Talk:USS Colhoun (DD-85)

USS Colhoun (DD-85) 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: May 24, 2013. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the USS Colhoun (DD-85) 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

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States / World War II

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Shipwrecks

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles 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.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Colhoun (DD-85)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 19:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

.... and I might as well review this one as as well, seeing as its the same class of vessel with the same editor. :) Miyagawa (talk) 19:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the wording in the lead for USS Breese (DD-122), I think specifying that the ship was later redesignated is better than what is currently at the top of this article.

Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Query: Being that this is a United States vessel, would it not be better to use the US format for dates? i.e. February 4, 1980 rather than 4 February 1980? I only mention it because this sort of thing is covered in WP:STRONGNAT, but it says "should generally" rather than must, so I'll leave it up to you.

Service history: Any specifics on what sound equipment they were?

Probably something related to sonar. No source specifically says this though. —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any ties date-wise between her recommissioning as APD-2 and the naming of the new USS Colhoun? I know the new one wasn't laid down till three years later, but I'm just wondering about the ordering date.

It's possible but not likely, the sources don't make a point of it on the next ship so it might have been convenient, but I doubt it was something that was explicitly planned. —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

World War II: Might be worth while merging that final line into the bottom of the previous paragraph as it looks unfinished there on its own.

Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links: Could the photos link be expanded to say what website it is linking through to? Just a bit of fancy piping will be fine.

Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just one duplicate link, references all look good. Images are all suitably licenced.

Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, not a great deal of changes needed to make this one a GA. Miyagawa (talk) 19:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your review! —Ed!^(talk) 21:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:STRONGNAT articles on the modern US military use day before month, in accordance with military usage Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying - I've struck the comment above. Serves me right as the only military articles I've ever improved have been Royal Navy ones. :) I'll keep that in mind for myself for future use. Miyagawa (talk) 09:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I think this one is all done now too. Miyagawa (talk) 22:15, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]