221:'s comments above. I would also add that depending so heavily on a single source, in this case batfish.com, makes it difficult to avoid copyright violations and plagiarism. As a single case in point, the batfish.com subsection "Post-War History" begins: "After arriving in San Francisco on September 9, 1945, Batfish then went into the Mare Island Shipyard for 'inactive overhaul', to prepare her for peacetime service." The second sentence of the existing Knowledge (XXG) article's subsection "1946-1952" says: "After arriving in San Francisco the Batfish was sent to Mare Island Navy Yard for inactive overhaul to prepare the ship for her peacetime service." Although not exactly identical, the Knowledge (XXG) sentence too closely imitates the source. Just spot-checking, I see other sentences that either copy or come close to copying the sentences of the source. As you do more research and improve the article, please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see
279:
It would be better to add the technical detail to the body of the article and cite it there (probably as part of the "Construction and commissioning" section), instead of citing it in the infobox. You could probably add a bit of background on the class here as well. See the "Design and construction"
275:
The lead section needs to be expanded to be a general overview of the article: a couple of paragraphs total covering the most important points (when was she built/enter service, highlights of her career, when did she decommission, how did she end up a museum ship...both the planning and execution,
153:
I've listed this article for peer review because Ive done some work on this subject and have added more information. And I would like another set of eyes to have a look to find anything and everything that needs to be fixed. My plan is to push this to Good
Article status so anything can help.
294:
links in the "References" section, and use these as a starting point to expand and cite the article. A greater variety of sources overall (both online and dead-tree) is also something to investigate, particularly if you plan to take this article to a promotion venue like GA.
268:
I've given the article a copyedit. In particular, the museum ship sections were very heavy on wordiness and detail, so I've tried to cut a bit of the excessive detail out. Feel free to re-add important details I've inadvertantly
240:
Im going to do a rewrite as soon as I have time and the batfish.com source will at some point be replaced as ive got other sources that back that info up I just dont have time write hints why i used the batfish one in the first
202:
DANFS is often quite good, and it's allowed, but battleship articles on
Knowledge (XXG) are generally of a high enough quality that we don't need to be copying our text from someone else's webpage. - Dank
191:
I often want to use military fansites of various ships and units myself; they're loaded with information, very accessible, and generally accurate. But "generally accurate" isn't the same thing as a
342:
More detail about the museum post-opening is required. Is it still open as of 2011, and what is its current status? Have there been any major events/incidents since the 1973 opening? Has
222:
126:
290:
More detail on the submarine's operational history (in particular her WWII and Korea wartime operations) would be good, if possible. Have a look at the two
291:
76:
122:
195:, and I'm guessing batfish.com wouldn't be judged a reliable source for Knowledge (XXG). That site references your Friedman source and also Alden's
107:
99:
379:
69:
353:
A couple more images would be nice, particularly of the submarine when in commission. Some of the old US Navy photos at
50:
44:
62:
365:
314:
256:
234:
208:
185:
172:
115:
329:
For someone not familiar with the region, specifying what river(s) the submarine was towed up would be useful.
17:
92:
199:; it would be better to get Alden, maybe through an interlibrary loan, and cite the original source.
230:
249:
165:
350:
been "1000-ish per week" since opening (I imagine its fluctuated or changed over 30-odd years)?
192:
226:
204:
181:
373:
362:
242:
158:
306:
299:
354:
346:
required any major maintenance/overhauls/upgrades since opening? Has attendance
281:
335:
The trench that had to be dug out, was that through land, or was it simply a
361:
Hopefully my comments and questions give you some ideas for improvement. --
310:
218:
317:, the book may identify some other, more relaible sources that can be used.
302:
by
Theodore Roscoe and Richard G. Voge, published by Naval Institute Press.
336:
197:
The Fleet
Submarine in the U.S. Navy: A Design and Construction History
272:
As a general rule, submarines are referred to as "boats", not "ships".
309:
by Mark W. Allen. Although this is published by vanity press
223:
Knowledge (XXG):Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches
141:
134:
103:
326:
meant to be going in Orange that the strike disrupted?
315:
Knowledge (XXG):Verifiability#Self-published sources
313:and probably may not be the best to cite from per
300:United States submarine operations in World War II
70:
8:
150:This peer review discussion has been closed.
292:Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships
77:
63:
32:
35:
332:Where is "Lock-and-Dam No. 6" located?
263:Comments, questions, and suggestions:
7:
24:
339:operation to deepen a channel?
1:
287:for an idea of what I mean.
276:what is her current status)
18:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review
396:
366:13:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
257:00:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
235:20:20, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
209:14:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
186:14:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
380:August 2011 peer reviews
217:: I heartily agree with
173:00:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
28:USS Batfish (SS-310)
307:Leader of the Pack
298:Potential source:
215:Finetooth comments
142:Watch peer review
87:
86:
387:
254:
247:
170:
163:
139:
130:
111:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
395:
394:
390:
389:
388:
386:
385:
384:
370:
369:
250:
243:
193:reliable source
166:
159:
145:
120:
97:
91:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
393:
391:
383:
382:
372:
371:
359:
358:
357:may be of use.
351:
340:
333:
330:
327:
320:
319:
318:
303:
288:
277:
273:
270:
260:
259:
212:
211:
200:
152:
147:
146:
144:
90:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
392:
381:
378:
377:
375:
368:
367:
364:
356:
355:navsource.org
352:
349:
345:
341:
338:
334:
331:
328:
325:
321:
316:
312:
308:
305:There's also
304:
301:
297:
296:
293:
289:
286:
285:
278:
274:
271:
267:
266:
265:
264:
258:
255:
253:
248:
246:
239:
238:
237:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
210:
206:
201:
198:
194:
190:
189:
188:
187:
183:
179:
175:
174:
171:
169:
164:
162:
155:
151:
143:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
26:
19:
360:
348:consistently
347:
343:
323:
283:
262:
261:
251:
244:
214:
213:
205:push to talk
196:
182:push to talk
177:
176:
167:
160:
156:
149:
148:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
27:
280:section of
180:. - Dank (
104:visual edit
322:Where was
311:iUniverse
227:Finetooth
374:Category
363:saberwyn
337:dredging
269:deleted.
241:place.--
178:Comments
157:Thanks,
344:Batfish
324:Batfish
127:history
108:history
94:Article
36:Toolbox
284:Otama
282:HMAS
252:eagle
168:eagle
136:Watch
16:<
231:talk
219:Dank
123:edit
100:edit
245:Dch
161:Dch
376::
233:)
225:.
207:)
184:)
140:•
125:|
106:|
102:|
229:(
203:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.