Talk:Canonicus-class monitor

Canonicus-class monitor 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 6, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Canonicus-class monitor was nominated as a Warfare good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 25, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States / American Civil War

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War 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

GA Review

Passed. Hog Farm _Talk 16:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Canonicus-class monitor/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 09:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 19:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this again; my concerns from the prior review have been largely addressed. Hog Farm _Talk 19:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arkansas Post is taking more work than I expected; I might not be able to get to this until this weekend. Hog Farm _Talk 23:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Roberts 2002, pp. 46–147." - you're wanting p. 47 for the end of the range, not p. 147 right?
- Yes. Fixed.
The article body says Wyandotte had a beam of 43' 5", but the infobox has 43' even?
- Amended for consistency.
"The contracts were issued in September 1862, and the yards incentivised to complete quickly by being given a $100 bonus for each day completed ahead of schedule and a similar penalty for each day late" - this should be $500 per the cited source (West p. 13) and Roberts p. 56
- Good spot.
"As part of this deployment, Tecumseh sank four hulks and a schooner." - the DANFS notes that this was a Union effort to block the channel; this should be clarified in the text so that this isn't assumed to be an action against enemy vessels
- Added.
"On 18 February, Canonicus captured the steamer Deer, the only member of the class to do so" - this needs to be rephrased somewhat. The intended meaning is that Canonicus was the only ship of the class to capture a prize, but as it is written right now, it implies that Canonicus was the only ship to capture the Deer.
- Good point. Clarified.
Silverstone 1984 and Smithwreck are listed as sources but are not used; I would recommend removal or moving to further reading, the latter only if they have a significant connection to the article subject.
- Good spot. A relevant fact has been added from one and the other removed.

This is in much better shape than it was the last time; good work here. Hog Farm _Talk 23:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: Thank you for your kind comments. I believe all the amendments you noted are made. I have also taken the opportunity to remove the duplicate links that I previously missed and made some other small changes as a general tidy up. Please tell me if there ia anything else you would like changed. simongraham (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.