Wikipedia:Peer review/Deutschland-class battleship/archive1

Deutschland-class battleship

I originally wrote this article more than a decade ago, and it passed GA and Milhist A-class review at that time. I have since substantially rewritten it with newer sources and figure it needs a few other sets of eyes to iron out any issues before I send it to FAC. Thanks in advance to anyone who gives the article a look. Parsecboy (talk) 14:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

STANDARD NOTE: for quicker and more responses to pre-FAC peer review requests, please remember to add your PR page to Template:FAC peer review sidebar (this has been done for you). And when you close this peer review, please be sure to remove it from there. Also consider adding the sidebar to your userpage so you can help others by participating in other pre-FAC peer reviews. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Vami_IV

• I repaired a tiny sfn error highlighted by a script, "Dodson 2016, pp. 203–205.", and then noticed "Dodson 2016, p. 203m 205."; was this accidental?
  • Yup, should have been a comma
• though they had stronger armor protection I think there is a better way to phrase this; "protection" is made redundant by "armor". Perhaps though they had thicker armor?
  • Removed
• Near the end of the war the two ships were both sunk. Axe "two" here; it's redundant. You should end up with Both ships were sunk near the end of the war.
  • Works for me
• [...]; the turrets had required heavy support structures, the elimination of which saved weight [...] "heavy" is made redundant here by "weight". I'd go with [...]; the turrets required support structures whose elimination saved weight [...].
  • Done
• Removing the turrets also freed up deck space that could be used to add another pair [...] could be? If that space was used for more guns, it would be better to just say so.
  • Good point
• Deutschland and her sister ship Hannover [...] There is WP:SEAOFBLUE happening here. I advise: Deutschland and Hannover, her sister ship, [...]
  • Generally, my experience with that is two links side by side are fine, but 3 in a row is excessive
• cork cofferdams More SEAOFBLUE here.
  • As above
• [...] though her 88. cm battery [...] This is the only instance of ". cm" in the article. Did you mean 8.8 cm?
  • Yup, good catch. Thanks Vami. Parsecboy (talk) 15:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments from SandyGeorgia

• No punctuation on sentence fragment per MOS:CAPTIONS ... Deutschland-class battleships in line.[a]
  • Good catch
• Check for redundant use of almost-always-redundant also per User:Tony1/How to improve your writing.
  • Trimmed most of these
• Would it be easier on the reader for verifiability to split these citations within the paragraph to the text they apply to?
  • During the summer cruise in July 1914, the fleet remained off Norway owing to the July Crisis that resulted in the start of World War I.[28][32][33][34]
  • In February 1915, Deutschland became the flagship of II Squadron.[28][36][37][38][39]
  • Hannover remained in active service for guard duty in the straits.[19][36][42][43]
    • The issue with these is, those lines or sections refer to the ships collectively, and each volume of Hildebrand covers only one vessel, so we need all of them to cover the material - the bundle of citations in the second and third examples could be moved forward a sentence, but that wouldn't accomplish much.

There is some verbosity, but these may be personal preference:

• The ships closely resembled those of the preceding Braunschweig class, though they had but with stronger armor protection and a rearranged secondary battery.
  • Works for me
• Germany's primary naval formation, through the late 1900s and early 1910s. During this time they conducted a series of training cruises overseas and underwent a heavy annual training schedule. --> Germany's primary naval formation, through the late 1900s and early 1910s, when they were used for training including overseas cruises.
  • Sounds fine to me
• where all five ships saw action, despite their marked inferiority to British dreadnoughts. ... should link to the type of ship, Dreadnought.
  • That's piped earlier as "all-big-gun battleship"

Design

• Deutschland and her sister ship Hannover were designed for use as flagships for the fleet and a squadron, respectively, which required additional accommodation spaces. --> Deutschland was designed for use as a fleet flagship and and her sister ship Hannover as a flagship for a squadron, both of which required additional accommodation spaces.
  • That strikes me as a bit wordier and I'm not sure it's an improvement, but I'm open to being convinced

General characteristics

• The Deutschland-class ships' hulls were built with transverse and longitudinal steel frames. Steel hull plates were riveted to the structure created by the frames. --> Their hulls were built with transverse and longitudinal steel frames, to which steel hull plates were riveted.
  • Sounds good to me
• The hull was split into twelve ... is divided more accurate than split ?
  • Yup

Modifications

• What does "trunked" mean (parenthetical definition or explanation needed)
  • It's a bit jargony (I've only ever seen it used in nautical contexts), and I've been removing it from older articles as I rewrite them, but missed it here.

Service history

• the Canary Islands, and the Azores, Portugal. not sure that Portugal is needed here.
  • That's fair

That's it, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Sandy. Parsecboy (talk) 20:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)