HMS Racoon (1910) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 27, 2024. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Maritime / British / European / World War I This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  Maritime warfare task force British military history task force European military history task force World War I task force Ships This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Racoon (1910)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 02:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll get to this shortly--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Images appropriately licensed
• In the lede link to the situation in Albania and Ottoman
  • Happy to link. What would you suggest?
• You've handled Raccoon's loss very oddly throughout the article. Just say that she was wrecked when she ran aground; I don't know why you danced around this unless your sources do the same.
  • The sources I have say that the destroyer was lost in a snowstorm, but provide little additional detail. Do you have a source that states that the vessel ran aground?
• Add something about why the Beagle's were regrouped into the G class.
  • Amplified.
• In the infobox, move the boilers into the power field as that supposed to cover the ship source of power and its rating
  • Moved.
• No need to add exact model designations or manufacturer in the infobox
  • Removed.
• Abbreviate nautical miles in the infobox and tell the reader what a QF 12 pounder is, along with its actual bore diameter.
  • Abbreviated. Added diameter.
• be consistent about the unit of power: hp or shp? And spell it out in the main body
  • Changed for consistency and expanded in the body.
• It's pretty obvious that you've made an effort to avoid using pronouns for the ship in the article; sometimes to the detriment of how well the text reads. I don't care which one you pick, but I suggest you use them in at least a few places.
  • I am not sure which of the GA criteria this relates to, but am happy for suggestions.
    • It's outside the GA criteria, but it's just a suggestion on readability. Would you like for me to point out examples so you can reword them outside this review?
      • That sounds a very reasonable plan. There seems to be disagreement amongst some editors about the "right" pronouns, despite WP:SHIPPRONOUNS, so I generally avoid introducing them to articles like this.
• Do you know when she returned home before the war or when she went back to the Mediterranean?
  • The sources are not clear.
• Is the date of 3 August correct? Shouldn't that be after the Goeben and Breslau found refuge in Turkish waters?
  • Yes; it was 13 August.
• "Duties varied" isn't a complete sentence. I suggest that it be folded into the next sentence which is rather awkward
  • Combined.
• Give the full name of the strait on first reference..
  • Added.
• What do you mean "for the first time since 1650"? Add a link to this event because I'm not sure what you're referring to.
  • Clarified.
• What did she do during 1916?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I have added what I have; it is quite generic, although it does connect to the following year.

@Sturmvogel 66: Thank you for your comments and edits. Please tell me if there is anything else. simongraham (talk) 14:35, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Is there an article on the 1650 incident so you can add a link to it?
  • I believe it was part of the Creten War but there is no explicit mention in the relevant article. I cannot see an explicit mention of an attack on Ottoman fortifications from the sea but my reading of the article is that there was conflict in the Dardanelles for much of the period before and after 1650. Please do add a link if you feel that is sufficient.
    • I think that it would probably be best to delete that claim since we can't independently verify ourselves.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:01, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Removed.
• British Vessels Lost at Sea 191-18 and 1939-45 says "wrecked on Irish coast". If you like I can add the citation to the article for you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Sturmvogel 66: Thank you. Please do add the source and amend the relevant sections as I do not have that article. simongraham (talk) 19:31, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Done, though you might want to check the syntax as I'm not fully conversant with the sfn format.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:01, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Thank you. That looks as if that works.
  • @Sturmvogel 66: I believe that should be everything. Thank you for your work on this. simongraham (talk) 05:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • You forgot to clarify that she ran aground.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 10:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @Sturmvogel 66: Sorry. I don't have the book you mentioned. If you have access to it, would be prepared to do so and feel it would be useful, I would appreciate it if you could update the text so that it aligns with the source. simongraham (talk) 16:02, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Done. BTW there's a question for you on my talk page.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]