Talk:USS Jacob Jones (DD-61)

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good articleUSS Jacob Jones (DD-61) 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.
Good topic starUSS Jacob Jones (DD-61) is part of the Tucker class destroyers series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 16, 2009Good article nomineeListed
June 11, 2009Good topic candidatePromoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 6, 2011, and December 6, 2017.
Current status: Good article

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Jacob Jones (DD-61)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Below is my review:

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • 54.6 km/h and 56 km/h in the infobox make a lot of difference in maximum speed.
      • The figure in the infobox and the "Design and construction" section was the correct one; I updated the figure in the lead to match. — Bellhalla (talk) 17:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
A nice article. Thanks - DSachan (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review! — Bellhalla (talk) 17:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scuttling

I'm lucky enough to have a copy of the captain's report in the sinking, from the Admiralty documents at The National Archives. Nowhere in his report or the subsequent investigation, is the word scuttling used. I appreciate that the source Feuer may use it, but it's clearly in error - why would a captain knowingly scuttle a boat with scuttling charges underneath armed depth charges at the stern, that would cause the charges to kill his crew in the water? It's nonsensical. Further, the captain's report clearly states that the torpedo holed the vessel and caused it to sink eight minutes later. I'll amend the sections as necessary unless anyone has any objections? Ranger Steve Talk 11:03, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I've just done it anyway. It's clearly incorrect and any captain who scuttles a ship and in those circumstances is clearly barking. Ranger Steve Talk 11:56, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch. It apparently was added in 2012 by an IP anon without comment or additional citations. --Dual Freq (talk) 01:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I had a feeling that might be the case! I did have a look through the history to see if I could spot such an insertion, but not that far back. Cheers Dual Freq. Ranger Steve Talk 09:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

USS Jacob Jones

My great great Uncle Thomas David Edwards died on the USS Jacob Jones https://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/2174.html This Jacob Jones is not the one that sank on Dec 6 1917. The one in the news recently was commissioned in 1916 and home based in Ireland. The Jacob Jones that my uncle went down on sank on 28 Feb 1942 off the coast of Maryland. What is the difference in the names. Was the WWII Jacob Jones names after the WWI ship? Wrick56 (talk) 15:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:USS_Jacob_Jones_(DD-61)"