Talk:Royal Sardinian Navy

Royal Sardinian Navy has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 8, 2019. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Royal Sardinian Navy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Maritime / European / Italian / Early Modern

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cheeky little ce

Rv a few mad commas and added pub year to cites. Rv as desired (why SfnRef?). Keith-264 (talk) 12:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cause I don't like harvard refs? :P Parsecboy (talk) 13:05, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, didn't know that they were different. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't generally include the year unless I need to differentiate between a pair of works by the same author. And I use the sfnref style because that's what I was introduced to several years ago, and that's what my muscle memory.

As for mad commas, you're not a fan of the serial comma, I take it? Parsecboy (talk) 17:25, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Missing ship

The RSN lost a steamship named Sardinia in November 1855 with great loss of life. Anyone have any further info? Mjroots (talk) 16:04, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I've seen so far, but I'd assume it was one of the seven paddle steamers sent to the Black Sea. Will have to see what I can dig up. Parsecboy (talk) 16:16, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interwikis

Can someone sort out the interwikis? I tried but got an error message. Mjroots (talk) 20:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Royal Sardinian Navy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 04:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

This is a topic I know virtually noting about, so I found this article an interesting read. I have the following comments:

"The fleet was created in 1720 when the Duke of Savoy, Victor Amadeus II, became the King of Sardinia, though Victor Amadeus acquired the vessels be used to establish the fleet while he was still the King of Sicily in 1713" - this seems to be trying to squish two different topics in one sentence. Splitting it into two sentences should help a lot.
- Good idea
"resulting in the creation of the Regia Marina (Royal Navy)" - perhaps note that this makes the RSN the direct descendant of the modern Italian Navy?
- Good idea
"He created a marine corps" - I'd suggest linking this to Marines
- Done
"the small Sardinian fleet of galleys was placed under the command of the British Mediterranean Fleet. The small vessels" - using "small" in different ways here is a little bit confusing. I'd suggest tweaking to diversify the wording.
- Changed the second one to "shallow-draft", which is more specific anyway
It might be worth noting why this fleet was always small: it was the fleet of a small and not particularly rich country.
- Have added a bit on this. Thanks for reviewing the article, Nick. Parsecboy (talk) 12:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Parsecboy: Sorry, I thought that I'd passed this nomination, but I'd forgotten to do so... My comments are now addressed - great work Nick-D (talk) 08:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - No problem, thanks again Nick. Parsecboy (talk) 10:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: