Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Spanish battleship Alfonso XIII

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article promoted by Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 07:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list

Spanish battleship Alfonso XIII

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk)

Spanish battleship Alfonso XIII (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/Spanish battleship Alfonso XIII/archive1

Nobody expects the Spanish Inqui... a Spanish warship at A-class review! Alfonso XIII, later renamed España, was one of three dreadnought battleships built for the Spanish Navy in the early 1910s. She had a fairly interesting career, ending up in the Nationalist fleet during the Spanish Civil War and ultimately being accidentally sunk by a Nationalist mine. Thanks to all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 15:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Support from Nick-D

Support It's good to see a change from the usual focus on the main battleship fleets. I think that the A-class criteria are met, but would like to offer the following comments to assist with FAC preperations:

Believe me, it can get boring writing about the same couple of fleets over and over - if I had the sources, I'd do more with minor navies, but they're generally poorly documented, and Ed went and did the South American battleships! Luckily, I was able to get all three of the Spanish battleships into good shape, so we can have a change of pace every now and then.

• "The ship's landing party went ashore to guard a rail line and several mines and in a clash with revolutionaries, one man from the ship's crew was killed and several were injured, while twenty-two revolutionaries were arrested and held aboard the ship." - I'd suggest splitting this into two sentences
  • Good idea
• "Alfonso XIII again helped to suppress revolutionary activities" - was this a revolution? The stub on the strike note that it led to the adoption of an eight hour day in Spain, which is far from a radical reform (not sure what the history is, but there's a risk here of accidentally legitimising attempts to use the armed forces to suppress trade union/workers rights activities) Nick-D (talk) 10:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
  • I don't know exactly, either - the passage characterizes the 1917 strike as one "with pronounced revolutionary overtones", but the 1919 strike simply as "another outburst of industrial unrest". Given what I do know about the political situation in Spain in the early 20th century, I don't know that it'd be unreasonable to think the latter strike had a similar segment of revolutionaries involved, but it might be safer to just say "...helped to suppress striking workers in early 1919..." Thanks Nick. Parsecboy (talk) 12:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

• The engines were rated at 15,500 shaft horsepower (11,600 kW) Link kW.
  • Done

• Maybe in the body too? Also link knots and calibre in the infobox too. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• Done

• Where's the weight of the ship in the body?
  • Whoops, good catch! (I've added it to the others too)
• superfiring turrets, as was done in the South Carolinas Mention here that the South Carolinas battleships were.
  • Good idea
• After Italy, a member of the Triple Alliance, declared neutrality Pipe Italy to the Kingdom of Italy.
  • Done
• King Alfonso XIII was aboard his yacht Giralda No link for Giralda?
  • No, unfortunately
• United States and commissioned into the US Navy Link US Navy.
  • Done
• the ship visited Lisbon, Portugal during ceremonies held to commemorate the country's soldiers who had been killed during World War I What did she do between the Rif War and this event?
  • Nothing - Rodríguez González doesn't mention anything, and as far as I can tell, the operations before July 1921 were limited to the Spanish Army
• advocated rebuilding the ships into analogues to the German Deutschland-class cruisers British analogues?
  • No, they'd have remained Spanish

• No I mean, shouldn't it be analog?

• Both variants are commonly used in the US (to my mind, I'd use "analog" for a clock but "analogue" in this context, but that might just be my own idiosyncrasy)

• @Parsecboy: By Ngram analog is more popular rather than analogue. However Merriam-Webster you know the biggest (and oldest) American dictionary says it's "chiefly British spelling of ANALOG" so I believe it's fine but to be sure because should we not use only the most common term in an English dialect?

• Any update Parsecboy?

• Not a hill I'm going to die on ;) Parsecboy (talk) 22:04, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

• After a brief period of uncertainty, Lieutenant Commander Gabriel Rozas Link both Gabriel Rozas and lieutenant itself.
  • Linked the rank, but I don't know that he's notable
• operational, and she carried only twelve of her 4-inch guns Imperial unit here while the rest of the article uses metric?
  • Fixed
• Link Royal Navy.
  • Done

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks CPA. Parsecboy (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Update: I don't really have the time to continue this. 'Cause of our lockdown, school and real life issues I won't be that much online for a week or longer. :/ Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 22:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Source review - pass

G'day, looks pretty good to me from a sourcing perspective. I have a few minor comments: AustralianRupert (talk) 04:04, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

• suggest adding hyphens to he ISBN for the Fernández work for consistency
  • Done
• suggest adding a translation for the title of the Moreno work
  • Done - but I'd be happy for a Spanish speaker to check Google Translate's work
• publisher and location for the Moreno work?
  • Done
• page range for Rodriguez's chapter in Taylor?
  • Added
• probably don't need "Ltd" for the Gibbons and Lyon works in the Further reading section
  • Removed
• endash for the title of the Gardiner work?
  • Done
• add "|language=Spanish" for the Moreno source?
  • Done
• there are no dup links or dab links (no action required)
• the citations appear to be consistently formatted (no action required)
• English language sources seem reliable to me based on authors, publishers and/or citations from other reliable sources; AGF on non-English language sources (no action required)
• suggest adding alt text to the images: [1]
• nothing much showed up in terms of additional sources that I could see based on my Google Books search (although for FAC, it may pay to consult a broader database, of course)

Thanks AR. Parsecboy (talk) 10:42, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Image review - pass

"File:Frente del Norte - Spanish Civil War (March-Sept 1937).svg" needs a source. Ie the book, article or map from which the information in the image is drawn.

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Added the source used per the uploader. Thanks Gog. Parsecboy (talk) 16:38, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by PM

A nice change, and the Spanish Civil War stuff is interesting. I know how hard minor navies can be... A few comments:

• suggest "she received major damage when she accidentally struck a mine that had been laid by a Nationalist minelayer."
  • Yeah, that sounds better
• "awarded to the Spanish firm Spanish"
  • Whoops!
• the deck armor conversion doesn't match between infobox and body
  • Fixed
• suggest "The destroyer Velasco also defected to the Nationalist coupside"
  • Done
• no idea of the tonnage of SS Mar Báltico?
  • @DagosNavy: added that line back in 2010, maybe he can answer that for us?
• "AtBy around 08:30, España's crew"
  • Done
• duplication: "A fourth man died of his wounds aboard Velasco" and "A fourth man died while Velasco was en route to Ferrol"
  • Removed the second one

That's all I could find. Nice job. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks PM. Parsecboy (talk) 14:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The tonnage is a very minor bit of detail, so supporting as is. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.