Talk:PS Duchess of Montrose

Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met ?

Only Coverage and accuracy away from B-Class. I'd appreciatte some pointers as to how to best meet this criterion - I guess the Casualties section may be considered irrelevant material ? Burruchaga (Talk) 13:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Possibly, such sections are usually discouraged as excessive, and lists of casualties are not especially relevant to the subject of the article. You could discuss the numbers of dead/survivors, etc but a detailed list tends to be the sort of information that gets trimmed out as being un-encyclopaedic. Otherwise, the main gaps I can see are in the period of her time as her main occupation - 13 years of her career is covered in just a sentence. There is probably scope for expansion in her brief career as a naval auxiliary as well. You could ask User:Brad101 if he had any more thoughts about this, as he gave the initial rating. This does seem a very good article, and is well sourced, but probably needs more balanced coverage of her entire career to warrant a B class rating. Benea (talk) 13:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

This article has been moved

I moved this article from PS Duchess Of Montrose to PS Duchess of Montrose. This agrees with the majority of sources, and with the normal usage for Duke of Kent, Earl of Wessex, Duchess of Montrose, etc. Shem (talk) 12:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

B-class

I reckon this justifies B2 (Coverage and accuracy criteron met), and have changed it accordingly. Shem (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)