Talk:HMS Larne (1910)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk · contribs) 20:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Will take a look at this shortly. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Prelim

• No edit wars
• Image licensed correctly
• Duplicated links: anti-submarine warfare, 2nd Destroyer Flotilla, Irish Sea
  • Removed.
• Earwig reports copyvio unlikely

Lede and infobox

• Looks like some of the same hyphen issues as with Sheldrake, e.g. the first "Acorn class" should have one
  • Nice spot. Template parameter changed.
• "Larne was participated in exercises" needs a rejig
  • Grammar fixed.
• "sustaining damage due to fast running and a naval demonstration" you could reword this, it currently reads like she sustained a naval demonstration!
  • I have reworded it.
• Infobox says laid down 8 December, article says 5 December
  • Oops. Good spot.
• The general characteristics heading has a random curly bracket
  • Removed

Design and description

• Full load doesn't have a short tons conversion
  • Added.
• Link horsepower
  • Added.
• Ibid knots
  • Added.
• Be regular with your abbreviations; you've got two "knots" followed by a "kn", for example
  • Fixed. It should be first instance full and all the others abbreviated, as per MOS:1STOCC.

Construction and career

• You provided the yard number for Sheldrake, was this not possible for Larne?
  • I wish I could. Unfortunately I don't have access to Lyon's unpublished Thornycroft List which I believe would provide this.
• "sourced from" is slightly strange wording, suggest "ordered" or similar
  • I was trying to avoid repeating "order" as it was in the previous sentence, but obviously clumsily. Amended.
• Our SIA has Larne as the third ship of that name rather than the fourth
  • Fixed.
• "named after the town of Larne"?
  • Added.
• "this time did" doesn't seem to make sense in context, suggest removing
  • Removed.
• Link bunkers
  • Linked.
• Not sure the lone "Flotilla" should be capitalised
  • Happy to change it to lower case.
• "evidence of their operation" not sure how relevant this might be to the article, but what evidence might one exactly find from a surface ship of submarine operations?! It would however be useful to note whether this was the end of their Hebridean trip
  • The source does not say, unfortunately.
• Was Conqueror still "damaged" at this point? After reading our GA on her I assume the destroyers were escorting the now not-damaged battleship back to the fleet?
  • Clarified.
• "only destroyer from the division to manage the whole journey" why?
  • Added the fates of the other ships.
• "Lame" a freudian slip?!
  • Possibly. Fixed.
• Why was she being recommissioned, and how long was she out of service beforehand?
  • The sources do not say, or why recommissioning was necessary.
• "escorting ships" stipulate what kind?
  • Added.
• I assume U-20 was on the surface to be shot at, but you might want to make it clear if that was so
  • The source does not say, but it is reasonable to assume so.
• "all merchant sailing"?
  • Added.
• "The alternative was to lose ships" really? this sounds unusually definite; would "to ensure ships were not sunk there" or similar work?
  • Amended for clarity.
• "During 1917" is a more specific date available?
  • Unfortunately not in the sources I have.

References

• Spot checking references suggests you might want to double check some dates. Monograph 31 has Larne shooting at a submarine on 28 April rather than 29 April. Furthermore, Monograph 31 has the submarine as U-45 rather than U-20, which, by the way, is currently linked to a SIA page
  • Good spot. I had missed that it was the previous evening. Text added to clarify.
• Other spot checks come up ok
  • Thank you.

@Simongraham: That's all I've got for now, will await your replies. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Thank you for another excellent review. I think all these are now addressed. simongraham (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Simongraham: Happy with the changes you have made. Passing this article as satisfying the GA criteria. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 10:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)