Talk:Type 1936 destroyers

Type 1936 destroyers 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: April 17, 2019. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / European / German / Russian & Soviet / World War II / Cold War

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
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

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

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Type 1936 destroyers/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 09:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in good shape. I have a few comments:

in the lead, suggest "All but one participated in Operation Weserübung, the German invasion of Norway in April; they were all sunk or scuttled during the naval Battles of Narvik. Z20 Karl Galster was refitting at the time, and was transferred..."
in the lead, say what Operation Zitronella was
the beam measurements and conversions in the body and infobox don't match
the infobox says 7 × 2 cm guns, but the body says 6?
where did Group 1 pick up its troops?
suggest "Shortly afterwards theyBritish ships hit the German destroyer twice"
"Z18 Hans Lüdemanns' captain"
italics for "participating in Operation Weserübung"
suggest "where ~~Z20 Karl Galster~~she conducted"
consistency with German operation names being italics, ie Barbarossa
suggest "participated in Operation Zitronella, the German attack on the Norwegian island of Spitzbergen"
Lenton 1975 has some slightly different/additional detail on p. 71, which you might like to incorporate. He says that the overloading and frequent breakdowns of the boilers under wartime steaming conditions led to the formation of a special committee before the end of 1939 to inquire into the problem. Also that Z20 had twelve 2 cm guns added during her service life. Finally, that the ship that torpedoed Z19 was HMS Eskimo.
- Lenton's old enough that I don't consider particularly reliable. I haven't seen mention of any committee anywhere else, but it wouldn't surprise me, given the problems that they suffered. Concrete details on the problems suffered and the things done to remedy them are lacking (the relevant documents didn't probably survive the war), which is annoying as hell considering that just about everybody tells you that there's a problem. I do know that the very late-war destroyer designs had a re-engineered system that apparently gave pretty good results, but little more than that. Unlike Cossack which got badly damaged when she tried to finish off one of the German ships, Eskimo wasn't touched, so I didn't think it useful to note her specifically.
What is with the hull number 43 in the pic of Z21?
- I think that it's a prewar code for her unit of assignement, 3rd ship of the 4th Division or some such.
on what basis is File:UK-NWE-Norway-2.jpg believed to be UK Govt-created?
- It's from the official history, The Campaign in Norway

That's all I have, placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:55, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One final thing. Shouldn't the article be at Type 36 destroyer, not destroyers? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:57, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I think so. Thanks for the detailed review. See if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 17 April 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) 23:36, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]