Talk:Operation Goodwood (naval)

Operation Goodwood (naval) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 22, 2019.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 23, 2014	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
July 17, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
June 21, 2015	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 20, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Operation Goodwood* was the last in a series of "intensely disappointing" attempts to sink the German battleship Tirpitz?*
Current status: Featured article

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Military history: Maritime / British / Canadian / European / German / North America / 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
	British military history task force
	Canadian military history task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	North American military history task force
	World War II task force
	Operation Majestic Titan (Phase III)

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 12:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, good to catch up here at GAN again -- will try to look this over during the week and post a review by the w/e at least. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ian. Nick-D (talk) 09:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbox checks

One dab link: Bear Island
- Manxruler has kindly fixed this Nick-D (talk) 10:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No EL issues.

Structure -- Looks straightforward/logical.

Prose/detail

"Operating from fjords on the Norwegian coast, the battleship was capable of overwhelming the close-escort forces assigned to the Arctic convoys or breaking out into the North Atlantic." -- Not sure if "Operating from" is the best terminology as it makes it sound like the ship was particularly active, whereas it mainly lurked as a threat, didn't it? Suggest "Stationed at" instead.
- Good point, and done (the Germans only ever planned to sortie the ship when they were really, really confident no Allied heavy units were about, so that was a bit over the top!) Nick-D (talk) 10:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since I've come to the end of the w/e without completing the review, just a note that I've read and copyedited to the end of Opposing Forces and the above is what I have so far, more later. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resuming, "if these aircraft had been unable to locate Tirpitz due to cloud they would have had to drop their scarce mines into the sea before landing" -- I gather "scarce mines" means they didn't have many of them but it reads a bit oddly to me; would "valuable mines" be supported by the source?
- The issue was that only a small number of mines were available with the fleet (the source doesn't specify whether this was because the RN didn't have many in stock or - more likely - that the escort carriers couldn't fit many in their magazines). I've tweaked this to make things clearer, though it's a bit on the wordy side. What do you think? Nick-D (talk) 10:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks pretty good -- I think you can afford to trim it by losing "after being launched". Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Other than that, all reads well to me and the level of detail seems appropriate.

Referencing -- Sources look reliable and citations/works appear suitably formatted.

Images -- All appear licensed appropriately.

Looks really good Nick, a worthy addition to your series on the FAA's abortive attempts on Tirpitz -- just let me know about that last prose point or if you have any probs with the copyediting... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:17, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your comments and excellent copy edits Ian. Nick-D (talk) 10:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Tks, passing as GA. I pretty well treated this like an A-Class review, which I assume is its next destination, so I'm sure I'll be happy to support it there too, though I'll probably let one or two others have a go at it first... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks a lot Ian. Yes, I think that this should actually have legs for FAC, so it will be off to an ACR shortly. Nick-D (talk) 11:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]