Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/South African Navy

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.

No consensus to promote at this time - Anotherclown (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 01:07, 28 January 2017 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

South African Navy

Nominator(s): Gbawden (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because I believe it merits it and if not the review will give me guidance on what needs to be done to get there Gbawden (talk) 07:46, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: G'day, thanks for your work on this article. I have the following suggestions/observations: AustralianRupert (talk) 14:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

for A-class, all paragraphs should be completely cited with inline citations at the end of each one
for such a broad topic, the lead probably should be expanded
the World War II section seems to stop at 1942, what happened between then and the end of the war?
suggest moving the "Decommissioned ships" sub-section to the Ships and weapons section. Additionally, for A-class some prose should be added to this section
for A-class, I think some more prose/commentary should be added to the Ensign and Ranks sections
in the References, "South Africa's fighting ships past and present" should use title case capitalization, e.g. "South Africa's Fighting Ships Past and Present"
in the References, there is a mixture of date formats, for instance compare: "30 June 2011" v. " 2010-12-15". For A-class, these should be consistent
in the References, "Pitta, Robert (1993). South African Special Forces. Osprey": is there a page number that could be added to this work?
"Command, control & organisation" --> "Command, control and organisation"?
link "Jan van Riebeeck"
"File:SAS Drakensberg (A301).jpg": as a non-free image, this needs a rationale on the image description page for its use specifically in this article
"File:HMSAS Immortelle.jpg": also needs a US licence
"File:Naval Ensign of South Africa.svg": is lacking author and date information on the image description page
inconsistent: "7,702 (Active) [and] 1,000 (Reserve)" (in the infoxbox) v. "6,104 active uniformed members augmented by 1,313 civilians and 1,000 reserve members" (body of the article)

Thanks for your suggestions. I will work through them Gbawden (talk) 13:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gbawden: G'day, as it has been nearly a month since your comment, I thought I'd check back in. How are you going with responding to these comments? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no substantive edits of the article since 13 December 2016 and no response to my query above, so I'm going to suggest that this review be closed. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:51, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Sort of a drive-by comment, but I'd expect all sections to have at least some prose in them. The empty decommissioned ships section with a link to the separate list is not sufficient, in my opinion. I'd to see at least a paragraph that provides a short run-down of the numbers and types of vessels previously used by the South African Navy (something to the effect of "In the course of its existence, the SAN operated X number of frigates, Y number of corvettes...").
If you have time to work on this and AR's comments above, I'll have a more thorough read - feel free to ping me if you do. Parsecboy (talk) 18:56, 17 January 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.