Talk:Flight deck cruiser

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Flight deck cruiser article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Flight deck cruiser 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 7, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 13, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that one design for a Flight deck cruiser was described as a cross between a Brooklyn-class light cruiser and the aircraft carrier USS Wasp?

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / North America / United States

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:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history 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

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Flight deck cruiser/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Thurgate (talk) 23:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
prose: (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

1. designed by the United States Navy during the period between. Suggest - A comma after Navy

I've tweaked it in a slightly different matter, adding "proposed" (since none were built) before "type of warship" and putting the comma there. Doe that work?

2. Several designs were proposed for an ship carrying both aircraft. Suggest - changing an to a

Done.

3. a secondary dual purpose armament of eight 5-inch (130 mm) guns also being carried. Suggest - a secondary dual purpose armament of eight 5-inch (130 mm) guns where also carried.

Reworded the whole sentence entirely to be a bit more clear on the roles (i.e. what "dual purpose" means) and comparing to conventional light cruisers of the time. Better?

4. rendered the flight-deck cruiser concept moot. Might just be me, but could you re-word moot.

I've rewritten that sentence entirely, and also added a bit at the end about the proposed Iowa-class conversions that added a flight deck.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Let me know if anything else is needed. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:19, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. Passed Thurgate (talk) 23:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flight deck cruiser. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090915193947/http://members.fortunecity.com/infinitywanderers/tarrantry/menu01.html to http://members.fortunecity.com/infinitywanderers/tarrantry/menu01.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:08, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]