Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SMS Schwaben/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2017 [1].

SMS Schwaben

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 13:24, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another German battleship, this one spent much of its career in a training role. She was also one of a handful of old battleships retained by Germany after war, though only after having been converted into a depot ship for minesweepers. Thanks to all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 13:24, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 00:11, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestions would be the linking of launching, commissioning, mines and ship breaking. Armored cruiser should be linked at the first instance in the third paragraph in service history instead of by Blucher. Also would link tender next to Ulan. Llammakey (talk) 02:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Good ideas, all. Thanks! Parsecboy (talk) 13:25, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Suggest scaling up the map
- Done
File:Wittelsbach_class_linedrawing.png: do we know the status of this image in its source country?
- No, so that's why it's here on en.wiki instead of Commons.
File:North_and_Baltic_Seas,_1911.png: where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Added the original source. Thanks Nikki. Parsecboy (talk) 11:47, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:45, 27 November 2016 (UTC) This article is in great shape. I have only one point:[reply]

The low range of the belt in the infobox isn't reflected in the body
- Fixed - thanks Peacemaker. Parsecboy (talk) 12:49, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Query Why not use File:SMS Schwaben.jpg? Ϣere SpielChequers 20:40, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's no source for a pre-1923 publication, so we can't prove it's PD in the US. Parsecboy (talk) 11:47, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments taking a look now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Schwaben spent the majority of her career..~~ ~~- why not just, "Schwaben spent most of her career"?~~

That sounds good to me. Parsecboy (talk) 13:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Should the conversions be rounded - eg 250 mm to 10 in rather than 9.8 in?~~

As a general rule, I don't like to do too much rounding with these figures - there have been times where slightly different figures round to the same conversion, and that can cause confusion. Parsecboy (talk) 13:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Otherwise~~ looks in order...but I am no expert in the area. I can say that it is accessible to a neophyte...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:56, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Casliber! Parsecboy (talk) 13:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note: Have I missed a source review on this? If we don't have one yet, it can be requested at the top of WT:FAC. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No concerns re. source reliability, I just tweaked formatting a bit. Given the depth of MilHist review prior to FAC, and Cas' (by his own admission!) neophyte check for accessibility, I think we can safely close this long-running review now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:15, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.