Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Maurice Suckling
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article promoted by Gog the Mild (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 14:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
- Nominator(s): Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk)
Maurice Suckling (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Maurice Suckling/archive1
I'm renominating this article now that I'm back editing and won't suddenly abandon work and disappear. The man who (maybe?) made Nelson the man he was, but apart from that had quite an uneventful naval career. Has received a slight update with a new source since my last nom. Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Support - I supported at the prior ACR, and a skim through the changes since then reveals nothing that concerns me. Hog Farm Talk 21:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Support Comments from Hawkeye7
Looks good to me, but some comments to prove that I read it:
- "Suckling did however have the support of considerable patronage from the powerful Walpoles" Who were they? You mentioned his great-uncle but not the other members of the family (although some appear in the final section)
- I've adjusted to focus more on Walpole himself rather than the wider family
- "he found it long and arduous work" I'm not sure what "long work" is.
- Replaced with time-consuming
- The final sentence had me wondering about the sword. Apparently it was sold in 2021 [1].
- It would be a fun subject to have a look into and possibly write an article about, but the main source Swords for Sea Service is rather expensive!
- A lot cheaper than the sword I'll bet. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- It would be a fun subject to have a look into and possibly write an article about, but the main source Swords for Sea Service is rather expensive!
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Hawkeye7: Hi, thanks for taking a look! Responses above. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- Moved to Support. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Image review - Pass - It is good to see this renominated. Welcome back. An image review was completed at 12:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC) for the previous submission and there seem to be no material changes. There is a nice selection of images and all seem appropriate to the text. All state that they are in the public domain and have relevant PD tags. Pass. simongraham (talk) 11:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Comments Support by Pendright
edit
Back soon! Pendright (talk) 04:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC) Lead:
- Suckling was employed in the aftermath of the Capture of Belle Île in 1761 destroying French fortifications on the Île-d'Aix, and went on half pay at the end of the war in 1763.
- Replace the first in with "during"
- Done
- Drop the comma after Île-d'Aix, or add [he] went on half pay
- Done former
Early life:
- Nothing is recorded of Suckling's childhood past this point apart from that he continued to live in Beccles.[2]
- Do you mean Nothing is "known to have been" recorded?
- Changed to "known", which is the wording the source uses
- Do you mean Nothing is "known to have been" recorded?
Early career:
- In Newcastle Suckling saw service in the Western Approaches, the English Channel, and off Gibraltar and Lisbon, advancing to able seaman on 7 April 1741 before being promoted to midshipman on 7 September.
- Second clause -> "who" is advnacing and being promoted?
- Reworded
- Second clause -> "who" is advnacing and being promoted?
- While sailing off Villefranche on 7 February 1746 he was transferred to the 80-gun ship of the line HMS Russell also as fourth lieutenant.[3][6]
- Add a comma after 1746
- Done
- Add a comma after 1746
- He was then on 1 November translated from Boyne into the 50-gun fourth-rate HMS Gloucester as that ship's first lieutenant, which naval historian David Syrett suggests was another appointment brought about by Suckling's patrons.[3]
- Change that to "this" or "the"
- Done latter
- Change that to "this" or "the"
- Suckling's position in Gloucester meant that he avoided the unemployment that came to many naval officers when the Royal Navy began to decommission warships in response to the end of the war.[6]
- end of "a" war
- Source is specifically referring to this war
- <> Which war is the source referring to? Pendright (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- end of "a" war
First commands:
- The ship was at the time serving on the North America Station, and Suckling took passage out in a merchant ship to join his new command.
- to "assume" or "take up" his mew command
- Done latter
- to "assume" or "take up" his mew command
Seven Years' War:
- Ordered to Jamaica, Dreadnought formed part of an eleven-warship escort [for]
toa convoy that [had] left Spithead on 31 January 1756.[10]
- Suggest the above changes
- Done former but not latter; imo the addition of "had" suggests that this is just the convoy leaving Spithead and not the whole group of ships
- Suggest the above changes
- The ship spent most of her service in harbour at Port Royal as the area was a backwater in the Seven Years' War.
- Suggest:
- in "the" harbour at
- I think "in harbour" is itself a well-used term
- <>It may be, but gramatically it is not correct Pendright (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- Link backwater
- Done
- in "the" harbour at
- Suggest:
- On 21 October 1757 Dreadnought was undertaking such an operation alongside two other 60-gun ships of the line, expecting to intercept a French convoy leaving Cape Français.
- Suggest this or something like it -> On 21 October 1757, Dreadnought and two other 60-gun ships of the line had undertaken an operaton to intercept a French convoy leaving or which had left Cape Français?
- Reworded along these lines
- Suggest this or something like it -> On 21 October 1757, Dreadnought and two other 60-gun ships of the line had undertaken an operaton to intercept a French convoy leaving or which had left Cape Français?
- The three ships formed [a] line of battle with Dreadnought taking the vanguard.[1][10][13]
- Add the indefinite artice "a" as indicated
- Done
- Add the indefinite artice "a" as indicated
- The French squadron, having received heavy casualties, retreated back into Cape Français.
- Drop the common after squardron
- Done
- Drop the common after squardron
- Suckling subsequently sailed his ship to Chatham, where she was paid off on 19 November.[10][3]
- where she paid off the officers and crew?
- A ship is "paid off", not the crew
- <>The link says -> The term "paid off" is alternatively used in British and Commonwealth contexts, originating in the age-of-sail practice of ending an officer's commission and paying crew wages once the ship completed its voyage. Pendright (talk) 19:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- The source used for that sentence says "When a ship reaches the end of her commission, she is paid off". I believe my wording to be correct. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- where she paid off the officers and crew?
- In June Suckling's ship reinforced the British squadron that had recently captured Belle Île, and [she] was then detached in a squadron under Captain Sir Thomas Stanhope.
- Suggest the above change
- Done
- Suggest the above change
- As the Royal Navy began mobilising in the expectation of war he was given command of the 64-gun ship of the line HMS Raisonnable, which was fitting out at Chatham, on 17 November.[1][3][19]
- Add a comma after war
- Done
- War with whom?
- Added
Pausing at the end of the Career section - Pendright (talk) 01:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Pendright: Hi, not sure if you've got any more comments to add here, but I've responded to all those above. Thanks for taking a look! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: <>I have left you one response. I'll finish the review in the next day or two. Thank you for your prompt responses. Pendright (talk) 19:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Resuming - Pendright (talk) 22:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Patron of Nelson:
- On 26 June Suckling was also appointed senior officer for his part of the Thames Estuary, and filled most of his time with paperwork regarding topics including naval discipline and the deployment of marine detachments.[19][26]
- and "he" filled most of
- Changed
- and "he" filled most of
Comptroller of the Navy:
- The Comptroller of the Navy was the head of the Navy Board, responsible for all Royal Navy warship construction and upkeep as well as troop transports and dockyards.
- "he" was resoinsible for...
- I believe the current wording is acceptable, I won't fight it if you demand it though!
- <> For the sake of discussion, let's kick this around a bit: It appears (from the previous sentence) that "The comptroller" is referring to Suckking in which case he was would be correct. If the sentence is referring to just "A" Comptroller, then it woudl be who was. I would be iterested in your thoghts.
- By the way, the word demand is a harsh word and I'm without the right to demand anything from you or anyone else on Wikipedia. As it should be! My role as a reviewer, as I see it, is to help make a good article better by suggestions, questons, and discussions that are all made in good fath. Pendright (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- "he" was resoinsible for...
- The position was highly prestigious as well as important and why Suckling, a relatively unknown candidate, was chosen by Sandwich, is not known.[36][37]
- Drop the comma afteer Sandwich
- Done
- Drop the comma afteer Sandwich
- The naval experience that Suckling brought [to the position[ was
, however,of great value to Sandwich[,]as he[who] went about reforming naval administration,with particular emphasis put on attempts to make Royal Navy shipyards more productive.
- Cosider the above or somethong similar
- Done
- Cosider the above or somethong similar
Done - @Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Pendright (talk) 22:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Pendright: Thanks, I've replied above. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: I support this nomination whether or not the comments left receive a response. Pendright (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Comments Support by Zawed
edit
- ...by Captain George Townshend, another maternal relative, historian John Sugden says...: Suggest moving "another maternal relative" to precede Townshend. I initially parsed this sentence as referring to Sugden
- Done
- He was then on 1 November translated from Boyne...: "translated" seems an unusual term to a layman, does it mean transferred or another meaning?
- Changed to "translate"
- link post captain
- Done
- ...combined with his patronage and the beginning of the Seven Years' War to almost guarantee his promotion to that rank.: This didn't quite read right, perhaps the last part should be "...Seven Years' War
toalmost guaranteed his promotion to that rank."?
- Done
- Having returned from this, Suckling then had Nelson join the 24-gun...: this could be read as referring to Suckling having returned, rather than Nelson
- Reworded
- appointing Maurice a clerk in the Naval Office: what's the Naval Office? I see later in the Death section mention of a Navy Office, is this what was meant? (if so, the link will need to be moved).
- Linked moved
Some comments above for your consideration, looks in pretty good shape. Zawed (talk) 05:29, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Zawed: Hi, thanks for taking a look! Responses above. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- All good, happy to add my support. Zawed (talk) 02:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Source review by Ykraps
"In 1775 he unsuccessfully applied to the Admiralty for shore-based appointments in Newfoundland and Jamaica". - Unless I'm missing something, the source doesn't specifically state he was unsuccessful. Are we basing his lack of success on the fact that he wasn't appointed to either position?--Ykraps (talk) 23:17, 10 June 2023 (UTC)- The sentence also contained some close paraphrasing which I attempted to remove with this edit [[2]]. Feel free to rewrite if you wish. --Ykraps (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Ykraps: Agree with your changes, thank you. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:42, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- The sentence also contained some close paraphrasing which I attempted to remove with this edit [[2]]. Feel free to rewrite if you wish. --Ykraps (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
The Mariner's Mirror article isn't freely available to all. Should it be marked as such?--Ykraps (talk) 08:08, 11 June 2023 (UTC)- Where there is a doi, it is assumed that a journal subscription is required. It can only be marked as doi-access=free. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:50, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, okay, thanks. --Ykraps (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- Where there is a doi, it is assumed that a journal subscription is required. It can only be marked as doi-access=free. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:50, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
"Suckling's sister Catherine had died on 26 December 1767" - You've used Sugden, who does indeed say December, to reference this but did you notice the next used reference, Syrett p. 37, says June? Can we have a quick look to see what the majority view is, use that date, double up on the refs, and add fn for other date/s?--Ykraps (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2023 (UTC)- @Ykraps: Hi, thanks for looking through this. Agree that I've gone a little far with the Admiralty applications and have removed "unsuccessfully" (although I expect this was the case!). Catherine's date of death is an interesting puzzle. I struggled to find any other truly RS sources that mention her full date of death; her Wikipedia article only cites Sugden! I think it is likely that Sugden is correct and Syrett has made an error because Catherine's gravestone [3] says 26 December. That said, I've added Syrett's separate date as a note. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- The gravestone is fairly conclusive so I think it's right to relegate Syrett to a footnote. --Ykraps (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Ykraps: Hi, thanks for looking through this. Agree that I've gone a little far with the Admiralty applications and have removed "unsuccessfully" (although I expect this was the case!). Catherine's date of death is an interesting puzzle. I struggled to find any other truly RS sources that mention her full date of death; her Wikipedia article only cites Sugden! I think it is likely that Sugden is correct and Syrett has made an error because Catherine's gravestone [3] says 26 December. That said, I've added Syrett's separate date as a note. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Support - I am happy that the sourcing meets A-class standards. They are reliable and of good quality, consistently formatted, and I have checked most for accuracy and close paraphrasing and some of those, I have listed below. Older sources are standard reference for articles on this subject and are routinely commented on by more modern historians such as Lambert, Hore and Gardiner so I see no problem using them either here or at FAC, if that's where you intend to go next. --Ykraps (talk) 06:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
Spotchecks for accuracy and close paraphrasing
|
---|
|