Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/USS Marmora (1862)

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history | Assessment

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) 17:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

USS Marmora (1862)

edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Hog Farm (talk)

USS Marmora (1862) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

I believe that this article, if promoted, will be the first American Civil War tinclad to get to A-Class. Marmora was one of the better documented tinclads, but even with that, a few stretches of her service history are more sketchily documented. The two most significant points in her service history are more lowlights than highlights: being present when the ironclad Cairo placed itself on top of two naval mines in December 1862 and torching two settlements in Arkansas in June 1863. She ended up have more log extracts published in the Official Records than any other tinclad. Hog Farm Talk 04:15, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Indy beetle

edit

I was unaware that we ever fielded "tinclads". My comments:

  • In line with this being a tinclad, perhaps mention in the lede that the ship was converted from being a typical paddle steamer into a tinclad or otherwise was armored when the US Navy acquired it.
    • I've noted this in the lead
  • Was James McDonald the original owner, or was he just the operator with some corporate owner? It's not clear who the US Navy bought her from.
    • DANFS has "Brenan, Nelson, and McDonell", ORN 1921 has "C. L. Brennan, William Nelson, and James McDonell". Neither says who these figures are. I think there was something in Smith's footnotes about this, but I'll need to get back to the library to consult Smith.
  • Along with USS Signal, Marmora was one of the first purpose-converted tinclads in the Union Navy. I think it's implied that the ship was supposed to be used for transporting troops and conducting littoral operations, but this is not made explicitly clear, so it would help to clarify what its "purpose" was.
  • The scouting upriver began at about 10:00 am, and around noon, encountered Confederate cavalry and a picket station. This seems to be missing a noun or a pronoun.
    • Corrected
  • None of the crew of Cairo were killed, and they were picked up by the other Union vessels. Is it known if that explicitly included the Marmora?

-Indy beetle (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pickersgill-Cunliffe support

edit
  • Add Latta as builder to infobox
    • Added
  • Is "ship captain" the best way to describe McDonald? It's rather vague; I would have expected "merchant" or something similar?
    • The sources consistently refer to him as "Captain James McDonald" or "Captain McDonald", so I've followed that general wording here.
  • Without a link or explanation I'm not sure if the non-technically minded reader will understand what the steam engine cylinder is
  • You use "it" as opposed to "she/her" only twice in the article, I would suggest converting those examples to the feminine as well for consistency's sake
    • Rephrased both of the instances
  • Unless I've missed it, the main text never explicitly mentions the American Civil War
    • Added a brief bit
  • "She was assigned the identification number 2" new paragraph, suggest beginning with Marmora
    • Done
  • "due to low water levels" The reason for this isn't made obvious. I assume it was for the purpose of improved vision?
  • "to Walke's main force at around 4:00 pm" ?
    • Done
  • "when Cairo sunk on December 12" sank
    • Fixed. In southwest Missouri, we say "sunk" instead of "sank" in that context
  • "arrived in early December" clarify where
    • Clarified
  • "and as a result was arrested." did they use the overseer to locate the mines or something?
    • It doesn't seem so - Tomblin doesn't elaborate much, and while Bearss provides a quote that the African-American had said the overseer was paid $ 500 for services in pulling off the torpedoes, I'm not sure what "pulling off the torpedoes" means, and Bearss's work seems to be the only place on the internet that exact quote is found. Hog Farm Talk 03:52, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The relation between Chickasaw Bluff and Marmora fighting at Drumgould's Bluff could be made clearer
    • Have clarified
  • "The morning," something is missing here
    • Added "next"
  • "began that movement that same day." what movement, where? The next sentence describes Marmora only planning to move upriver days later
    • Clarified
  • One gets the feeling that mention of the Mississippi River Squadron could come a bit earlier. Is Marmora part of it or just working alongside it?
    • I've added a gloss for the Mississippi Squadron earlier in the article, so hopefully the nature of this is clearer.
  • "left Helena that day"...to return to the expedition?
    • Reworded. The sources frankly aren't very helpful for the Yazoo Pass activities
  • The modern view image caption seems to suggest that Marmora's attack on Eunice caused the permanent destruction of the town, which could be made clearer in the main text
    • Clarified using Bragg 1977
  • What happened to the two Confederate gunboats on the Little Red?
    • Added
  • "while the Red River campaign was ongoing elsewhere" why is this useful? Wording suggests that Marmora only moved to fighting illegal trading after this other campaign finished?
    • The two don't seem to be related, so I've remove any reference to the Red River Campaign.
  • Link surplus
    • Linked

That's all I have. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Pickersgill-Cunliffe: - I think I'm going to need to take another trip to Wilson's Creek's Civil War library to get ahold of Smith's recent work that has a chapter on the Yazoo Pass Expedition. I've found Smith's multiple books on the tinclads to be about 75% redundant to each other (with some passages identical in both his main book on tinclads and his recent After Vicksburg, but Google books preview suggests that the Yazoo one does contain some different information. I'll also need to consult Smith 2010a for the low water levels thing - Tomblin doesn't mention it, and Bearss doesn't say why that was going on. It'll be next Saturday at the soonest that my schedule and the library's operating hours overlap. Hog Farm Talk 04:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image and source reviews

edit

CommentsSupport by CPA

edit
  • "present when the fort surrendered on January 11" I think this is MOS:EGG.
    • Rephrased
  • "She was also known as the Marmora No. 2" Why isn't this then included in the lead?
    • Based on my reading of MOS:ALTNAME, I don't think this is required. She's almost never referred to as "Marmora No. 2" in the sources, so I don't think it would be overly helpful to clutter the lead with that fact
  • "Marmora had a tonnage of 207 tons" Which tons?
    • Can't clearly state which measurement. Sources don't specify, and IIRC naval and merchant ships of the time had different tonnage measurements. Since Marmora was both a merchant and a military ship, it's not clear what the measurement should be
  • "at a cost of $21,000" Do you know how much this is in 2023?
    • Added a template - the most recent numbers available are for 2021
  • "to not open a court of inquiry against" MOS:EGG here.
    • I tend to disagree on this - "court of inquiry" is exactly how these proceedings are generally referred to in the relevant sources
  • "Marmora spent part of December 29, on another" --> "Marmora spent part of that day, on another"
    • Done
  • "Yazoo Pass" Link?
    • There isn't one, and I don't think there ever will be. I can gloss this in a single-sentence footnote if you think it would be helpful
  • If it doesn't then a small note won't about this won't hurt right?
  • "The morning of June 16 saw a combined" --> "The morning of June 16, saw a combined"
    • Done
  • "division of cavalry on August 9 at Clarendon, Arkansas" --> "division of cavalry on August 9, at Clarendon, Arkansas"
    • Done
  • "on an expedition beginning on August 12 to locate" Same as above.
    • Done
  • "she captured the two Confederate gunboats" Which boats?
    • I've removed "the" - I don't think it's worth getting into too much detail on these vessels, as they didn't directly affect Marmora
  • Well I assumed that most readers probably would ask the same question as I did. I don't necessarily think it is needed but I think it is handy for extra info to the reader. If they're unknown then I'm okay with how it currently is.
  • "on February 8 and occupying" --> "on February 8, and occupying"
    • Done
  • "reported as of May 17 to be patrolling" Same as above.
    • Done
  • "reported on September 13 that" Same as above.
    • Done
  • "between Napoleon and Gaines Landing" Areas? like cities and towns?
  • After double checking you're right but maybe add river port before Napoleon's first time it got mentioned?
  • "sold to D. D. Barr for $8,650" Do you know how much this is today?
    • Done, but the inflationary values are only calculated through 2021
  • "had required $15,107.40" Same as above.
    • Ditto as above
  • The "Retrieved"s in the refs have dd/mm/yyyy dates while dates are in mm/dd/yyyy?
    • Should be resolved
  • "207 tons" in the infobox maybe convert and which tons is this?
    • See reply above

That's everything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:02, 22 February 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/USS_Marmora_(1862)&oldid=1142302378"