This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Imbros article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Battle of Imbros was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
I think it might be worth mentioning the former German names of the Turkish ships directly, rather than just piping the links. From teh VC citation for White, it looks like the RN at the time still routinely referred to them by their German names, and there's probably some chance of confusion. David Underdown (talk) 10:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added the german names next to the first mentioning of each ship in question. Most sources i used as references tend to use a mixture of both the german and turkish names.XavierGreen (talk) 22:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a bit of work copy editing the article for typos, adding wikilinks, and addressing tense or MOS issues as I found them. If I've mucked anything up, I apologise and please feel free to change it back. Cheers. — AustralianRupert (talk) 22:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewer:Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Kitchener had been dead for over a year and a half by the time of this battle. More detail is need on the actual damage suffered by Yavuz and what it inflicted on the British ships as well as the air raids made by the British against her before I can pass this as GA. Read through the WP:MOS carefully, you need to spell out numbers less than ten, IIRC. More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Kitchener in command of this battle was the nephew of the Lord Kitchener who died in 1916. Henry Franklin Kitchener, Viscount Broome was the heir to the earldom after his father inherited it in 1916 but he himself died before assuming the earldom. He used the courtesy title of Viscount of Broome so his name is styled as Lord Kitchener. I'd link the name to the appropriate page, but it doesnt yet exist.
I can add a bit more about the air raids, although they were entirely ineffective. Only 8 hits were claimed to be scored, and all the nonbiased sources state that they caused only superficial damage.--XavierGreen (talk) 19:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know that they were ineffective, I've read a fairly detailed account of the attempts, but the reader should know about them as well. Redlink the son nephew, as a general he's notable enough for his own article. His title should have changed to Earl the minute his father died, even if he wasn't formally invested with the title by the King, but that's a minor point that I'm not prepared to quibble about. Get a hold of the second edition of Ian Buxton's Big Gun Monitor for a good tactical account of the battle.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.svg)
.svg)
