 275

Improved to Good Article status by Lettler (talk). Self-nominated at 01:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC).Reply

  • New GA, meets all other DYK requirements. There may be a concern about what is meant by "operational" in the hook; ALT1 avoids that so I think we should go with that. The nine-days is not stated explicitly in the article - it says it left on patrol on 13 days after the first, so the 14th. The next para says it was sunk on the 24th, so I think the hook is supported by a simple WP:CALC. DYK requires a ref on the sentence with the hook facts. "Blair" refs the last sentence about 49 lost. As written, "Kemp" supports everything in the para before that. We need a ref after the sentence "A second attack..." because the date of the sinking is in the hook. You said in the nom that it came from "Blair", so that needs to be repeated earlier. Also, it doesn't exactly say when the second attack was, presumably the same day. Could you clarify if that was "minutes later", "hours later" or what (by the same B-17)? so that the hooks matches better.   MB 18:12, 18 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
Lettler, please see the rest of my comment about inline citations and clarifying the details of the sinking. MB 02:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
MB Is this what you wanted? Lettlerhellocontribs 17:25, 19 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I think that clarifies the details of the sinking in the article such that it unambiguously says what is stated in the hook. The added citations meet the DYK requirements as specified in Did you know/Reviewing guide, which every reviewer should require before passing. Since I don't have access to any of the refs, AGF on the accuracy of the article. QPQ review not required.