Talk:French destroyer L'Audacieux/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Kges1901 (talk · contribs) 23:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
I'll take this one. Kges1901 (talk) 23:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
Lead
- which was tasked to hunt down German commerce raiders and blockade runners --> suggest , tasked with hunting down German commerce raiders and blockade runners
- The purpose of the Force de Raid, the reason for being based at Dakar and the reason behind the transfer to Algeria are not mentioned in the body
- I'll grant you that I didn't explain why it moved to Algeria, but the Dakar move was explained. "Afterwards it was dispersed into smaller groups to search for German commerce raiders and blockade runners.", although I've rephrased to that trim redundant material.
Design and description
- and one member of the class, Le Terrible, set a world record for a ship with a conventional hull that was in excess of 45 knots (83 km/h; 52 mph) --> suggest with one member of the class, Le Terrible, exceeding 45 knots during trials to set a world record for a conventionally-hulled ship
- More pertinent to L'Audacieux is Jordan & Moulin's statement that she and her sisters made 43 knots on trials, although they were much slower in combat due to high speed vibrations
- I gave the trial speed and I think that the vibration problem is better presented in the class article.
- Suggest explaining the abbreviation AA as anti-aircraft
- L'Audacieux had Rateau-Bretagne turbines, so why mention the Parsons turbines
- With her turbines, L'Audacieux had a range of 2,700 nmi per the article, so there shouldn't be a range in the infobox
- and the number of the latter increased to 254 --> , with the number of the latter increasing to 254
- Sailors in infobox but crewmen in body
- Aren't they really synonyms in this context?
- Is the gun turret numbering really relevant when the article doesn't mention individual gun turrets by name
- Seems unnecessary to have dates in the modification section title
- Is it necessary to mention the other members of the class that received enlarged bridge wings? Seems like mentioning all the ships is a detail for the class article.
Construction and career
- 300th anniversary --> tercentenary
- 15 January and 26 February 1937 should be mentioned here not in the next sentence
- all of the Le Fantasques redundant 'all of'
- Force X that was based --> Force X, based
- Convoy KJ 4 seems not notable enough for a redlink
- 7–13 November. The division escorted Strasbourg and the heavy cruiser Algérie back to France on 18 November --> between 7 and 13 November, then escorted Strasbourg and the heavy cruiser Algérie back to France on 18 November
- Don't forget to mention the beginning of 1940; suggest splitting the first paragraph of the WWII section which is overly long compared to the rest of the section
- What did she do between November 1939 and April 1940?
- Not covered in the sources.
- 'People' is too vague - per Jordan & Moulin, the convoys were evacuating personnel (I would assume military personnel) to North Africa
- Link Mers el Kebir attack
- the ship escorted the cruisers that attempted to rendezvous with Strasbourg after she escaped from Mers-el-Kébir and later arrived at Toulon --> the ship escorted the Algiers-based cruisers that failed to rendezvous with Strasbourg, which escaped to Toulon with the aid of details from Jordan & Moulin's Cruiser book, p. 184; we already know that Strasbourg was at Mers-el-Kebir from the preceding sentences
- 4e Division de croiseurs (4th Cruiser Division) Switch the order of the translation and French term to be consistent with the rest of the article
- Mention Bourragué's first name - Célestin
- The date of her sinking is not mentioned in the text; that paragraph is chronologically unclear and should be more detailed as this was probably L'Audacieux's most important action
- Sadly there isn't any more detail available.
- Link de Gaulle
- If you are omitting HMS for Hermes than HMAS isn't necessary for Australia
- destroyed the dock's gate when they evacuated the city --> destroyed the dock's gate during their evacuation of the city
Kges1901 (talk) 23:43, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the thorough review, see if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:33, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
- Passing - All comments addressed. Kges1901 (talk) 23:11, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
