Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Maurice Suckling/archive1

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 - Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 23:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Maurice Suckling

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk)

Featured article candidates/Maurice Suckling/archive1

Maurice Suckling, a naval officer with a rather uneventful 40-year career, was appointed Comptroller of the Navy in 1775, and might have written himself into the history books for his good work there during the American Revolution if his career had not been cut short by his death in 1778. Suckling's nephew, Horatio Nelson, was however far more interesting. As the man who brought Nelson into the Royal Navy and who orchestrated the beginnings of his naval education and career, Suckling gets a mention in every Nelson biography and in more recent years has had a study or two on himself written. I have expanded this article from a desultory 500-word skeleton to the current GA, and hope it can go a step or two further. Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HF - support

I will review this soon. Hog Farm _Talk 16:03, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"which had only recently been captured from the French as a precursor to the beginning of the Seven Years' War" - I'm having a bit of trouble understanding this phrasing, which currently implies that Lys was captured specifically as a precursor to this war

I've reworded it, see if that works better.

Yes, that resolves it. Hog Farm _Talk 00:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look okay

Supporting, good work here. Hog Farm _Talk 14:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

There is a nice selection of images and all seem appropriate to the text. All state that they are in the public domain.

Maurice Suckling by Thomas Bardwell.jpg lacks a US PD tag.

Added.

HMS Russell - The Capture of the 'Glorioso', 8 October 1747 (detail) BHC0371.jpg has relevant US PD tags. It seems to be sourced from Greenwich, which I believe means it needs a UK tag.

Not sure what UK tag would be appropriate for this. The page also has an RMG template under the license.

Action off Cape Francois.jpg has appropriate PD tags.
HMS Triumph 1764.jpg has an appropriate US PD tag. I see no evidence that it is sourced from inside the US so it may require additional tags.

See previous comment on UK tags.

Young Nelson.jpg has appropriate PD tags.
All the images lack ALT attributes per MOS:ACCIM and MOS:ALT.

Added to all.

I believe that is everything. Please drop me a note if you would like me to look again. simongraham (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Simongraham: Hi, thanks for taking a look at these. Would appreciate some input on what I should do with the images requiring non-US licenses. Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: I am not certain, but I believe that either {{PD-Art}} or {{PD-Scan}} could be appropriate. simongraham (talk) 02:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Simongraham: Is what I've done acceptable? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 03:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: That looks good to me. simongraham (talk) 12:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Vami

Reserving a spot. –♠Vamí _IV†♠ 22:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if "American Revolutionary War" shouldn't just be "War of American Independence" or somesuch name given that the subject and ENGVAR of the article is British.
I feel that the War of the Austrian Succession should be mentioned earlier, rather than just saying "OK now this thing that had been happening is now over". Did Suckling's stations see any fighting in the war in the time he was aboard? Did they do anything otherwise noteworthy if not?
Gloucester finally returned on 16 January 1753 [...] Returned to England?
[...] almost guaranteed his promotion. This occurred on 2 December. Promotion to what rank?
[...] Townshend who was now a rear-admiral. Recommend replacing "who was" with a comma.
Naval historian William Laird Clowes says of the battle that "few pluckier or more creditable actions have ever been fought". One wonders where Clowes would put Cap-Francais in his estimation of naval history's annals had he been writing in the last hundred years. I struggle to see the relevance of or need for this sentence.

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.