Talk:Action of 13 March 1806/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA and below are my comments. (This is an excellent article, so these are meant to be helpful.)

Comments

• In general, you sentences tend to be long, detailed and complex, making it difficult for the general reader unfamiliar with the subject to follow. I have done some copy editing and added wikilinks, which you are free to revert if I have inadvertantly changed the meaning.

Your changes were mostly good, thanks. Are there others that need addressing?--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• Lead

• It would be desirable if you could set the general context of these engagements in a couple of sentences, to orient the general reader to the larger context.

I'm not sure what you are asking me to do here?--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• "Warren's flagship HMS London in his ship of the line Marengo." - I cannot figure this out. What Ship was Warren in?

Clarified.

• "was inadvertently sailing across the cruising ground of Warren's squadron." - Does "inadvertently" mean "by mistake" or "unaware"?

In this context it means unaware, although Linois would almost certainly have considered such an action a mistake as well.--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• "losing nearly 70 men killed between them." - Killed is redundant so I have removed it.
• "not exchanged by Napoleon" is unclear, as it is not obvious to the general reader that Linois was taken prisoner.

Well he could hardly run away in the Mid-Atlantic! I will try to clarify.

• Background

• "visited Pondicherry and Île de France before sailing to the South China Sea" - Why does it matter that he visited these places? (Too much detail is confusing to the general reader.)

Cut.

• "These squadrons were able to escape due to the reduction in the size and diligence of the British continental blockade, which had been relaxed in the aftermath of the Trafalgar campaign of 1805, in which 13 French and 12 Spanish ships of the line had been captured or destroyed, significantly reducing the ability of the French and their allies to operate in the Atlantic." - This is an example of a sentence that is too long and complex. Can it be simplified?

Any better?

• "When the blockade was relaxed, the squadrons were able to break out into the Atlantic without resistance, following their orders to avoid combat with significant British forces and to cruise British trade routes in search of lightly protected merchant convoys." - Would suggest: When the blockade was relaxed, the squadrons were able to break out into the Atlantic without resistance; their orders were to avoid combat with significant British forces and to cruise British trade routes in search of lightly protected merchant convoys.

I'm not sure thats better, it seems to suggest that they had no resistance because they were deliberatly avoiding it, which is partly true but not the whole story.--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• Battle

• "On 13 March 1806, Warren's squadron was cruising in the Eastern Atlantic, HMS London under Captain Sir Harry Burrard-Neale and the flagship HMS Foudroyant under Captain John Chambers White some distance from the rest of the squadron in company with the frigate HMS Amazon under Captain William Parker." - confusing.

clarified

• "with blue lights" - does this have a special meaning?

not especially, its just used to explain how the signals wer transmitted in the middle of the night.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• "In the face of this overwhelming force, the French ship of the line had no option to surrender, although by the time the tricolour was lowered at nearly 11:00, both Linois and Captain Joseph-Marie Vrignaud had been taken below with serious wounds." - Not sure what this means. Does it mean the ship was sunk if it could not surrender, or what?

whoops, word missing.

• But then you say it did surrender.
• "Losses on Belle Poule were less serious, but there were still six killed and 24 wounded from her complement of 330. British losses were comparatively light, London suffering ten dead and 22 wounded ..." Seems to be conflicting, as the Belle Poule had less serious casualties than the British.

Yes, but British losses were significantly lower than on Marengo. In any case, I have simplified the sentence.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

• Aftermath

• The first paragraph of this section does not seem to be congruent with what is in the lede.

I've slightly simplified the lede, but I'm not sure in what way it is not congruent?

• I may add to these comments as I read further.

Thankyou very much for the review, much appreciated, regards --Jackyd101 (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

—Mattisse (Talk) 16:34, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows relevant MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): Covers major areas in context b (focused): Remains focused on topic

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: Neutral

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.: Stable

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass

A fine article. Congratulations

—Mattisse (Talk) 18:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)