Talk:Action of 3 July 1810

As a courtesy I am leaving a notice that I am preparing a new, expanded and sourced version of this article in my Userspace and it should be pasted up here in about a week. If anyone has any comment then by all means drop me a line.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

It's ready and imported. see User:jackyd101/Action of 3 July 1810 if anyone needsd the history of the article as I created it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 14:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Action of 3 July 1810/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GAN, and should have the full review up soon. Skinny87 (talk) 12:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • 'attacked and defeated a well-armed convoy' - I don't think 'well-armed' is needed there.
   • 'During the engagement the British convoy resisted strongly and suffered heavy casualties but two ships were eventually forced to surrender, the British flagship Windham holding off the French squadron to allow the surviving ship Astell to escape.' - semicolon after surrender, please.
   • 'the French frigates part of a squadron operating from the Île de France under Commodore Jacques Hamelin.' - 'being' part of a squadron
   • 'The huge distances involved, restrictions on supplies and the powerful presence of Royal Navy warships and heavily armed East Indiamen ' - remove 'powerful', please.
   • 'attacking the well-armed convoys' - 'well-armed' isn't required here as its really repetition.

Well not actually, as I removed the previous one. Nevertheless, removed.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

1. • 'by the aggressive tactics of the merchant captains and their powerful broadsides' - 'powerful broadsides' is a bit peacock-esque and dramatic - can you reword the sentence?
   • 'Although only four frigates eventually reached the French island, these were new vessels carrying 40 heavy guns each and were ordered to operate in the Bay of Bengal and attack British shipping, in particular the large East Indiamen of the Honourable East India Company (HEIC)' - Instead of 'and', could we have a semi-colon or a full stop and then begin a new sentence? That would flow better
   • 'During the winter few ships were at sea, the risk of being caught in a seasonal hurricane was considered too severe to operate between December and March' - 'as the risk'

All done.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • 'Windham, her captain John Stewart and many of her crew had been engaged and captured by Hamelin on 22 November 1809 in the Bay of Bengal and recaptured a month later by HMS Magicienne off Île de France' - citation please, per the tag

Whoops, how did I miss that? Done.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   • 'Fortunately for Stewart, Minerve lost two topmasts as she turned to face his ship and had to pull away from the British to effect repairs' - do we know why?

Not as such, no. It as probably a combination of high winds and the stress of the manouvere. It is possible although unlikely that there was some damage from the British ships. However, without any specific information I would be unwilling to speculate.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

1. a (major aspects): b (focused):

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

4. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Could we have a picture or two? I know they're not required, but they'd break up the text a bit; one of Duperre would be nice.

Good point, one added.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

1. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

An interesting article, and nice to read one linked to the last one of yours I reviewed. Get those prose bits done, and add a citation, and it'll be a Good Article! Skinny87 (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment - just interested to know if France was considered at war here with the British East India Company or British Empire? (The BEIC is listed as a beligerant in the infobox) Thanks. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

France was at war with Britain, not specifically the HEIC. However, HEIC ships, although not owned by the British crown, were part of the British Merchant Navy (then not specifically codified as it is now). This made them economic assets of Britain as a nation and thus fair game for attack and seizure. The reason the infobox has the HEIC flag is that all of the British ships invovled in this encounter were owned by the HEIC and not the Royal Navy.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting all of those things done so quickly. Well, I'm satisfied, so I'll mark it as a GA right now. Skinny87 (talk) 15:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)