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)[reply]

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

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 Unfortunately I don't have access to Lyon's unpublished Thornycroft List which I believe would provide this.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)[reply]

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

@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)[reply]