Talk:HMS Saracen (P247)

HMS Saracen (P247) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 2, 2019. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War II

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles 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.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

A fact from HMS Saracen (P247) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 March 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that HMS Saracen was sunk during her 13th patrol shortly after midnight of a Friday the 13th?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2019/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Saracen (P247).

Wikipedia

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Saracen (P247)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 00:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this one. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments:

the surfaced displacement doesn't match between the body and infobox
third-group or third-batch? Suggest choosing one.
typo - first was patrol
say that HMS Talisman was also a sub
typo - after there days
~~between~~ in the Strait of Sicily
Partinico and Edward Preston Young are duplinked, Preston should just be Preston at second mention
suggest ~~later~~then eastern Tunisia
uinto a suitable
suggest redlinking Corallo
suggest "south of the island of Capri"?
Provinçale II and Marseillaise V
It is a bit of a shock to discover that she wasn't called Saracen until 15 Feb 43. Consider calling her P247 until this point?
- I don't think so. The 247 pennant was just a temporary number while a name was chosen, and anyway its the same sub. But I've added a sentence to explain this in the first para. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
two German landing crafts
typo - Saracensighted
"ending her patrol" needs a full stop
1,085
was not damaged. tThe submarine
suggest "south of the island of Pianosa"
"overhead". tThe boat"
typo - "submarines in he area"
when landing men is mentioned, it doesn't say they were British agents, but the lead does?
the table would benefit from a total tonnage sunk at the bottom
with regard to sources, uboat.net is used extensively, and these entries are apparently based on primary sources. This is a less-than-ideal source, and I don't think it would pass muster at A-Class or FA.
- I know, and I'm not planning on an ACR or FAC. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
all images are appropriately licensed. A location map wouldn't go astray.
Earwig indicates some similar phrasing to the uboat.net entry, suggest varying the language to reduce this.
- Made some changes. Most of the "copyvio" comes from the log book quote about the ship blowing up. I personally like it, as it adds some color and action. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's me done. Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:06, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All done, except for the displacement, done by Sturm. Sorry for having so many typos, I will be more careful. L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:02, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by appropriately licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Nice work! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]