Talk:New York-class battleship

New York-class battleship 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: June 15, 2013. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New York-class battleship article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States: Military history Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States / World War I / World War II / Operation Majestic Titan

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
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War I task force
	World War II task force
	Operation Majestic Titan (Phase I)

untitled

Tried to clean up the page somehwhat. Fixed some consistency errors, such as numbering and capital letters. Hypeer 21:44, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup Tag

I felt that the article was good enough to remove the cleanup tag. We're allowed to make bold decisions, right? Hypeer 15:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gun layout

While the article mentions 5 dual gun turrets, it's not quite clear how they are distributed. From the text and images I guess 2 superfiring turrets in the front, 2 (also superfiring?) in the back and one "amidship" - what exactly does that mean? Can someone with access to good sources clarify this a bit? Of course, something like Image:HMS_Dreadnought_(1911)_profile_drawing.png would be really excellent.--Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your are correct. The front two and rear two turrets are superfiring. The amidships turret is rear-facing and originally was aft of the rear cage mast. This turret is in-between the boiler rooms and the engine room. After the modernization in the 1930s the rear cage mast was removed and the new tripod was placed aft of the midships turret for weight concerns. I have not been able to find a free image, but I have a few that show the layout but they are copyrighted. Hope this helps, -MBK₀₀₄ 16:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's reasonably clear now. I'll put a sentence into the article - please check it it agrees with your source. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found an image that reasonably shows what you're looking for: Image:USS Texas-5.jpg -MBK₀₀₄ 04:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found yet another image: Image:USS Texas-6.jpg -MBK₀₀₄ 21:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fifth Series?

"The New York class battleship was the fifth series of two super-dreadnought battleships of the United States Navy" The New Yorks were the first to depart from the 12" guns of previous American dreadnoughts - thus, they were the first super-dreadnoughts, not the fifth series of them, although they were the fifth two-ship battleship class in a row. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.32 (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Super-dreadnought" is an overstatement. They had the gun size, but the propulsion (VTE) and armor suite pretty much disqualify them. The Nevadas, with triple turrets, turbines, all or nothing armor, and oil fuel, were the giant leap forward characteristic of super-dreadnoughts. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York-class battleship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 12:26, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this shortly.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No duplicate links found (no action required)
No disambiguation links found (no action required)
No broken external links found (no action requried)
Image licences and captions check out fine (no action required)
Referencing seems fine (no action required)

Prose:

IIRC from the review of the USS New York, her overhaul was in 1940-41. Was USS Texas overhauled at a different date (1939?) or should the As constructed, these turrets had an elevation of 15 degrees, but this was increased to 30 degrees during an overhaul in 1939. be amended?
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Should ... a 6th design ... be changed to "the 6th design"?
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would recommend splitting Sent to reinforce the British Grand Fleet in the North Sea, she conducted blockade and escort duties, and twice came into contact with German U-Boats, and is believed to have accidentally sunk one. in two.
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the subsection dealing with the USS Texas, it is not clear (at least to me) if ...ugrades to become the first ship to mount anti-aircraft weapons. means that the USS Texas was the first ship of the class to have AA weapons, or the first US ship to have them, or the first ship in general. Could you please clarify this?
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to the preceding point: Turning back to the "armaments" subsection, I saw the prose there identifies the USS Texas as the first US battleship to have AA weapons - does that mean that there were other US Navy ships (other than battleships) fitted with AA guns?
- There were likely test ships to try them out, but as I understand, she was the first battleship to use weapons specifically designed for anti-aircraft defense. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article employs abbreviation "US" and "U.S." - please apply one form consistently.
- I've made this consistent. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few minor edits - mostly having to do with MOS and convert templates. Please review them and revert as needed. There are few things to mend before this nom can be passed, the most significant being the issue of the AA guns and the overhaul date. Nice article!--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, I've fixed up the article. Sorry about the delay, been a little busy lately. —Ed!^(talk) 20:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. No sweat re delay. Everything seems to be in order, therefore I'm happy to pass this GAN. Nice work!--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A couple images

Hey all, I found two images of New York here. Best, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 07:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]