Talk:James Nicoll Morris/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 08:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

I will review, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 08:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Lead

• He was promoted to commander in 1790, commanding HMS Flirt...: suggest rephrasing to avoid close usage of commander/commanding

•  Done

• The lead implies while commander of Boston he captured ships in the English Channel. This doesn't seem the case when reading the relevant section of the article.

•  Done

Naval career

• This is strictly just a suggestion, not something that would hold up promotion to GA, but I think structure wise the Naval career heading could be deleted and the following headings brought up in hierarchy.

•  Done

Early career

• Morris was left in his father's will as a "legacy to king and country": this doesn't seem right to me, is there a word or two missing after "left"? Otherwise I am not sure what is trying to be said here.

• His father left him in his will to the country, I'm not sure how else to word this.

• Rear-Admiral Samuel Barrington: link Rear-Admiral here as this is its first mention but watch it doesn't create a dupe link elsewhere

•  Done

• Staying in the Channel Fleet,...: no antecedence for the Channel Fleet, presumably Barfleur was part of it?

• Changed to "English Channel". Unless specifically written one can never be sure in this period whether a ship was actually part of the fleet or serving in one of many other units in the area.

• I suggest moving the last sentence of this section to precede the first sentence of the command section (or combine them there); the two events referred to in the respective sentences occurred at the same time.

•  Done

Command

• The first sentence has seven cites, are they all necessary? I also suggest making sure the cites are in numerical order (there are a few elsewhere that aren't), it's not essential but does look tidier.

• Actually there's only five! Removed one as unnecessary.

• transferred commands, joining instead the...: don't really see the need for "instead" here.

•  Done

• Throughout this article I notice extensive use of the number of guns as part of identifying the ships. While for larger ships it could be used to emphasize the importance of the ship, to me this seems excessive particularly when referring to smaller ships and also the list of captured ships while in command of Boston.

• The number of guns is often the only way to clearly identify how large or powerful a ship was. For example with the Boston list, if I remove the guns then you've just got a list of privateers. These ships could have been anything from large rowing boats to corvettes or small frigates, and without the guns the reader is left to guess as to what kind of ships Morris was actually fighting.

• He continued on the same station in Lively: it is not established what that station is?

• Clarified

• link Admiral

•  Done

• Phaeton stayed in the Mediterranean...: the link isn't needed here as the Mediterranean Sea is already linked previously.

•  Done

Trafalgar

• Morris stayed unemployed throughout: was umemployed. So was he literally umemployed, i.e. no pay, or was he without a command and on half pay?

• Period language uses "unemployed" and "half pay" in the same fashion, changed for clarification.

• link Commodore, Admiral

•  Done - admiral already linked

Later service

• after the end of the Wars: "after the end of the Napoleonic Wars"

•  Done

Other stuff

• References: Place of publication for Grocott?

• Caxton Editions do not provide one.

• References: No dashes in the ISBN numbers for Clayton, Sudgen and Syrett

•  Done

• Image tags check out OK.

That's my review complete. Apologies for the length of time this has taken. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 04:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• @Zawed: Thanks for taking a look at this! I've responded to all your comments. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Zawed: Hi, do you have an ETA on when you'll be able to get back to this? Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:02, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

• Looks good, passing as GA as I believe this article meets the necessary criteria. Zawed (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2022 (UTC)