Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Duke of Kent
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 20:23, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
HMS Duke of Kent
edit- ... that the 170-gun HMS Duke of Kent could have been the most heavily-armed ship of its time? "a 170-gun ship with five tiers of guns: it was intended to be called 'Duke of Kent' but never built" "raising the number of cannon carried from 112 to 136. This made the Santisima Trinidad by some way the most heavily--armed ship of its time" (page 36)
- ALT1:... that the design of the 170-gun HMS Duke of Kent may have been fabricated in an attempt to claim credit for several ship-building innovations? "A suspicion at least arises that the date 1809 represents nothing more than a desire to establish the deceased surveyor's prior claim to numerous improvements associated with the name of his better-known colleague Sir Robert Seppings ... or of Sir William Symonds" From: Clowes, Geoffrey Swinford Laird (1948). Sailing Ships: Their History & Development. H.M. Stationery Office. p. 67.
- Reviewed: to follow
Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 19:47, 6 September 2018 (UTC).
Provisional
Prefer Alt1 as more interesting and less ambiguous than the original hook. Article created today; long enough at 3209 bytes of readable prose so approximately same number of characters; adheres to core content policies, with Earwig and spot-check showing no signs of plagiarism; hook and alt are both of appropriate length. AGF on offline source for alt1, and also on the assumption that QPQ is forthcoming. I'll check back to ensure QPQ has been fulfilled.Just as a very minor style suggestion, try to ensure that consecutive citations are in numerical order (see [3][2][7]). Nicely done. – Juliancolton | Talk 20:15, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review Juliancolton, I have now carried out a QPQ at: Template:Did you know nominations/Evgenia Arbugaeva. I've sorted the ref ordering you noted - Dumelow (talk) 06:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update. Good to go! – Juliancolton | Talk 14:06, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review Juliancolton, I have now carried out a QPQ at: Template:Did you know nominations/Evgenia Arbugaeva. I've sorted the ref ordering you noted - Dumelow (talk) 06:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
