Talk:History of the United States Navy/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 03:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC) Doing... Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 03:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Since the US Navy was the largest at the time during WWII, shouldn't there be more on the subject? Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 03:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I would agree their should be more detail but not much, as that's the whole reason for splitting the article up into daughter articles. Thurgate (talk) 20:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I attempted to write about the highlights here - it may need an expansion or another further info link or two. Kirk (talk) 20:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Great White Fleet also had to take most of their coal from Brit colliers, which showed that the USN had to develop a logistical chain to support its big ships. Should not that be mentioned, as logistics are also very important. Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 02:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Interestingly, the main article doesn't mention that fact; I'll see if I can add that sentence with a citation. I don't think I substantially rewrote that section and now that I think about it I'm not satisfied with that title - 1898-1914 should cover the Naval arms race and Battleship developments. I'll ping you when its ready. Kirk (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok I expanded and renamed this section. I didn't see the logistical question you raised answered in Miller or Howarth but that seems important, I'll keep looking. Kirk (talk) 20:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ok this is done. Kirk (talk) 20:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - GJ.
In such a large article there are bound to be a few dablinks:
- Derna in section United States Navy (1794–1812).
- Battle of Mobile in section American Civil War (1861–1865)
- Columbia in section Rise of the Modern Navy (1898-1914)
- Commitment in section Post-Cold War from 1991
Rename Post-Cold War from 1991 to Post-Cold War (1991-present) or similar.
You could cut the info about the Alabama, as there are some things that could be better used in this article. FAC Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 02:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I've seen the date stuff done both ways but I changed the heading, the dab links you mentioned, and cut the Alabama. Kirk (talk) 14:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename section ((!xt|United States Navy (1794–1812)}} Quasi-War (1794–1812) or something related to it, as the entire article article is about the USN. FAC Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 02:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I went with Establishment of the United States Navy; I considered Birth of the United States Navy - is that ok?Kirk (talk) 16:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Tis a little long on the TOC, go with Establishment of the Navy.
Beyond that, there is little less to say. The citations are a little loose if you want to go beyond GA, you mainly use Miller. I'll pass this, and you can change the section header at your leisure. FAC Wiki cop ter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 04:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]