This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Argentine鈥揅hilean naval arms race article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
Argentine鈥揅hilean naval arms race 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
February 7, 2013. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that even before the
Argentine鈥揅hilean naval arms race, the Chilean Navy was stronger than the United States Navy? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi Ed17,
thanks for your invitation. I would like to tell you some ideas about this issue. First of all, I have never read so much about it, although I wrote the init of the article Pactos de Mayo, but actually I gathered the information for other article ,and then ...
Few days ago I read Pablo Lacoste's Argentina, Chile y los Pactos de Mayo (1902) and discovered again as a interesting theme. For "your" article I would propose:
I think Lacoste goes through every of this issues, he uses a lot of figures, not easy to understand but we should do it and if neccessary we can put it in diagrams.
My policy in wikipedia is to write as less as possible (or as few as possible?). But I have some know-how in Diagramms and maps. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 15:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The table says "4" TB, but I think there were 6:
You can take a look to my unpublished new list under User:Keysanger/LL. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 16:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
We agree, except 140t <-> 311t
Lacoste says, in Cuadro II, that Argentina bought 22 torpederas between 1880 and 1893. Do you have a reference in your books for?.
A mention of the Baring crisis should be there also. Reference: http://www.argentina-rree.com/7/7-021.htm of http://www.argentina-rree.com/historia.htm
--Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 11:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I mean Argentine torpedo boats. If we count the Chilean TBs, then we should count the Argentine also. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 14:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the rights. I will use them when necessary. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 11:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ed,
The current table contains "jumps" and it is not continuosly in the time. I think we can replace it through at the right side and the tons can be added. The new table can be read linear from top to down.
I added the table of Lacoste.
Year
|
Ships (type)
|
Year
|
Ships (type)
|
---|---|---|---|
1887 |
Capit谩n Prat (BB) |
1896 |
O'Higgins (AC) |
1888 |
Libertad (BB) |
1896 | San Mart铆n (AC) |
1890 | Veinticinco de Mayo (PC) | 1897 |
Pueyrred贸n (AC) |
1891 |
Nueve de Julio (PC) |
1898 |
General Belgrano (AC) |
1892 | Blanco Encalada (PC) | 1901 |
Rivadavia (AC) |
1894 | Buenos Aires (PC) | 1901 |
Constituci贸n (BB) |
1895 |
Esmeralda (AC) |
1901 |
Announcement of plans |
1895 |
Garibaldi (AC) |
1901 |
Chacabuco (PC) |
Statistics complied from: Scheina, Naval History, 46鈥51, 297鈥299.
|
Year
|
tons
|
tons
|
Year
| ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1887 |
Capit谩n Prat (BB)
P. Err谩zuriz (PC) |
6,900 2,080 |
1887 | ||
1888 | 2,300 2,300 |
Libertad (BB) Independencia (BB) |
1888 | ||
1890 | 3,200 | Veinticinco de Mayo (PC) | 1890 | ||
1891 | 3,570 |
Nueve de Julio (PC) |
1891 | ||
1892 | Blanco Encalada (PC) | 4,400 | 1892 | ||
1894 | 4,740 | Buenos Aires (PC) | 1894 | ||
1895 |
Esmeralda (AC)
Ministro Zenteno (PC) |
7,500 3,437 |
6,840 | Garibaldi (AC) | 1895 |
1896 |
O'Higgins (AC) Six torpedo boats |
8,500 | 6,840 | San Mart铆n (AC) | 1896 |
1897 | 6,840 | Pueyrred贸n (AC) | 1897 | ||
1898 | 6,840 | General Belgrano (AC) | 1898 | ||
1901 |
Constituci贸n (BB) |
11,800 11,800 |
7,800 7,800 |
Rivadavia (AC)
Mariano Moreno (AC) |
1901 |
Statistics complied from: Scheina, Naval History, 46鈥51, 297鈥299, tonnage from G. v. Rauch Conflict in the Southern Cone, p.150-154 |
Country | Navy tons | inhabitants | kg/inh |
---|---|---|---|
UK | 1.065.000 | 41.100.000 | 25,90 |
France | 499.000 | 38.300.000 | 13,08 |
Russia | 383.000 | 135.600.000 | 2,82 |
USA | 333.000 | 75.900.000 | 4,38 |
Italy | 245.000 | 32.200.000 | 10,34 |
Germany | 285.000 | 56.000.000 | 5,09 |
Japan | 187.000 | 43.800.000 | 4,26 |
Chile | 100.000 | 3.000.000 | 33,33 |
Argentina | 100.000 | 4.500.000 | 22,22 |
Austria-Hungary | 87.000 | 46.700.000 | 1,86 |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Khazar2聽( talk 路 contribs) 02:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll be glad to take this review--very interesting topic. In the next few days, I'll do a close readthrough, noting any issues here that I can't immediately fix, and then follow with the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 02:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
On first pass, this looks extremely solid: well written, well sourced, and quite interesting to boot. Only a few quibbles:
All this looks good. Some small points above could still be addressed, but I'd say this article is ready to pass as a Good Article. Since we've given this unusually quick turnaround between nomination, review, and response, I'd like to wait another 48 hours before passing it just to make sure that anyone else watching this article has had a chance to chime in, give a last check, etc. Unless anyone speaks up, though, I think this is good to go. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 15:18, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | Pass. |
Hi Ed,
I read your work and found it very well. I want to collaborate with following:
The article could contains also data about the construction of the Marine Yards in Argentina and Chile. As soon as possible I will contribute with some figures. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 13:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
There's no info on the circumstances and timing of the order for the two cruisers eventually acquired by Japan. Specifically was it before or after the orders for the two Swiftsures? And when did Argentina sell them to Japan?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 04:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Argentine ships Independencia and Libertad should not be considered in the Argentine-Chilean naval arms race. They were coastal defense ships, not ocean ships, which could not have been acquired in response to Chile, but to Brazil, which also had such ships. -- Muwatallis II ( talk) 06:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Argentine鈥揅hilean naval arms race article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
Argentine鈥揅hilean naval arms race 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
February 7, 2013. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that even before the
Argentine鈥揅hilean naval arms race, the Chilean Navy was stronger than the United States Navy? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi Ed17,
thanks for your invitation. I would like to tell you some ideas about this issue. First of all, I have never read so much about it, although I wrote the init of the article Pactos de Mayo, but actually I gathered the information for other article ,and then ...
Few days ago I read Pablo Lacoste's Argentina, Chile y los Pactos de Mayo (1902) and discovered again as a interesting theme. For "your" article I would propose:
I think Lacoste goes through every of this issues, he uses a lot of figures, not easy to understand but we should do it and if neccessary we can put it in diagrams.
My policy in wikipedia is to write as less as possible (or as few as possible?). But I have some know-how in Diagramms and maps. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 15:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
The table says "4" TB, but I think there were 6:
You can take a look to my unpublished new list under User:Keysanger/LL. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 16:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
We agree, except 140t <-> 311t
Lacoste says, in Cuadro II, that Argentina bought 22 torpederas between 1880 and 1893. Do you have a reference in your books for?.
A mention of the Baring crisis should be there also. Reference: http://www.argentina-rree.com/7/7-021.htm of http://www.argentina-rree.com/historia.htm
--Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 11:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I mean Argentine torpedo boats. If we count the Chilean TBs, then we should count the Argentine also. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 14:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the rights. I will use them when necessary. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 11:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ed,
The current table contains "jumps" and it is not continuosly in the time. I think we can replace it through at the right side and the tons can be added. The new table can be read linear from top to down.
I added the table of Lacoste.
Year
|
Ships (type)
|
Year
|
Ships (type)
|
---|---|---|---|
1887 |
Capit谩n Prat (BB) |
1896 |
O'Higgins (AC) |
1888 |
Libertad (BB) |
1896 | San Mart铆n (AC) |
1890 | Veinticinco de Mayo (PC) | 1897 |
Pueyrred贸n (AC) |
1891 |
Nueve de Julio (PC) |
1898 |
General Belgrano (AC) |
1892 | Blanco Encalada (PC) | 1901 |
Rivadavia (AC) |
1894 | Buenos Aires (PC) | 1901 |
Constituci贸n (BB) |
1895 |
Esmeralda (AC) |
1901 |
Announcement of plans |
1895 |
Garibaldi (AC) |
1901 |
Chacabuco (PC) |
Statistics complied from: Scheina, Naval History, 46鈥51, 297鈥299.
|
Year
|
tons
|
tons
|
Year
| ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1887 |
Capit谩n Prat (BB)
P. Err谩zuriz (PC) |
6,900 2,080 |
1887 | ||
1888 | 2,300 2,300 |
Libertad (BB) Independencia (BB) |
1888 | ||
1890 | 3,200 | Veinticinco de Mayo (PC) | 1890 | ||
1891 | 3,570 |
Nueve de Julio (PC) |
1891 | ||
1892 | Blanco Encalada (PC) | 4,400 | 1892 | ||
1894 | 4,740 | Buenos Aires (PC) | 1894 | ||
1895 |
Esmeralda (AC)
Ministro Zenteno (PC) |
7,500 3,437 |
6,840 | Garibaldi (AC) | 1895 |
1896 |
O'Higgins (AC) Six torpedo boats |
8,500 | 6,840 | San Mart铆n (AC) | 1896 |
1897 | 6,840 | Pueyrred贸n (AC) | 1897 | ||
1898 | 6,840 | General Belgrano (AC) | 1898 | ||
1901 |
Constituci贸n (BB) |
11,800 11,800 |
7,800 7,800 |
Rivadavia (AC)
Mariano Moreno (AC) |
1901 |
Statistics complied from: Scheina, Naval History, 46鈥51, 297鈥299, tonnage from G. v. Rauch Conflict in the Southern Cone, p.150-154 |
Country | Navy tons | inhabitants | kg/inh |
---|---|---|---|
UK | 1.065.000 | 41.100.000 | 25,90 |
France | 499.000 | 38.300.000 | 13,08 |
Russia | 383.000 | 135.600.000 | 2,82 |
USA | 333.000 | 75.900.000 | 4,38 |
Italy | 245.000 | 32.200.000 | 10,34 |
Germany | 285.000 | 56.000.000 | 5,09 |
Japan | 187.000 | 43.800.000 | 4,26 |
Chile | 100.000 | 3.000.000 | 33,33 |
Argentina | 100.000 | 4.500.000 | 22,22 |
Austria-Hungary | 87.000 | 46.700.000 | 1,86 |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Khazar2聽( talk 路 contribs) 02:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll be glad to take this review--very interesting topic. In the next few days, I'll do a close readthrough, noting any issues here that I can't immediately fix, and then follow with the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 02:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
On first pass, this looks extremely solid: well written, well sourced, and quite interesting to boot. Only a few quibbles:
All this looks good. Some small points above could still be addressed, but I'd say this article is ready to pass as a Good Article. Since we've given this unusually quick turnaround between nomination, review, and response, I'd like to wait another 48 hours before passing it just to make sure that anyone else watching this article has had a chance to chime in, give a last check, etc. Unless anyone speaks up, though, I think this is good to go. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 15:18, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | Pass. |
Hi Ed,
I read your work and found it very well. I want to collaborate with following:
The article could contains also data about the construction of the Marine Yards in Argentina and Chile. As soon as possible I will contribute with some figures. --Best regards, Keysanger ( what?) 13:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
There's no info on the circumstances and timing of the order for the two cruisers eventually acquired by Japan. Specifically was it before or after the orders for the two Swiftsures? And when did Argentina sell them to Japan?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 04:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Argentine ships Independencia and Libertad should not be considered in the Argentine-Chilean naval arms race. They were coastal defense ships, not ocean ships, which could not have been acquired in response to Chile, but to Brazil, which also had such ships. -- Muwatallis II ( talk) 06:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)