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
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
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Okay, I'll bite: what is "The Peace of the Wisconsin" listed under Wisconsin's operational history? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
192.158.48.11 (
talk) 20:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)reply
In the "General characteristics and machinery" section, I changed a couple instances of "she" to "they" for consistency. Let me know if you disagree. The prose is good though, no issues.
Well-referenced; the first of the design section relies on a single source, but I looked around on Google Books and it doesn't seem like there's too much detailed information published on these so it makes sense.
The article was thorough. After reading it, my only question was why only three ships of this class were built. The infobox mentions that the Maine class succeeded this class, but if you want to improve this article beyond GA status you could add some info on why this class was superseded by the Maine class.
The two images are fine for GA, if you want to keep working on the article you could add more to illustrate some of the technical features from the design section, like the armament or the engines.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Great work on this, I'm happy to close the review as pass and promote to GA. --
Cerebellum (
talk) 20:40, 25 July 2015 (UTC)reply
Hull numbers
Is it really correct to refer to these ships as "BB-xx" when they were all decommissioned before the "BB" hull classification symbol came into use in 1920?
216.255.171.122 (
talk) 17:07, 16 May 2020 (UTC)reply
This is how sources routinely refer to them, so we follow suit.
Parsecboy (
talk) 16:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)reply
Illinois-class or Alabama-class?
Given that the Alabama was the first one laid down and the first commissioned ship of this class, shouldn't they be described as Alabama-class battleships? My source (Padfield, Battleship) calls them "Alabamas".
Merrybrit (
talk) 21:54, 6 November 2022 (UTC)reply
Most sources follow US naming conventions, which name the class after the first vessel authorized. There's a similar discrepancy with the
Colorado class, where a different ship was completed first (which causes some European sources to refer to them as the "Maryland class").
Parsecboy (
talk) 22:57, 6 November 2022 (UTC)reply