User talk:The ed17/Sandbox/Brazilian battleship Riachuelo
| This is a subpage of The ed17's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
 | This user page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
| {{WPMILHIST|class=B|B1=yes|B2=yes|B3=yes|B4=yes|B5=yes |OMT=1|South-American=yes|Maritime=yes}} {{WPSHIPS|class=B |B1 <!-- Referencing and citations -->=y |B2 <!-- Coverage and accuracy -->=y |B3 <!-- Structure -->=y |B4 <!-- Grammar and style -->=y |B5 <!-- Supporting materials -->=y}} {{WikiProject Brazil|class=B}} | |
 | A fact from The ed17/Sandbox/Brazilian battleship Riachuelo appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 May 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Cleanup tags
[edit]I am adding the wikify and cleanup tags because this article needs to be cleaned up to meet wiki's standards. Its not a bad thing, it notifies other editors that they should try and improve the article and make it look like other ship articles. If you intend to substantially improve this article in the next couple of days you should add the {{underconstruction}} tag to let other editors know that you will be working on the article. Hope this clairifies why I am adding that tag. Bonewah (talk) 17:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Cause of abandonment
[edit]The article's lead states that the weakness of the Brazilian economy meant that the ship was never built. The link is never explained in the text, where it later states that the outbreak of the First World War and the acquisition of ships under construction in British yards for the Royal Navy (and the diversion of those yards to building ships for the British) meant that work was never begun. This seems more plausible, the Riachuelo was ordered just a few months before the outbreak of war, and with that sort of time-scale Armstrong Whitworth would have had no time to start work before the war began. So was it the Brazilian economy that meant the ship was not built, the war, or a combination of the two, whereby the weak economy delayed the order being placed, and when it finally was, the war intervened? Or another reason not covered? Benea (talk) 07:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- You could say the the British forcibly canceled it, and the Brazilians just happened to be thinking the same thing, but in regards to hteir economy. Buggie111 (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Does that mean that in ordering the Riachuelo, the Brazilians had ordered a ship they knew they could not/might not be able to afford? Presumably there was still the intention to pay for the ship's construction up until the outbreak of war meant the British yards shelved the project. Did new economic difficulties arise during/after the war that meant that the ship was never reordered? Benea (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- The Brazilian economy was shattered by WWI because coffee was put on the Allies' contraband list and the war had little need for rubber (there being few cars/tanks/etc. in the war). See Brazilian battleship Minas Geraes#First World War—Ed (talk • majestic titan) 20:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Read the article on HMS Agincourt that I've been working on this week. The Brazilians ran out of money in 1913, not 1912, when rubber prices fell that year and they never cancelled her, but rather sold her to the Turks at the end of the year.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- The Brazilian economy was shattered by WWI because coffee was put on the Allies' contraband list and the war had little need for rubber (there being few cars/tanks/etc. in the war). See Brazilian battleship Minas Geraes#First World War—Ed (talk • majestic titan) 20:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Does that mean that in ordering the Riachuelo, the Brazilians had ordered a ship they knew they could not/might not be able to afford? Presumably there was still the intention to pay for the ship's construction up until the outbreak of war meant the British yards shelved the project. Did new economic difficulties arise during/after the war that meant that the ship was never reordered? Benea (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)