687:
My sources don't deal with this, but German submarines were not very successful in attacking Allied warships unless they laid in wait outside a port or were escorting slower merchantmen. This was, I expect, because warships typically travelled at speeds that the submarines couldn't match, even on the
709:
The statement in the lead that "By 1942, the Royal Navy was very short of aircraft carriers and Argus was pressed into front-line service despite her lack of speed and armament." isn't directly supported by material in the body of the article (though I believe that it's correct)
419:"the ship was heavily involved for several years in the development of the optimum design for other aircraft carriers, various types of arresting gear and general procedures needed to operate a number of aircraft in concert, and fleet cooperation" - this is a bit of a mouthful
475:"As it was originally designed for an ocean liner, her hull was built to minimise rolling and most of the changes made to the ship had added weights high in the ship, thus raising her centre of gravity." - this is a bit unclear. Splitting it into two sentences might help.
683:
It's interesting that this ship successfully operated in some of the most submarine-infested waters in the
Atlantic during 1940 to 1942. Can anything be said about how she escaped without (apparently) being attacked? - was she heavily escorted, or fast, or just lucky?
504:"The same month, the ship was used to evaluate the effects of an island" - this doesn't seem quite right; how about "The same month, the ship was used in trials to evaluate the effects which an island superstructure would have on flying operations" or similar?
177:
was the first aircraft carrier with a full-length flight deck. Too slow to keep up with the fleet and too small to carry many aircraft, she spent much of her career on secondary duties like deck-landing training and as an aircraft ferry.
427:"Existing carriers could launch wheeled aircraft, but had no way to recover them" - can you briefly describe the design of these ships? (I presume that they had a flying off ramp, but nothing which resembled a flight deck)
183:
117:
212:
No source spotcheck on my part but I'm yet to see any serious concerns in that regard in one of Storm's articles so up to other reviewers/delegates to determine if they need to see one. Cheers,
675:"On her return to the United Kingdom she began a lengthy refit." - a refit which lasted no more than two months can't really be called 'lengthy' (a 'lengthy' refit can last for years)
766:
283:
693:"When Eagle flew off seven more Spitfires whilst Argus flew 10 Fulmars and two Sea Hurricanes of 807 Squadron covered the operation from Argus." - this is rather repetitive
209:
Reviewed and copyedited at MilHist A-Class Review earlier in the year and was happy with referencing, structure, prose, coverage and images (though alt text could be added).
40:
182:
was one of only two out of seven
British pre-war carriers to survive World War II, although she was scrapped shortly afterwards. This article had a MilHist
545:
Not many readers will be aware of the systems of classifications included in the
Washington Treaty, so material to clarify this would be helpful to them.
438:
I'm not sure what you're concerned about here; Beardmore was the builder of the Conte Rosso and physically converted her into an aircraft carrier.
30:
17:
619:"and New Zealander troops" - should read "and New Zealand troops" ('New Zealander' is the singular form, and isn't very common these days)
316:
88:
83:
92:
133:
539:"Washington Naval Treaty classified her as experimental" - should 'ship' or 'aircraft carrier' be added at the end of this wording?
435:"and Beardmore began work on converting the ship" - should this refer to Beardmore developing plans for the conversion of the ship?
377:
Consider disambiguating the Brown sources by date rather than first name, as you use a very similar format for multi-author cites
75:
774:
753:
733:
719:
656:
642:
608:
594:
568:
554:
532:
493:
464:
450:
403:
389:
356:
342:
328:
310:
295:
268:
221:
195:
165:
138:
579:"In February 1936, it was decided to refit the ship as a Queen Bee tender" - you should note here what this involved
236:
582:
Sources don't specify, although I suspect that this really only involved radio equipment to guide the drones.
729:
652:
604:
564:
528:
460:
399:
338:
306:
191:
161:
441:
Read literally, the current wording states that
Beardmore did all the physical work on the ship himself.
762:
667:"Condors that patrolled the Bay of Biscay and the Western Atlantic" - this should be 'eastern Atlantic'
352:
324:
301:
You'd have to ask the uploader. The
Seafire wasn't deployed until 1942, though. Thanks for the review.--
291:
264:
385:
79:
239:- GDR is not the author but original uploader. Author should be noted as an unnamed Navy personnel.
725:
648:
600:
585:
I'd suggest using the wording 'a tender for Queen Bee target drones' or similar to clarify this.
560:
524:
456:
395:
334:
302:
217:
187:
157:
542:
Seems kind of redundant as the reader already knows that she's a ship and an aircraft carrier.
333:
I see no need to rename the file since I've changed the dates in the template to 1942-1944.--
749:
715:
638:
590:
550:
489:
446:
348:
320:
287:
260:
512:
It should be noted that the ship was commissioned too late to play any part in World War I
633:
Still confusing I'm afraid (the ship couldn't make space; this was the role of her crew).
381:
249:
71:
64:
53:
724:
An indirect reference added after Ark Royal was sunk. Thanks for your thorough review.--
770:
627:"space was made to land the Swordfish to load the torpedoes" - this is a bit awkward
213:
186:
back in
February and shouldn't require much work to bring it up to FA standards.--
109:
745:
711:
634:
586:
546:
485:
442:
478:
I'm going to have to look at my source again to see if I can clarify this.
769:
are my edits. (Edits may take days to show up on that page.) - Dank (
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
286:- I don't see the year in the source. Where does this come from? —
259:
In the information template (i.e. under "description"). —
143:
105:
101:
97:
57:
317:
File:Aircraft in hangar of HMS Argus (I49) c1942-1944
284:
File:Aircraft in hangar of HMS Argus (I49) c1942.jpg
118:
Featured article candidates/HMS Argus (I49)/archive1
173:Converted from an ocean liner during World War I,
784:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
41:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured article candidates
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
790:No further edits should be made to this page.
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
520:"Argus was inclined" - what does this mean?
256:What date parameter are you talking about?
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured article candidates
394:Both done. Thanks for checking them out.--
122:
125:
115:
252:- Date should be in the date parameter
744:My comments have now been addressed.
7:
701:Should Operation Harpoon be linked?
24:
206:No dab or external link issues.
1:
775:05:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
754:07:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
734:03:43, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
657:16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
643:05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
609:16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
595:05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
569:16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
555:05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
494:05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
465:16:41, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
451:05:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
720:09:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
533:16:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
404:02:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
390:02:35, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
357:23:58, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
343:23:48, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
329:23:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
311:23:11, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
296:22:50, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
269:23:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
222:02:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
196:16:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
166:16:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
31:featured article nomination
807:
315:If so, perhaps retitle to
237:File:HMS Argus (1917).jpg
787:Please do not modify it.
56:19:10, 14 November 2012
36:Please do not modify it.
630:How does it read now?
481:How does it read now?
373:- spotchecks not done
523:Linked. More later.--
380:FN17: why the date?
763:standard disclaimer
169:
151:
150:
798:
789:
154:
123:
113:
95:
48:The article was
38:
806:
805:
801:
800:
799:
797:
796:
795:
794:
785:
347:Fair enough. —
250:File:H63028.jpg
86:
72:HMS Argus (I49)
70:
68:
65:HMS Argus (I49)
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
804:
802:
793:
792:
779:
739:
738:
737:
736:
707:
706:
705:
699:
698:
697:
691:
690:
689:
681:
680:
679:
673:
672:
671:
665:
664:
663:
662:
661:
660:
659:
625:
624:
623:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
577:
576:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
537:
536:
535:
518:
517:
516:
510:
509:
508:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
473:
472:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
433:
432:
431:
425:
424:
423:
409:
408:
407:
406:
378:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
359:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
246:
245:
244:
232:
231:
229:
225:
224:
210:
207:
184:A-class review
171:
170:
156:Nominator(s):
149:
148:
147:
146:
144:External links
141:
136:
128:
127:
121:
120:
67:
62:
61:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
803:
791:
788:
782:
781:
780:
777:
776:
772:
768:
764:
761:on prose per
760:
756:
755:
751:
747:
743:
735:
731:
727:
726:Sturmvogel 66
723:
722:
721:
717:
713:
708:
703:
702:
700:
695:
694:
692:
686:
685:
682:
677:
676:
674:
669:
668:
666:
658:
654:
650:
649:Sturmvogel 66
646:
645:
644:
640:
636:
632:
631:
629:
628:
626:
621:
620:
618:
610:
606:
602:
601:Sturmvogel 66
598:
597:
596:
592:
588:
584:
583:
581:
580:
578:
570:
566:
562:
561:Sturmvogel 66
558:
557:
556:
552:
548:
544:
543:
541:
540:
538:
534:
530:
526:
525:Sturmvogel 66
522:
521:
519:
514:
513:
511:
506:
505:
503:
495:
491:
487:
484:That's good.
483:
482:
480:
479:
477:
476:
474:
466:
462:
458:
457:Sturmvogel 66
454:
453:
452:
448:
444:
440:
439:
437:
436:
434:
429:
428:
426:
421:
420:
418:
417:
416:
415:
414:
405:
401:
397:
396:Sturmvogel 66
393:
392:
391:
387:
383:
379:
376:
375:
374:
372:
371:Source review
358:
354:
350:
346:
345:
344:
340:
336:
335:Sturmvogel 66
332:
331:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
313:
312:
308:
304:
303:Sturmvogel 66
300:
299:
298:
297:
293:
289:
285:
281:
272:
271:
270:
266:
262:
258:
257:
255:
254:
253:
251:
247:
242:
241:
240:
238:
234:
233:
230:
227:
226:
223:
219:
215:
211:
208:
205:
204:
203:
202:
198:
197:
193:
189:
188:Sturmvogel 66
185:
181:
176:
168:
167:
163:
159:
158:Sturmvogel 66
153:
152:
145:
142:
140:
137:
135:
132:
131:
130:
129:
124:
119:
116:
114:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
66:
63:
60:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
786:
783:
778:
771:push to talk
758:
757:
741:
740:
599:Good idea.--
455:Clarified.--
412:
411:
410:
370:
369:
282:
248:
235:
228:Image review
200:
199:
179:
174:
172:
155:
139:Citation bot
69:
49:
47:
35:
28:
647:Reworded.--
349:Crisco 1492
321:Crisco 1492
288:Crisco 1492
261:Crisco 1492
696:Rewritten.
507:Good idea.
430:Clarified.
382:Nikkimaria
54:GrahamColm
422:Reworded.
688:surface.
413:Comments
214:Ian Rose
134:Analysis
50:promoted
759:Support
742:Support
678:Agreed.
670:Indeed.
559:Done.--
201:Support
126:Toolbox
89:protect
84:history
746:Nick-D
712:Nick-D
635:Nick-D
587:Nick-D
547:Nick-D
486:Nick-D
443:Nick-D
93:delete
767:These
704:Done.
622:Done.
515:Done.
273:Done.
243:Done.
180:Argus
175:Argus
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
750:talk
730:talk
716:talk
653:talk
639:talk
605:talk
591:talk
565:talk
551:talk
529:talk
490:talk
461:talk
447:talk
400:talk
386:talk
353:talk
339:talk
325:talk
319:? —
307:talk
292:talk
265:talk
218:talk
192:talk
162:talk
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
52:by
773:)
765:.
752:)
732:)
718:)
655:)
641:)
607:)
593:)
567:)
553:)
531:)
492:)
463:)
449:)
402:)
388:)
355:)
341:)
327:)
309:)
294:)
267:)
220:)
194:)
164:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
59:.
33:.
748:(
728:(
714:(
651:(
637:(
603:(
589:(
563:(
549:(
527:(
488:(
459:(
445:(
398:(
384:(
351:(
337:(
323:(
305:(
290:(
263:(
216:(
190:(
160:(
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.