Wikipedia:Peer review/Baragoola/archive1

Baragoola

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I believe that with up bit of assistance I can increase the assessment level of it.

Thanks, Blacklord (talk) 06:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments by Peripitus

Like the article, and the subject. I'm very pleased that it's still around and being cared for. There is some more material I'd like to see.

A deck/profile plan would be great expecially to highlight the text in the internal layout section. The original plans seem to be on display in the boat and, given their age, will be in the public domain.
Information on the heritage listing/delisting (see http://www.smh.com.au/national/knackers-yard-looms-for-manlys-historic-ferry-20090621-cslm.html)
There is more material at http://www.baragoola.com.au/ship.php that should be included.

There are some sources of additional, or more complete, information.

heritage nsw - http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/07_subnav_01_2.cfm?itemid=5045045
this SMH article - http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/17/1042520776848.html
information on the vessel from shipbuilding directories and other books, like: International shipping & shipbuilding directory, 1974; Sydney since the twenties, 1978; Sydney by ferry & foot, 1989; Last ferry to manley, 1984; Manly and Pittwater: its beauty and progress, 1948. I've always found that books and newspapers are indispensible for subjects of this age.
there are mentions of the collisions/incidents in issues of "The Nautical magazine" around the same time as the incidents.
you mention "three Scottish steamers" but don't name them until later nor give much information on them so the two sentences mentioning them seem out of place
I'd like to see more on her construction and physical structure. Was the passenger capacity all seated, all standing or a combination.

Take note not to cut and paste material - it needs to be substantively original work. I can see that:

Baragoola was arguably the most popular Manly ferry, this was evidenced by the massive turnout for her farewell trip in 1983 (from baragoola.com.au) and
Baragoola ... was regarded as the most popular Manly ferry, this was shown by the large number of people who turned out for her farewell trip in 1983 ... (from the article)

are rather too similar and the change from "was arguably" to "was regarded" is a significant change in meaning.

There are some awkwardly phrased sections and sentences, and some parts that need explaining.

What is a 7SKM diesel electric engine ? (I know it's an engine model but this needs explaining if it's mentioned)
see what changes I've made to the Concept and construction section. I've removed the abbrevated forms of Mort's and the Manley company as these are the first time they're mentioned in the main article, and tried to make it flow in a more prose style.
Avoid the repeated in <date> something happened beginning to sentences (see "Incidents in service" and following). They tend to read as more of a dot-point list rather than prose.
Typical of all Manly ferries constructed until 1938, Baragoola's public spaces are laid out to a specific format..... do you mean a "common format" ?
"Baragoola (aboriginal for Flood Tide)" - when mentioning this it is best to mention the aboriginal tribe and/or language.
when did she change from SS to MV ? was it 1961 at the relaunch ?

an enjoyable read - keep up the good work. Peripitus (Talk) 11:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Peripitus, I'll make the changes you recommended. Blacklord (Talk)