Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battleship: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
[[Battleship]]: furhter comment
[[Battleship]]: Signing for Tony1. Indenting inserted comments by nominator further, for, I hope, greater clarity.
Line 137:
 
*'''Oppose'''. I think, in the light of Sandy's comment, that the size should be reduced - probably by at least 10 Kb. This should be done by weeding out redundant wording and by rationalising larger portions of text. In particular, there are problems in the prose. Here are random examples from the lead that indicate the need for a thorough run-through by a copy-editor who's relatively unfamiliar with the text. Don't just fix these examples.
:::Well, let's hope there's such a copy-editor who's going to come along and do so (and for all the other FAs where a near-identical comment has been left by this user). [[User:The Land|The Land]] 09:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
**"better-armed and better-armored than cruisers and destroyers" - make it "better armed and armored than cruisers and destroyers".
**"Battleships have evolved a great deal over time" - spot the two redundant words.
Line 144:
**"In 1905 HMS Dreadnought heralded a revolution in battleship design, and for many years modern battleships were referred to as dreadnoughts." You need to add "since that time,".
**"In 1905 HMS Dreadnought heralded a revolution in battleship design, and for many years modern battleships were referred to as dreadnoughts." But they no longer do? This brings up a larger problem in the lead: it appears to be a potted history, whereas many readers will expect more prominent reference to battleships as they are now.
:::Battleships 'as they are now' means trivia about museum ships. The article treats battleships as history, because they ''are'' history. [[User:The Land|The Land]] 08:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
**"The global arms race in battleship construction in the early 1900s was a significant factor in the origins of the First World War, which saw a clash of huge battlefleets at the Battle of Jutland." Only in the origins of the war, and not its conduct/outcome?
::{{unsigned|Tony1}} [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 09:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC).
:::This is an arguable point - one could write a Ph.D. on whether battleships were more important in causing WWI or concluding it. [[User:The Land|The Land]] 08:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)