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 Ian Rose 10:01, 14 December 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

SMS Schleswig-Holstein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/SMS Schleswig-Holstein/archive1

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 21:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of my German battleship articles, this is the first pre-dreadnought in the series to appear at FAC. Schleswig-Holstein holds the dubious distinction of firing the first shots of World War II when she opened fire on the Polish forces at Westerplatte early on the morning of 1 September 1939. This article was mostly written back in 2010 when it passed a GA review, and then was reviewed at Milhist's A-class review this past March. I look forward to working with reviewers to ensure this article meets or exceeds the standards for Wikipedia's best work. Thanks in advance to all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 21:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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) 21:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

• Dreadnought didn't really affect the status of cruisers and smaller ships. Suggest changing the ref to battleships of the German Navy.
• Hyphenate second most and port side.
• Link casemates, all of the guns in the main body, torpedo tubes, point
• submerged in the hull reads oddly. Suggest "below the waterline" or somesuch.
• which the II Battle Squadron rejoined the fleet. The main battle fleet covered This transition was a little abrupt. I'd suggest something like the squadron assisted in covering the battlecruisers along with the rest of the main fleet or somesuch.
• Images are appropriately licensed.
• No DABs or problems with external links.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:51, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should all be taken care of. Thanks for the review, Sturm. Parsecboy (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good to go, don't forget to respond to my last comment on Asahi.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

• Source for normal displacement?
• Speed and range differ between infobox and text
• FN19, 38, 41, 42, 43, 50, 54: page formatting
• No citations to Koop & Schmolke
• Be consistent in whether you include locations for books. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:38, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should all be taken care of, thanks Nikki. Parsecboy (talk) 18:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport I had reviewed this at Milhist A-class and the article looks in good shape. The ISBN number for Hildebrand, Röhr and Steinmetz is wrong. MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:09, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

fixed it myself MisterBee1966 (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks MisterBee - I had missed this comment when ÄDA commented just after yours. Parsecboy (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I would love to support the article as it is in general well written and sufficiently sourced. My only concern is the single paragraph on Schleswig-Holstein's action in Danzig in September 1939. While there is a blow-to-blow account of Schleswig-Holstein's 'five minutes' at Jutland, the first shots of World War II are merely mentioned in passing. I would suspect, there is more to that part of her history. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 18:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. I've added a few more details, but I'll have to see what else I can dig up. Parsecboy (talk) 10:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My interests lie far from anything like warships—my comments will likely seem comical.

• It appears that the article is in US English. Don't Americans insist on MONTH DAY, YEAR dates? Not that I'd raise a fuss about it.
  • I figured that since it was a European warship, DMY would make more sense.
    • Won't keep me up at night. MDY is a plague. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• it would be nice to have a pronunciation guide for "Schleswig-Holstein"
  • Cribbed it from Schleswig-Holstein.
• relegated to guard duties: is there some reason "duties" is in plural?
  • Good point - fixed.
• and up to 14,218 metric tons (13,993 long tons; 15,673 short tons) at combat loading.: this lay editor doesn't understand the phrase "at combat loading"—can the phrase be linked or reworded?
  • Linked to Displacement_(ship)#Full_or_deep_load_or_loaded_displacement
• She was equipped with three-shaft triple expansion engines: how many engines?
  • Simplified to "three triple expansion engines" - that can be unclear to you landlubbers ;)
• while they bombarded Scarborough, Hartlepool, and Whitby: Jesus, it sounds like it was about to attack Toronto!
• he broke off the engagement and turned for home: or "turned <<the ship|??>> for home"?
  • How about "turned the fleet for home"?
    • Sounds good to me. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• During the "Run to the North,": kick that comma out of the quotemarks
  • Fixed.
• if Scheer ordered an immediate turn towards Germany, he would have to sacrifice: "if Scheer had ordered an immediate turn towards Germany, he would have had to sacrifice"?
  • Fixed.
• Indeed, the visibility was so bad,: I'm not sure if "indeed" falls under WP:EDITORIAL or not, but either way I don't think it's necessary here.
  • Alright.
• the fleet reformed for the night: maybe "re-formed" would make it clear that the fleet didn't realize the error of their ways and decided to make a new start
  • Good point.
• Thereafter, the ship was used as a target for U-boats,: this makes it sound like they torpedoed the bejeezus out of it, and then continued to use it after...? Could this be clarified somehow? It's left me scratching my head.
  • Presumably they used torpedoes without warheads, but the source doesn't say. Normally, live-fire targets are filled with cork and whatnot to keep them afloat, and most of the equipment is cut away (see for instance what happened to SMS Hessen).
    • If the source doesn't say I guess there isn't a lot you can do about it ... if you ever come across a source that explains this kind of thing, you might want to come back and throw it into a footnote or something. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• in the Mediterranean on 22 to 30 May ... with Elsass on 1 to 7 June ...to Vigo from 12 to 14 June: with "on", I think the dates should be endashed; is there any reason you use "on" for the first to and "from" with the last one? I don't think it's actually a problem, but ...
  • "From" is probably better."
• he ship was moored close to the Polish fortress at Westerplatte; at 04:47 on 1 September,: I'm not sure what purpose the semicolon is serving here
  • Reworded to drop the semi-colon.
• A force of German marines was landed to take the fortress: I'd drop the passive
  • Done
• and in April 1940, invaded Denmark.: I'd drop the comma (actually a lot of commas, but this one bugs me most)
  • Fixed.
• ship was now permanently disabled,: I think you can drop the "now"
  • Ok.

———Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the article, it was very helpful. Parsecboy (talk) 10:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose. Looks great to me. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 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. Ian Rose (talk) 13:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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