Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/USS Kearsarge (BB-5)/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 10:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

USS Kearsarge (BB-5)

Featured article candidates/USS Kearsarge (BB-5)/archive1

Nominator(s): Inkbug (talk) 09:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it recently successfully completed a MILHIST A-Class review, and I believe it meets the guidelines. Inkbug (talk) 09:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and images - spotchecks not done

Retrieval dates aren't needed for GBooks
- Removed Inkbug (talk) 05:33, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Try to avoid sandwiching text between images, or stacking images
- I removed two images that were not contributing to the article – I hope it is better now. Inkbug (talk) 10:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods
- Removed. Inkbug (talk) 10:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Kearsarge_double_turret.jpg: is Revista Kosmos an author or a publication? Page number? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:34, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I cropped it from File:Kosmos esquadra americana 4.jpg, which seems to be a scan from the 12 January 1908 issue of Revista Kosmos. I hope the description page is clearer now, but I don't have a page number or any other data. Inkbug (talk) 07:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: My concerns were addressed, so I'm lending my support. Good work. Praemonitus (talk) 23:46, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: it's a good article and I only found a few points of concern:

~~If this article is about a U.S. military vessel should, shouldn't it use U.S. date format per WP:STRONGNAT?~~
- A number of other US battleship articles also use this format (USS Indiana (BB-1), USS Massachusetts (BB-2), USS Nevada (BB-36)). Inkbug (talk) 05:33, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - That seems wrong, but I won't make any further issue of the point. Thanks. Praemonitus (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - WP:STRONGNAT says "articles on the modern US military use day before month, in accordance with military usage.", but WP:Milhist tends to be more flexible than that. - Dank (push to talk) 19:27, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Good enough. Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 23:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~"...until being relieved by Maine on 31 March..." of 1905 or 1906?~~
- Clarified. Inkbug (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~"She [was] recommissioned on 23 June 1915...": missing a 'was'?~~
- Added Inkbug (talk) 05:33, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~It would be more complete to show information about the various other Captains (such as Commander Joseph Newton Hemphill, who apparently took over the Captaincy in 1902).~~
- I found four of the commanders, but couldn't find sources for the remainder. (William M. Folger, 1900–; Joseph Newton Hemphill, 1902–1904; Herbert Winslow, 1907–1909; Louis Rudolph De Steiguer, 1916–1917.) I'll mark this one off as not being addressable at the present. Praemonitus (talk) 23:46, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've added in the commanders until (and including) the Great White Fleet. Do you have a source for de Steiguer? Inkbug (talk) 06:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 00:45, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So far so good on prose per standard disclaimer, down to where I stopped, at USS Kearsarge (BB-5)#Service history. - Dank (push to talk) 03:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The Kearsarge-class battleships were built as coast defense ships. vs. the source The earlier classes (Kearsarge, Illinois and Maine) had been designed principally for coastal defense. The US had a strategic mission since 1890 for larger ocean-going battleships and Kearsarge woudn't be confused with smaller Coastal defence ships built by other nations. I think paraphrasing 'designed principally for coastal defense' is one option; Congress called the Illinois class 'seagoing coastline battle ships' which reflected the pre-dreadnaughts mission and design compromises (big guns & armor vs short range & low freeboard).
- Changed. Inkbug (talk) 10:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The important bits of the first sentence of the lead should be in the prose. Clarify that the ship was named shortly after the sloop foundered and was lost.
- Done. Inkbug (talk) 10:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Mention the low freeboard/poor seagoing characteristic issues somewhere - most of the guns were unusable in heavy seas.
- Done. Inkbug (talk) 10:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox
- Propulsion: add the number of boilers; Installed Power: delete boilers and use shaft instead of propeller as well as in the prose (or 'propeller shaft' which is what I think Scheina used)
  - I don't understand. In the infobox the engines, boilers, and propellers are mentioned in the Propulsion field, not the power field. In addition, Reilly & Scheina used propellers, not propeller shafts. Inkbug (talk) 06:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - See Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide — boilers belongs in power, along with horsepower. Shafts or propeller shafts is preferred to propellers because some ships, early destroyers in particular, had more than one propeller per shaft.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:54, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Done – thanks for the clarification. Inkbug (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Armament - I would use 'primary' instead of 'Mains' if you are going to use 'Secondary'. Kirk (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done. Inkbug (talk) 06:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - good work! Kirk (talk) 21:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: very well-researched. While it's short, given the topic (a battleship that didn't serve much in the one war it was commissioned for), I don't see a problem with it. Images: there are probably too many images for this article. Do we need a low-quality file like File:Kearsarge double turret.jpg, or an indistinct thumbnail like File:SMY Hohenzollern-II.jpg? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I removed File:SMY Hohenzollern-II.jpg. File:Kearsarge double turret.jpg was requested in the GA review. If any one has a better quality image for the double turret, I'll be happy to replace it. Inkbug (talk) 05:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is no free line drawing that can be substituted? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - What about [2] or [3]? Inkbug (talk) 07:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - The first is copyrighted (it's from Friedman's US Battleships), but the second would be good, even more so if you cropped and used the high-quality image on the LOC site. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 12:12, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Replaced. I hope I got the licensing correct. Thanks for all the help! Inkbug (talk) 14:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I tweaked the licensing, but it looks good now! Nice work. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:24, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~

What's the armed guard?
- That is the term used by the DANFS. It could be a mistake (a confusion with the WWII Armed Guard?), as I didn't see anything in a Google search. Inkbug (talk) 05:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm fairly certain that there was a WWI equivalent, but I'm not certain about the exact name. Capitalize the name and we'll call it even.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. Inkbug (talk) 09:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the "an" in Cape Cruz, Cuba, an accidental ignition
- Done. Inkbug (talk) 05:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Only provide a conversion on first use in the main body. You've got two conversions for 5 inch, although I haven't checked for others.
- Removed. Inkbug (talk) 05:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how Albertson phrased his claim about Kearsarge being the longest-serving battleship, but the Iowa-class ships each broke that number, AFAIK. Anybody else know more details?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I assume that it's on active service? The Iowas were around longer, but much of that time was spent in the reserves. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - True, but Kearsarge wasn't a battleship for that entire time. That's why I think that we need the exact text of the quote to see if it's been surpassed by the Iowas.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:26, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Albertson writes ... longest term of uninterrupted service of any American battleship. However, I agree that the Iowa-class ships served longer, so I removed the line. Inkbug (talk) 05:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Probably the best thing to do in this case.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate comments -- Inkbug, is this your first FAC? If so, welcome! As is usual for new nominaees, I'd like to see a reviewer perform a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing. Also can someone let me know that they've stepped through the infobox and that all the data not cited there is cited somewhere in the main body? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is my first FAC, and I'm happy that people like it. Thanks everyone for the reviews! Inkbug (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Ian, I checked the infobox facts were cited. Kirk (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Tks Kirk. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks and niggles

If not converting a number between zero and nine, spell them out unless you have two numbers adjacent that will likely confuse the reader. 12 16-inch guns is bad and should be rendered as twelve 16-inch guns or vice versa.
- Done. Inkbug (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No issues with Reilly & Scheina and Friedman.
Unfortunately, there's a fair amount of close paraphrasing from DANFS although some of that's sourced to other publications.
- ~~Kearsarge became flagship of the North Atlantic Squadron,[15] sailing down the Atlantic seaboard and in the Caribbean Sea~~
- ~~On 26 July she returned to Bar Harbor, Maine,[22] and resumed duties as flagship of the North Atlantic Squadron~~
- ~~She next sailed to Phaleron Bay, Greece, where she celebrated the Fourth of July with King~~
- ~~Kearsarge remained flagship of the North Atlantic Fleet until being relieved by Maine on 31 March 1905,[30] but continued operations with the fleet~~
- ~~On 13 April 1906, during target practice off Cape Cruz, Cuba, an accidental ignition of the gunpowder in a 13-inch gun killed two officers and eight men.~~
- She trained Massachusetts and Maine state naval militia until the United States entered World War I, and then trained thousands of armed guard crews as well as naval engineers along the East Coast from Boston, Massachusetts, to Pensacola, Florida.
- embarked United States Naval Academy midshipmen for training in the West Indies.[16] The midshipmen were disembarked at Annapolis, Maryland, on 29 August,[16] and Kearsarge proceeded to the Philadelphia Navy Yard, where she decommissioned on either 10 May[16][53][54] or 18 May 1920[10][9] for conversion to a crane ship.
- ~~In 1945, the crane ship was towed to the San Francisco Naval Shipyard where she assisted in the construction of Hornet, Boxer, and re-construction of Saratoga.~~
  - Fixed (I hope). Sorry for the delay, Inkbug (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - All of these have been reworded. I've tightened and tweaked your wording; feel free to revert anything you don't agree with. One of the best ways to deal with DANFS is to throw out a lot of the extraneous details as they're often not really essential.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:18, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks! Inkbug (talk) 04:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll further note that several of the changes I asked for have not been yet been made. Shame on me for not confirming that they'd been made before switching to support.
- Can you please give examples? I went through all of the above comments and I didn't see any I didn't address. Inkbug (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Cuba, an accidental
  - Armed guard is not capitalized--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I fixed those a few days ago. Are you looking at an old revision? Inkbug (talk) 06:45, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK, that's just bizarre because I saw that you'd deleted the redundant conversions and removed the bit about the longest-serving battleship and you did them all at once. My apologies.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:PARAPHRASE for guidance on how to avoid close paraphrasing. Eliminating or moving a single clause or word is generally not enough.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Tks for that spotcheck, Storm. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Having a hard time spotting any problems with the article at this point. Looks good to go. —Ed!^(talk) 01:01, 30 April 2013 (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) 06:54, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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