Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yugoslav submarine Nebojša/archive1

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 Graham Beards via FACBot (talk) 06:36, 31 October 2015 [1].

---

Yugoslav submarine Nebojša

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

This article covers one of the first Yugoslav submarines, which was built in the late 20's using parts from cancelled British WWI L-class subs. She evaded capture by the Italians during the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941. She survived as a training boat during the war, and served on in the communist Yugoslav Navy until 1954 when she was struck. She recently successfully went through Milhist A-Class review, and I will be keen to see where further improvements might be found. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. I've looked at the changes made since I reviewed this for A-class. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 00:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Dan. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 04:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Sure, any time. - Dank (push to talk) 01:29, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• No DABs, external links OK.
• Link launched, scrapped, diesel engine.
  • Done.
• L-class submarine that was never built Probably better to say that she was never completed since she was actually laid down in December 1917, much like her sister. Both were cancelled on 1 April 1919. Source is {{colledge}}, p. 192
  • Good point, done.
• [2] is the preeminent source on British subs of this era and should have more details on the late L-class submarines.
  • Nothing that is new specifically about this sub.
• Specify that the 4-inch guns are deck guns.
  • Done.
• where she performed a training role Awkward; howzabout "became or served as a training boat"?
  • This has been fixed as a result of adding some more info.
• Vickers-Armstrong Naval Yard, River Tyne, United Kingdom This reads like an address for a houseboat. Rephrase to say that the yard was in High Walker on the River Tyne and I wouldn't bother giving the country.
  • have made it more like a sentence than an address.
• Why is the construction paragraph covering her propulsion and armament?
  • Have renamed the sections as Design and construction, Service career and Legacy
• they were designed to reach a top speed of 15.7 knots (29.1 km/h; 18.1 mph) under diesel power and 10 knots (19 km/h) on her electric motors Specify that the speed using diesels is on the surface and on the electric motors is submerged both in the infobox and in the main body. Also disagreement with pronouns (their vs her).
  • Fixed.
• Do not force the knot and nautical mile conversions to only output in km. Don't specify any output unit and the template will automatically triple convert to miles and km. Both in the infobox and main body.
  • Done.
• What caliber machinegun?
• Was she fitted with hydrophones or sonar (ASDIC)?
  • Haven't found any thing specifying that. I assume just directional hydrophones, as only a few of the Group III L-Class subs in RN service got ASDIC.
• The Italians had claimed they had sunk all the Yugoslav vessels. This should probably be spliced to the preceding sentence with a "despite" or somesuch.
  • Done.
• Any idea if she was used as a training boat by the Yugoslavs post-war?
  • Yes, have added a bit sourced from a Serbian news site.
• Put Thomas in title case.
  • Done.
• This is awfully sketchy to meet the completeness criteria, especially on the post-war career.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Have added a bit to her post-war info, hope that helps. Here are my edits. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:01, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Yugoslav_submarine_Hrabri.jpg: the current licensing is correct, but for completeness it would be good to indicate why it's PD in the US. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Hi Nikki, I've added {{PD-1996}}. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 13:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments from West Virginian

• Support Peacemaker67, first and foremost, thank you for submitting this article for FAC. I've engaged in a thorough and comprehensive review of this article and I find that it meets Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. I have condensed my comments below. There are some minor details that should be addressed, but they are outside the confines of FA criteria. -- West Virginian (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments by West Virginian (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Lede and overall Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the Yugoslav submarine Nebojša, establishes the submarine's necessary context, and explains why the submarine is otherwise notable. The info box for the submarine is beautifully formatted and its content is sourced within the prose of the text and by the references cited therein. There is one minor issue here, though: Fearless is mentioned as the English translation of the submarine's name, but this is not discussed in the prose. I would include the ship's name translation in the "Description and construction" section. As Nikkimaria already engaged in an image review, I'll refrain from further commentary on the images as they all look good to go and are appropriately licensed with proper captions. The lede is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section. Description and construction As stated above, I would suggest including mention of Fearless as being the submarine's translated name. It should probably also mention in this section that it was in 1927 that the ship was built at the shipyard on the River Tyne. This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section. Service career and Legacy I would suggest using [3] or [4] to archive your online sources, in case they disappear or the web links are modified. These sections are otherwise well-written, consist of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Thanks for the review, WV! Will get right onto those points. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

• Peacemaker67, you're quite welcome! -- West Virginian (talk) 02:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

• All done. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

• Thank you for your timely response Peacemaker67 and once again, congratulations! -- West Virginian (talk) 03:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Support Comments

• I usually prefer to expand abbreviated units on first use (or at least uncommon ones like brake/shaft horsepower)
• ..."made a very good impression..." - on whom? The Maltese? Whatever RN ships were there?
• I wonder if it's worth mentioning that Osvetnik was French-designed? I think it might cause some confusion over the nationality of the boat.
• Same with describing Split as Dalmatian - I doubt many readers will know that that's a region, not a country, or that Dalmatia was then part of Yugoslavia (the point being that Nebojša finally returned to her own country might be lost)
• Rohwer's Chronology of the War at Sea might have some more details on her flight from Yugoslavia in April 1941, which was apparently made in concert with a pair of torpedo boats. The edition in Google Books only offers snippets, and I don't have my copy handy at the moment. I can check it later if you need me to. Parsecboy (talk) 14:34, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
  • All done, Parsecboy. I've added the two MTBs that escaped with her. Thanks for the review. These are my edits. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 00:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
    • Looks good to me now. Great work. Parsecboy (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Support Comments by Dudley

• I am venturing way out of my comfort zone commenting on this article, so excuse my ignorance.
• "She was eventually stricken in 1954" I assume this means stricken as in an admiral struck his flag, but could it be linked to an article clarifying what "stricken" means in naval terminology? Does it just mean taken out of service and laid up?
  • In layman's terms, decommissioned. I've linked it now.
• "her crew might be retrained and used to operate the recently captured German Type VIIC U-boat U-570, but this idea was soon abandoned." Is it known what happened to her crew? Presumably they did not stay on the ship?
  • I haven't found that information, although as she was used as a training boat, the assumption would be that at least part of her crew remained with her.
• Are the names of her commanders and what rank they were not known?
  • I haven't found that information, unfortunately.
• A first rate article. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:16, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review, Dudley Miles, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 01:15, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Sources review

• No spotchecks carried out
• All reference information properly and consistently formatted. The sources are of appropriate quality and reliability. Brianboulton (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks Brian! Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 01:15, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

• 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. Graham Beards (talk) 06:36, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

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