Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/German destroyer Z39/archive3

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 9 October 2021 [1].

German destroyer Z39

Nominator(s): Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 11:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a German destroyer that served in WW2. This article has been to FAC twice so far, failing first due to sourcing issues, and secondly due to lack of reviews. I believe this article is at FAC standards after major improvements made after the first review. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 11:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Pass. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:32, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Z39-Zerstoerer1936modA-USN-Photo.jpg: the source gives a courtesy credit for this image - who is that person? Ditto File:Captured_German_destroyer_Z39_underway_off_Boston_on_22_August_1945.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution to Robert F. Sumrall, US Navy, has been added. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 12:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HF

Will review soon. Hog Farm _Talk 17:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"she laid numerous barrages of mines" - is there a possible link for barrage? I don't think this meaning is particularly well-known
Strangely enough, no. The various Wikipedia articles only describe specific barrages, such as Naval mine linking to some. Wiktionary for Barrage doesn't directly refer to naval barrages, only indirectly by mentioning explosives/projectiles. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 04:08, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remove the period after "Transferred to the French Navy" in the infobox
Done.
Per MOS:SECTIONHEAD; Destroyer Function should be Destroyer function
Done.
" the average size Allied ships" - size of?
Fixed.
To me, the structure of the background section feels awkward. It starts off by discussing specific WW2 tactics, then two sections of more general worldwide and German naval background. I'd recommend moving that first section about WW2 destroyer tactics to after the Plan Z section
Done.
Link Plan Z somewhere
Done.
"22 battleships (two), seven carriers (none), 22 heavy cruisers (four), 61 light cruisers (six), 255 destroyers (34)" - add some ship type links here. In particular, I doubt that most readers will know the difference between a light and heavy cruiser
All but destroyers and submarines are linked in the first sentence of this paragraph; I've added links to those two. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:46, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why isn't ship class mentioned in the design section?
Fixed.
Any of the sources say anything about why the Greek coat of arms of all things was on the ship?
I can see if new sources have come out or if I've missed something; I think a source that didn't pass WP:V stated that it was because the Greek royal family was, indirectly, "German" by way of being related to the Danish royal family who was related to a Holstienian noble family; it seems possible given that the Germans had a simultaneously wide and narrow definition of German (per their roving band of Aryans accomplishing everything good in history). Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 04:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"fourteen 3.7 cm (1.5 in) guns" - single or twin?
Fixed.
"Koop & Schmolke 2003, pp. 42–42." - This page range is malformed. And there's been a tag into the article about this page range being malformed since 2020. This should have been addressed before this was taken to FAC
Fairly embarrassing. I do not personally own the book; unfortunately, my university library does not quite match the beast that is the Houston Public Library, so I've put in an interlibrary loan. Will resolve as soon as it arrives. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:12, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, I was able to find a copy online; ref fixed. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:59, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox specifies that the boilers were water-tube boilers; this isn't specified in the body. As not all boilers are water-tube boilers, this should be directly clarified in the body
Fixed; good catch. The link on boiler currently points to water-tubed boiler, have removed the pipe so the text itself speaks to water-tube boilers. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:59, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a ship expert, so I may wrong, but the infobox gives the completion date as the commissioning date. But wouldn't "and Z39 was not fully operational until 7 January 1944" be the completion date?
You are correct; fixed.
"After these changes, she began minelaying operations in the Skagerrak and the Kattegat until March when she was transferred to Reval off the Gulf of Finland" - can we have a more specific date for this? This could be read to suggest that this happened right after the Project Barbara work; but surely this wouldn't have happened until after the commissioning. The chronology isn't clear here
Added.
Is there a map that can be added to the German service? It's really hard for me as a non-European to have the foggiest idea where these various bays and islands are located
Haven't been able to find one; I've put a request in with the Wikimap ~~cult~~ Project. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 07:33, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did the oil shortage affect Z39 in any way? It's mentioned, but no consequences of it are really mentioned, although it seems like running low on oil would mess up your naval fleet movements
It definitely did, but I didn't find a source to actually say this, several sources mention other ships and units being kept in port due to lack of oil, but I can't really extend that to Z39 without it constituting OR, I believe. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 07:02, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gerhard Koop, Klaus-Peter Schmolke (p. 114) mentions Z33 and other Swinemünde based ships, I can't get a full view of the page with Google preview, however; must wait for it to arrive. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 07:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Further reading items should generally be relevant to the specific subject - are O'Brien and Zaloga really relevant to this subject, or just general works on WWII
Removed.
For consistency with how you format the other refs, drop the usage of Annapolis, Md. to just Annapolis
Done.
Pae 218 here gives the more specific date of November 1947 for the transfer to France
Added.

I think that's it from me. Hog Farm _Talk 02:12, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: implemented all the fixes, the only thing left is to attempt to find more information on oil shortage effects, and see if anyone is willing to create a map for her operations. Will hope and pray for information regarding the usage of the Greek coat of arms, but its unlikely. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 07:33, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support - It would be preferable if material for the oil shortage could be found, but I understand if it just isn't possible. Hog Farm _Talk 04:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthyovenator

Will take a look and review soon. Ichthyovenator (talk) 23:05, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article is excellent. Since I'm not very knowledgeable in this area I just have some minor points and questions:

The fourth and fifth sentences in the lead both start with "She". Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:58, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed
The ship was part of the French navy for substantially longer than either the German or American ones, but I presume Z39 is still the most common name used (and not the later French designation)?
Yes; additionally, it seems like an unwritten rule (or perhaps it is written somewhere) that whatever the most important role of the ship is, is the name most sources and articles will use. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:09, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. Ichthyovenator (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following the end of World War One, Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles, which put strict limits both on the size and displacement of warships that she could possess. are countries typically referred to as "she"? Why not "... warships that the country could possess."? I see that you've continued to gender Germany later as well so maybe I'm just confused about this since I'm not a native English speaker.
Most countries are actually referred to as she in English, however, Germany could theoretically use gender-neutral (in its own language it is, from what I've heard), or masculine, as it is a Fatherland, unlike most countries. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:09, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The more you know! Ichthyovenator (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Erich Raeder, the Grand Admiral of the Kriegsmarine, was assured by Hitler that war would not start until at least 1945. Raeder had wanted the deadline for the completion of Plan Z to be extended to 1948, but Hitler insisted on 1945. World War Two began in 1939, meaning that very few of Germany's heavy ships were finished at that point. Was Raeder assured in 1939 that the war would not start until 1945? Surely Hitler must have been aware that the war would start much sooner at this point given that it started later that year? Would be nice with more insight on this but I understand if it might be out of the scope of this article.
Yeah, he did actually make this promise in either late 1938 or early 1939. To my understanding, the Germans were fully ready to go to war over the annexation of the Sudetenland, but after the British and French folded on that, they pretty much thought they could do whatever they wanted as long as it wasn't a direct attack on France, Belgium, or England. Hitler did think it would be 1942 before war broke out between them and England/France, which I've now added to the article. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:09, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting stuff. So still a d*ck move to tell Raeder that they weren't planning to go to war until 1945. Ichthyovenator (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, but this is also the man who intentionally put 2-3 people into effectively one position, so they'd fight, and he'd see who won and was therefore the greatest Warrior Aryan, or something to that effect. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 10:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Link "prize ship" to Prize (law).
Done

Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:58, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ichthyovenator: Believe I have responded to all of your comments/suggestions. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Everything looks good to me! Ichthyovenator (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Pendright

@Iazyges: Is the article written using British or American English? Pendright (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pendright: It should, in theory, use American English. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:00, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iazyges: Thank you - back shortly. Pendright (talk) 15:34, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pendright, is there more to come from you? No obligation, just checking. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:17, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Yes! Pendright (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iazyges: The article has the {{use British English|date=March 2020}} template, so if it is to be written in American English, should this be changed to {{use American English}}? -- Politicsfan4 (talk) 17:27, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's my bad, this article uses British English because a lot of the sources do; I didn't have it tagged on the talk page and didn't check the article itself so I had assumed it was American English. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:39, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the article to American English. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iazyges: I leave you with more than a few comments. You'll note that many of them are of the type that would have been corrected in a routine copyedit. In any event, I look forward to your responses and stand ready to answer any questions you may have. Pendright (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Will say that the article did get a copy edit by our esteemed friend User:Twofingered Typist in 2020, although the article has changed somewhat since.

<>My apology to each of you. Pendright (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Her anti-aircraft armament was increased extensively during the war.

anti-aircraft -> antiaircraft

Not done, Antiaircraft is a much rarer use, and I think all but maybe Chicago MOS in American English would overwhelmingly use Anti-aircraft.

<>Could you be a bit more specific?

Anti-aircraft is almost overwhelmingly used by sources, people, etc; antiaircraft isn't necessarily wrong so much as odd; the Chicago MOS is notably the most hostile to usage of hyphens in general, but I think even they would use anti-aircraft. The LA Times mentions this example specifically. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

<->To the case in point, when the word antiaircraft is used particularily in connection with guns or armaments the word is unhyphenated in publications authored by Norman Freeman, U.S. Destroyers - 2004 and John C. Reilly, Jr., U.S. Navy Destroyers of World War II - 1983. In the scheme of things the hyphen is insignificant, so I yield to your preference, but without necessarily agreeing with it. Pendright (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

She served [the navies] ~~with a total~~ of three different countries: from 1943 to 1945 with the Kriegsmarine as Z39, from 1945 to 1947 with the US Navy as DD-939, and from 1948 to 1964 with the French Navy as Q-128.

Consider the above suggested changes

Done.

Throughout her German [service] ~~career~~, she laid numerous barrages [(concentrated efforts over a wide area)] of mines in the Baltic Sea and bombarded Soviet forces several times.

Consider the above changes

Did change career service, added (explosives concentrated over a wide area), for clarity. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the last months of the war, Z39 helped escort steamships, which were evacuating German soldiers and civilians from Eastern Europe to Denmark.

Replace the comma and which with that

Done

She was damaged twice, once by Soviet planes while in Paldiski, and then by British planes, while in Kiel.

Drop te comma after Paldiski
Done.
Drop the comma after the second planes
Done.

Interbellum:

Following the end of World War One, Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles, which put strict limits both on the size and displacement of warships that she could possess.

"World War One" -> World War I or the First World War
Replace the comma and which with the word that
Done.

Several negative consequences resulted from this, however, such as making them slower and overweight.

Consider dropping "however"

Done.

Were they slower because of being overweight?

Largely, but not entirely. Don't think I could get WP:V source to say this, but German destroyers, in general, were supposed to be fast, partly because British destroyers tended to be slow, and a bunch of destroyers that were significantly faster than a cruiser while bearing similar armaments would truly dominate the seas. Great idea, but the engines didn't really work out great. Part of the slowness comes from the over-engineering of the engine, I believe. Source does say slower, so I'm in favor of keeping it unless one will give me enough to expound upon it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Although German heavy destroyers matched British light cruisers in armament, they were much less seaworthy, and had far worse facilities for control and use of their guns.[3]

Drop the comma after seaworthy

Done.

As a result of the treaty, Germany felt that her ships could not compete with those of the Allied navies and began to ignore the treaty, at first covertly, and later openly after Hitler publicly denounced it.

If this is the first mention of Hiller, then his name and title should be spelled out, including the date on which he openly denounced the treaty.

Done.

Plan Z:

Plan Z was a German naval re-armament plan, [that] started in 1939, ~~which~~ [and] involved building ten battleships, four aircraft carriers, twelve battlecruisers, three pocket battleships, five heavy cruisers, forty-four light cruisers, sixty-eight destroyers, and 249 submarines.
Done.

re-armament -> rearmament
Consider the above suggested changes
Done.

These ships were to [form] ~~be split into~~ two battle fleets: a "Home Fleet", to tie down the British war fleet in the North Sea, and a "Raiding Fleet", to wage war upon British convoys.[4]

Consider the above suggested changes
Done.
"tie down" is usually hyphenated?

As a noun it is hyphenated, as a verb I don't think so. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

<>Tie-down is a noun, period, but tie is a verb. Pendright (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tie-down is used as its meaning related to literal tying down using ropes, but usage to mean a metaphorical restriction is largely unhyphenated, such as in articles like Operation Mars, and Rolls-Royce 40mm Cannon.

<-> I used the meaning given in the New Oxford Engrlsh Dictionary, but we have kicked this around enough so I yield to your preference.Pendright (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Erich Raeder, the Grand Admiral of the Kriegsmarine, was assured by Hitler that war would not start until at least 1945.

This seems to be the first mention of Hilter, so give his full name and title.

Not done, accomplished above.

<>Sorry for this duplication! Pendright (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

World War Two began in 1939, meaning that very few of Germany's heavy ships were finished at that point

World War two -> World War II or the Second World War
Done.
"were finished -> would be finished
Done.

Compared to the number [of ships] Germany had upon entry [into the war,] (in parentheses) they had: 22 battleships (two), seven carriers (none), 22 heavy cruisers (four), 61 light cruisers (six), 255 destroyers (34), 135 submarines (57, of which less than half could actually serve in the Atlantic or the North Sea).

Consider the above suggested changes?

Done.

Destroyer function:

During World War Two, destroyers served three basic functions: to act as screening ships to defend their fleets from those of an enemy; to attack an enemy's screening ships; and to defend their fleet from submarines.[8]

During World War Two-> same as above
Done.
In other lists commas were used, in this one it's semicolons?

Fixed I will attribute this strangeness to my evolution as a writer.

Since this is about the role of destroyers in general, could it be beefed-up a bit giving a reader a sense of the value of these fast, maunverabe, and long-endurance warships

Done

Germany relied on a massive fleet of trawlers which had been requisitioned and re-fitted as minelayers instead.

change which to that
Done.
re-fitted -> refitted
Done.
requisitioned from ...?

The source doesn't say, but, being Nazi Germany, likely whoever they wanted it from.

The role of the destroyer began to vary more widely as the war progressed.

Could the role change be briefly described?

Done.

Design and armament:

Before her Project Barbara modifications to improve the anti-aircraft capabilities of German ships, she was armed with: seven 2 cm (0.8 in) anti-aircraft (AA) guns, two twin 3.7 cm SK C/303.7 cm (1.5 in) anti-aircraft guns,[a] a twin 15-centimetre (5.9 in) L/48 gun on a forward turret,[b] two single 15-centimetre (5.9 in) L/48 guns in a gunhouse aft, two quadruple 53.3 cm (21 in) torpedo tubes, and 60 mines.

Drop the word her
Done.
Anti-aircraft -> misspelled twice
Not dohne.

<>Same as above - Pendright (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

She had the Greek coat of arms on either side of her 15-centimetre (6 in) twin turret.[12]

Anything new here?

Not sure what this means? No, it's not a new gun, if that's what you're asking.

<>Is there a reason why a Greek phrase is on a German warship?

No one is really sure why they slapped the Greek coat of arms on it; sources don't even bother to speculate. It may be related to the Greek royal family being vaguely German by way of relation to Danish royal family, but I cant find a source to say that.

Her propulsion system consisted of six Wagner water-tube boilers [that generated and feed] ~~feeding~~ high-pressure superheated steam (at 70 atm (1,029 psi; 7,093 kPa) and 450 °C (842 °F)) to two sets of Wagner geared steam turbines.[16][17]

Consider the above suggested changes

Done.

Z39's sensor suite (housing) included a FuMO 21 radar [that] ~~, which,~~ was placed on the ship's bridge, and four FuMB4 Sumatra aerials on the foremast searchlights.[c]

Consider the above suggested changes

Done.

She also had several other radars and radar detectors, including a FuMB 3 Bali and FuMO 81 Berlin-S on her masthead, and a FuMO 63 Hohentweil K.[20]

Drop the comma after masthead.

Done.

She also had a degaussing cable ~~which~~ [that] wrapped around the entire ship, but was covered by her spray deflector.

Consider the above suggested change

Done.

Service history:

Z39 was ordered on 26 June 1939, laid down by Germaniawerft in Yard G629 in Kiel on 15 August 1940, launched on 2 December 1941, and was commissioned on 21 August 1943.

Change the first in to at
Done.
Drop the comma after 1941
Done.

At some point between her launching and commissioning, she was modified under Project Barbara, with the addition of three pairs of 3.7 cm (1.5 in) anti-aircraft guns, one pair forward of her bridge, one pair abreast after her funnel, and one pair abreast forward of her funnel.

ant-aircraft -> sp?

<>Same as above - Pendright (talk) 19:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what this means.

<>? Pendright (talk) 19:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't sure what the "sp" means, was it a suggestion to remove the hyphen as before?

<-> Yes - Pendright (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

She had a pair of quadruple 2 cm (0.8 in) guns and a pair of single 2 cm (0.8 in) guns added to an extended deckhouse in her No. 3 gun position.[13]

"at the" No, 3 gun position

Done.

German service:

After this move, she served in the 6th Destroyer Flotilla, alongside German destroyers Z25, Z28, and Z35.[2

After the move to Reval,
Done.
Add the definite article after alongside

Done.

Between 12 and 13 February Z39 laid mines in the "Dorothea A" barrage, alongside two other destroyers and three minelayers.[28

Change alonside to along with

Done.

While [in] at port [at] in Kiel on 24 July, she was hit by a bomb when the British [Royal Air Force] ~~air force~~ bombed Kiel [Harbor] ~~Harbour~~, causing damage to ]the] ~~her~~ quarterdeck and [was required] ~~leading to~~ her ~~having~~ to be towed back to Swinemünde.

Consider the above suggested changes

Done.

Z44 [was] ~~had been~~ damaged in an air raid on 29 July ~~while in~~ [at] Bremen and sunk [yet] ~~so that only~~ her superstructure remained above water and Z45 was being built.[34]

Consider the above changes
Done.
"and Z45 was being built" -> How does this relate?

They stole parts off of her to rebuild Z39; it's a status on the two that got eaten to fix Z39.

Z39 [was] ~~had been~~ repaired enough to be seaworthy on 28 February 1945 and was ordered to sail to Copenhagen for ~~more~~ extensive repairs, however, due to Nazi Germany's [shortage] ~~lack~~ of fuel, she sailed to Sassnitz instead.[29]
Done.
~~During~~ [At] this time, the Kriegsmarine, which had always dealt with shortages in [of] oil, reached critically low levels of oil supply.

Consider the above suggested changes

Done.

On 25 March, [the] repairs on Z39 [were] finished while she was in Swinemünde; she resumed operations on 1 April.
Done.
From 5 April to 7 April, she escorted transports and [some] ~~parts~~ of Task Force Thiele around the Bay of Danzig.[29]
Done.
On 10 April she and T33 [(torpedo boat)] escorted the German destroyer Z43, which had sustained damage from both mines and bombs,[36] to Warnemünde and Swinemünde.[37]
From 1944, German surface ships were called upon to provide support for the Army Group [located] North along the Baltic Sea coast.

Consider the above suggested changes

Torpedo boat added, [located] not added, the actual name of the Army Group was Army Group North.

This tactical use of cruisers, destroyers, and torpedo boats was difficult in the restrictive waterways of the Baltic, but despite these difficulties, it justified the continued existence of the surface fleet.

"restrictive waterways of the Baltic" -> in what way?

I don't think I could find a related source to mention this, but presumably, because the Baltic isn't very deep, has random unexpected storms, and a host of other problems.

On 15 April[,] Z39, [with] two other destroyers, and four torpedo boats escorted [the] German steamships Matthias Stinnes, Eberhart Essberger, Pretoria and Askari to Copenhagen, with ~~a total of~~ 20,000 refugees.[36]

Consider the above suggested changes

Done

On 2 May, she shelled [the] Soviet Army forces from the Oder estuary.
Not done; Soviet Army forces works better grammatically than "the" Soviet Army forces, because the forces aren't specified nor their location.
On 3 May, she~~, alongside~~ [and] the battleship Schlesien, moved to protect the bridge across the Peene river at Wolgast.
A day later, Z39, three other destroyers, one torpedo boat, one ship's tender, one auxiliary cruiser, one anti-aircraft ship, and five steamer ships, sailed for Copenhagen, taking 35,000 wounded soldiers and refugees with them.

Consider the above changes
All done but change to anti-aircraft.
antiarcraft ship?

A ship whose sole job in life is to attack enemy aircraft; the Atlanta-class cruiser were one such type; although in this case it was probably just a rinky-dink boat with some Flaks mounted on it, hence the lack of name.

This might be an appropriate place in the text to tell readers that the German armed forces surrendered unconditionally on 7 & 9 May 1945.

Done; I used the date of 8th May because that's the technical date of the first surrender, and the 7 and 9 dates aren't entirely important enough to dwell on.

On 8 May, Z39, six other destroyers, and five torpedo boats set sail with 20,000 soldiers and civilians from Hela to Glücksburg, and [they] arrived on 9 May.[37][41]
Done.
Following the German [armed forces] surrender, she was decommissioned [at Kiel] from the Kriegsmarine on 10 May 1945 ~~at Kiel~~.[37]

Consider the above suggested changes

at Keil done, armed forces not done; technically a good portion of the military held out. The last Germans surrender in September.

This section chroicles the many operations undertaken by Z39 and other ships, but it does not describe, for the most part, the efforts envolved, enemy reactions to them, or the results of these operations.

That's largely because it was a destroyer, and therefore most of what it did was quite routine. "Destroyer did some things, a group of ships responded, destroyer when home" is the general routine they had, and hence its hard to find details because probably even primary sources didn't bother to gather them. Rarely would any reaction or strong result come from just one destroyer or even a group of them, outside of battle. The Von Bismarck paralyzed two days of Allied sea traffic just by sailing west, no one really cares about destroyers until they sink you.

<->Much of the activity mentioned in the section is about minelaying, so one might expect that some of the activity could have been eventful. Showing how things happen is usually better than telling readers - a writing axim of long-standing. Your view on destroyer service during wartime is interesting, but it differs from my experiences serving aboard two U.S. destroyers. Pendright (talk) 22:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

American and French service:

At some [unknown] point after the war [in Europe] ended, Z39 ~~was~~ sailed [with] by a mixed German and British crew to Wilhelmshaven, and then [to Plymouth, Englad, on 6 July 1945.~~, to Plymouth~~
Done.

She left England on 30 July, and arrived in Boston on 7 August, where, on 14 September, after extensive trials, she was commissioned into the US Navy as DD-939.[37]

Consider the above-suggested changes

Done.

Could you elaborate a bit on the extensive trials?

Unfortunately no, "where she was subjected to extensive trials" is the beginning and end of what sources will say.

She was used by the US Navy to test her equipment, namely her high-pressure steam propulsion plant.[43]

If this is one of the sea trails, then it should be woven in elsewhere?

I don't believe these were one of the trials, or at least sources won't say so and it doesn't really make sense. The trials were largely to ensure she wasn't going to randomly sink from the damage of two bombs being overlooked because of desperate times.

After arriving in Casablanca in January 1948, she sailed to Toulon, [where Z39 was] redesignated [as] Q-128, and was [later cannibalized] ~~cannibalised~~ for her parts, which were used to repair the French destroyers Kléber (ex-Z6 Theodor Riedel), Hoche (ex-Z25), and Marceau (ex-Z31).[37]
Partly done,
~~She~~ [Q-128] served as a pontoon for minesweepers near Brest until she was broken up in 1964.[45]
Done

Consider the above suggested changes

Overused words:

The dictionary defines overused simply as "used too much". The case in point here is the word choice of "she" that is habitually used throughout the article. Suggest mixing it up a bit with Z39, the ship, or the destroyer.

Done.

Images:

The article would benefit from a few more images, I should think that any image that is relevant to the story would be appropriate.
Unfortunately virtually all copyright-free images are from the US' time with her, so I have about 40 images of her near Boston, and nowhere else. A map of her service is currently in the works.

Finished - Pendright (talk) 17:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pendright: Believe I have responded to everything. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:16, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pendright: responded to suggestions/comments. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Iazyges: I'll Ping you whe I have finished! Pendright (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pendright: Didn't want to edit within your userspace, but in regards to the usage of antiaircraft in Oxford English Dictionary and the Merriam-Webster Dictionary and other books, I will mention that the main sources used, the three Whitley books, and Koope and Schmolke, make usage of anti-aircraft, rather than antiaircraft; additionally, Oxford and Merriam Webster are both either British or British owned dictionaries. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

<->To the case in point, when the word antiaircraft is used particularily in connection with guns or armaments the word is unhyphenated in publications authored by Norman Freeman, U.S. Destroyers - 2004 and John C. Reilly, Jr., U.S. Navy Destroyers of World War II - 1983. In the scheme of things the hyphen is insignificant, so I yield to your preference, but without necessarily agreeing with it. Pendright (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iazyges: Supporting - Thank you for your prompt and forthright rsponses. Pendright (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pendright: Thank you for your review! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

fn 9: "Whtiley" is mispelt
Fixed.
Author-link K. Jack Bauer, Norman Friedman, Spencer C. Tucker, Michael J. Whitley, David T. Zabecki
Done.
The ISBNs were inconsistently formatted, so I had the MilHistBot reformat them.
Thank you!
Spot checks: 10, 39, 43, 47 - okay. fn 28: I think this should be pp. 135-136
Done.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:06, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawkeye7: Done all. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:23, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.