Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/SMS Wittelsbach

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 Anotherclown (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 10:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

SMS Wittelsbach

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk)

Featured article candidates/SMS Wittelsbach/archive1

Another one of my revamped articles - this passed GA way back in 2011 and has since been overhauled with the usual Hildebrand et. al. treatment. Thanks to all who take the time to read the article. Parsecboy (talk) 23:32, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support after a few copyedits. I have to wonder if the 1903 peacetime exercises would be easier to read as bullet points. (I know that hasn't really been done before with battleship articles, and you may choose to disregard this.) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:42, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, your edits look good to me. I don't know how much I like bullet points inserted into prose, though. Parsecboy (talk) 12:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support with one image concern:

File:SMS Wittelsbach Bain picture.jpg. The copyright tag claims it was a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties; that doesn't seem to be backed up by the Library of Congress entry it comes from. Hchc2009 (talk) 21:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Good catch, I didn't look all that closely at it since it's a Bain photo - updated with the proper tags. Parsecboy (talk) 23:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

support

minor caveat: "the VIII Torpedo-boat Flotilla" Is Flotilla the name of the ship, of a flotilla? auntieruth (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The latter - does adding "the vessels of the VIII Torpedo-boat Flotilla..." make that clearer without being too verbose? Parsecboy (talk) 11:53, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - yes, much better. auntieruth (talk) 14:17, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.