Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yugoslav torpedo boat T2/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 5 October 2023 [1].

Yugoslav torpedo boat T2

[edit]
Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:41, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a dinky little steam torpedo boat of the Austro-Hungarian Navy that saw extensive service in World War I, including being present for the mutiny in the Bocche di Cattaro in February 1918 and as an escort when the dreadnought Szent István was sunk by Italian motor torpedo boats in June 1918. Transferred to the new Kingdom of Yugoslavia post-war, she saw limited use until she was stricken and scrapped immediately before World War II. This article is part of a Featured Topic on the Ships of the Royal Yugoslav Navy, and I am nominating it after bringing it up to a similar standard as four of its sister ships that are already FAs, with the aim of getting every article/list in the FT up to Featured status eventually. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:41, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MyCatIsAChonk
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Present in the Bocche de Cattaro during - is it typical to use the foreign name? The wiki article just uses the English name. If it should use the foreign name, would it not be "Bocche di Cattaro"?
Yes, that was its common name then. Typo fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lack of images is surprising to me- the image used in the infobox makes sense, but none under "Career", even though there's quite a bit discussed?
Sadly none that have acceptable PD licences. The 2020 Freivogel book actually has several photographs of this specific boat, but AFAIK, it was the first publication. This is a common problem with Yugoslav vessels. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It appears that this was French disinformation - "it appears that"? What purpose does this serve in the sentence? If it's unknown, I think a simple "allegedly" would work better
Sure, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the evening of 3 November, the 1st Torpedo Flotilla left Sebenico to make a night torpedo attack on the French fleet, which had begun its seventh raid on the Adriatic on 31 October, but by the time they reached the threatened areas, the French had withdrawn as they were running low on coal. - this is rather long- that's fine, but the use of only commas to divide it up is a bit confusing. Using a semicolon before the but may be helpful: "...which had begun its seventh raid on the Adriatic on 31 October; but, by the time they reached..."
Sure, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Italy declared war on Austria-Hungary on the afternoon of 23 May 1915 - "in" the afternoon?
The Cambridge Dictionary says "We use in with morning, afternoon, evening and night, but we use on when we talk about a specific morning, afternoon, etc., or when we describe the part of the day." Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • and 79 T was part of a force - might be intentional, but 79? Isn't this article about 77?
Quite right, typo fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • this force included six of the eight T-group torpedo boats. This force was tasked - "this force" is used twice, choose a different title for one of the instances
Sure, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Peacemaker67, no more from me, excellent job on the prose! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, MyCatIsAChonk, all done I think. My cat is also a chonk! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, if you get time, I'd appreciate comments at this FAC. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 17:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HF

[edit]

Will review soon. Hog Farm Talk 18:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't forgotten about this; I have been busier than expected with work but will get back to this soon. Hog Farm Talk 18:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
" and it is believed that this included the forward gun on T2" - recommend attribution for who believes this
Freivogel, added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cernuschi & O'Hara 2015 - the long citation indicates this to be a book chapter, but then p. 37 of this source is cited, which falls outside of the stated page range for the chapter. So does a long citation for another chapter need added?
A ridiculous typo, p. 75 is where the info is. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"During the French occupation of Cattaro, the original torpedo tubes were destroyed or damaged, and new ones of the same size were ordered from the Strojne Tovarne factory in Ljubljana." - this, to some degree, lack context. Maybe give a brief indication of when this was occurring (presumably a postware occupation)? Does Freivogel indicate if this was intentional, or accidental, or even known if the French did this or the Yugoslavs?
I think I've explained this better, the French occupied Cattaro in November 1918, and neglected the former A-H Navy ships and also damaged some. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's all from me. Hog Farm Talk 16:45, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done I think, Hog Farm. I appreciate you following through on this review given your RW challenges. Best of luck with everything, and hope to see you back here soon. You have been a really great contributor in an area that has been sadly neglected. Warm regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Peacemaker67: - For the p. 75 one, should it be Cernuschi & O'Hara 2016, not 2015, based on the page ranges listed in the long citations? I anticipate supporting but will hold off an a declaration until the Frievogel situation raised by Sturmvogel is resolved. Hog Farm Talk 02:14, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, 2016, not 2015. No worries, I'll ping you. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 12:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Freivogel 2022 A-H TB book has been consulted and all relevant material added, thanks to some scans from Sturm, Hog Farm. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hog Farm Talk 01:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild

[edit]

Recusing to review.

  • "could carry 10–12 naval mines". Does this mean that she could carry either 10, 11 or 12 mines, dependant on circumstances which the sources don't reveal; or that she could carry either 10 or 12 mines but there are differing opinions either within a source or between sources? Whichever is the case perhaps the phrasing could be tweaked to reflect it.
Usually it means that it depended on the types or models of mine carried. Some took up more space than others, and therefore less could be carried of those types. This is sometimes mentioned in sources for other vessels, but not (AFAIK) with respect to these boats. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "T2 and the rest of the navy were". It may just be me, but it niggles that "T2 and the rest of the navy" is seen as plaural.
I'm agnostic about it, I've reworded to make it less specific. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:11, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why is Trieste spelt "Triest"?
That was the name at the time (per WP:PLACE), as it was part of the A-H Empire and it was known by the German/Friulian name. Trieste is the Italian name, which applied after WWI. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:01, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The turbines were rated at 5,000–5,700 shaft horsepower (3,700–4,300 kW)". Each, or in aggregate?
In total, clarified. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:01, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This was allegedly French disinformation". Is it known who made the allegations?
Freivogel states this, attributed to him and reworded a little. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This force was tasked to maintain" → 'This force was tasked with maintaining'?
Sure, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On 1 February 1918 ..." Suggest a paragraph break here.
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found it confusing that the opening paragraph of Post World War I did not retail events in chronological order.
Doh. Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could the hyphenisation of the ISBN of Sokol be standardised with the other sources?
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And that is all I have. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon I've addressed your comments, Gog. See what you think? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your usual masterly job. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from JennyOz

[edit]

Hi PM, just a few small suggestions from me...

  • good article move to above use australian english
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

lede

Better, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • This specification was based an expectation - based on an
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Description and construction

  • The T-group had one funnel - no hyphen here? (not used when not adjective in lede at "the T group, ahead"
Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • with the F-group to follow. - no hyphen?
Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Career

Nice pick-up, linked. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • to keep the Austro-Hungarian fleet engaged while they conducted operations in the southern Adriatic - maybe make clearer by swapping "they" with 'the French'?
Definitely better, thanks. Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • deployed a force from its main fleet base at Pola to - move Pola link up to first mention at "left Pola soon after to deliver "
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • to Cattaro in the southern - link town? (or are all mentions of Cattaro and of "the Bocche" referring to the bay?)
All the Bay. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • one of 77 T's 66 mm guns was - use apos template
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • referred to only by the numeral - their numeral?
Yes, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • from its main fleet base at Pola to - move naval base descriptor to first linked mention of Pola?
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Allies began to evacuate by sea - move link to this first mention from "an Allied naval blockade" just below
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • the British drifter Beneficent, but once - Halpern 1987 (p151 and p620) spells it Beneficent but Halpern 2015 (p279 and p628) spells it Beneficient. Did he correct himself or make typo in latter work?
the latter I think. Easily missed by a copy editor. UK Admiralty public records from 1975 [2] use Beneficent, as does Hepper in British Warship Losses in the Ironclad Era 1860-1919 p. 63, and Colledge in Ships of the Royal Navy: Navy-built trawlers, drifters, tugs and requisitioned ships p. 44. Compton-Hall likewise in his books on WWI submarine warfare. The clinchers for me are the Admiralty records. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • to get through the strait and - at "to the Strait during the night" it has a cap
decapped. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Horthy left the naval base of Pola in the upper Adriatic - move location upper Adriatic to first mention of Pola?
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • At about 23:00 on 9 June 1918, after - move year back to last sentence at 8/9 June?
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It varies across articles, but not as much in the main sources such as Freivogel and Warship. Sometimes sources use MAS. 15 and sometimes MAS15 and even MAS-15, but mainly it has the space. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Waiting with their engines off, the two Italian boats waited - 2x wait, may be "Waiting" can go?
Yep, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Szent István were abreast her boiler rooms - abreast of?
Yes, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This disaster practically ended - practically has two meanings, can mean nearly/almost or, in fact/actually/essentially. Which are they meaning?
The latter, I changed to "essentially". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interwar period

  • Section name intentional? She didn't make it to WWII so should it be Post World War I?
Sure, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • sued for peace - maybe link?
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's my lot. JennyOz (talk) 10:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your review, Jenny! I think I've addressed them all? Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Jenny, just checking you've seen this? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:50, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi PM, yep, have been watching changes, but have new questions. Can you pls check eg

Will do final run through tomorrow. Thanks, JennyOz (talk) 14:12, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, have checked all (and made two minor tweaks). I am very happy to s'port but pls confirm the Pola question just above, it reads strangely to me:) JennyOz (talk) 02:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Jenny, it was the Bocche, not Pola (which wouldn't have made sense, as you pointed out). Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]
  • Notes and references formatted consistently.
  • References are known to me as highly reliable.
  • Freivogel published a book dedicated to the A-H torpedo boats last year. It covers their more minor activities in some detail that is needed for this to be a comprehensive treatment of the boat's history. Email me and I'll send you photos of the relevant pages. This book is needed for any future FACs on these boats and the relevant details should be added to those articles all ready FAs.
  • Oppose as incomplete.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Sent you an email. I have ordered the book. Just received the post-WWII JRM book of his, which is good as usual (although he still needs a better copy editor, "commando bridge" etc). Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:32, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to ping you, Sturm. Between them, Freivogel's The Great War in the Adriatic 1914–1918 and Cernuschi & O'Hara's tables in Warship 2015/2016 do cover a lot of minor operations involving A-H 250t TBs. Everything that is in them regarding 77T/77/T2 is already included in this article, AFAIK. But I would appreciate a scan of the relevant pages so I can check that the article covers everything. I have also added everything that is in Freivogel's 2021 JRM book. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:49, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that I agree with you. Surely Armin Pavić, who took command in 1918, is worth a redlink since he became a rear-admiral in the RYN? Or the occasional defensive minelaying mission? I think that the "76" at the bottom of page 78 and top of 79 is a typo since Joris, commander of 77F in 1914, is mentioned as commander of the division during the mutiny and 76 wasn't even present. It's also in the middle of the section devoted to 77. His actions then and the number of her convoy escort missions in 1917 and 1918 would be useful.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sturm, I'm not saying there isn't material in it that would be useful for this article, the class article and the other 250t boat articles. I'd appreciate a scan of the relevant pages (I've sent you an email), as it will take a while for the book to get to me from Croatia. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot you have my old WP email. Got them, thanks! Will ping when I've added the additional material. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All done I think, Sturm. See what you think? And thanks again for the scans, I'm looking forward to getting my copy. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Support--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:26, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
Added. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:50, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It dates from 1786. Added PD-AustriaGov and PD-US-expired. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:50, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias (he/him) • talk 19:59, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I may have addressed your comments, Harrias? Thanks for taking a look! Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:50, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pass Looks good to me now. Harrias (he/him) • talk 11:18, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

[edit]

PM, are you deliberately placing citations out of numeric order (e.g. after the clause "when French forces withdrew," and "scrapped soon after."? No prob if you do it so the citation order reflects the supported portions of a statement but just in case... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 20:39, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you been hacked by CPA-5?! He always used to get very worked up over the numeric order of citations!! (Unlike the MOS, which doesn't care at all..) Harrias (he/him) • talk 21:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wasn’t deliberate, I usually keep them in order as a matter of preference. Have fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Yugoslav_torpedo_boat_T2/archive1&oldid=1178801515"