![]() | HMS Hood (1891) 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. | ||||||||||||
![]() | HMS Hood (1891) is part of the Predreadnought battleships of the Royal Navy 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. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
HMS Hood (1891) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This paragraph conflict with my understanding of stability. Since the next paragraph depends on it, I am trying to look up this term, rather than simply changing it now. David R. Ingham 19:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I find "As the ship is inclined through small angles of heel, the lines of buoyant force intersect at a point called the metacenter." For stability, the center of gravity must be below the metacentric hight. Will try to fix article to agree with this. David R. Ingham 20:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Canadian Paul ( talk · contribs) 14:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll take on this review later tonight - I haven't done a ship in quite some time. Per the toolbox at the side, there is one disambiguation link in the article, and resolving it may help my review. Canadian Paul 14:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Comments:
Not surprisingly, just a few minor clarifications needed. To allow for these issues to be addressed I am placing the article on hold for a period of up to a week. I'm always open to discussion so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 18:49, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
@ Mohawk82: Please show which sentences justify the statement "The ship's bell was later used as one of two bells on the battlecruiser HMS Hood"?
The citation mentions that this bell was used as a bell on the battlecruiser HMS Hood. It does not mention the Hood having a second bell.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Could have sworn it was there. This source indicates two ceremonial bells [1]
Another source indicates that there were at least THREE bells [2]
Excerpted text
Hood is known to have carried at least three bells; two were large but fairly typical watch bells and the third was this smaller, more ornate bell. This particular bell was the most important of the three. It had previously been used aboard the pre-dreadnought battleship Hood and was given to Admiral SIr Horace Hood following that ship's retirement. Following the death of Sir Horace at Jutland, his widow, Lady Hood, gifted the bell to our Hood.
The bell bears two inscriptions: the first, located around the lower edge reads "This bell was preserved from HMS Hood Battleship 1891-1914 by Late ADM Hon. Horace Hood killed at Jutland 31 May 1916.". The second inscription, located on the side of the bell reads "In accordance with the wishes of Lady Hood it was presented in memory of her husband to HMS Hood battle cruiser the ship she launched 22nd August 1918." In addition to the inscriptions, the bell still wears vivid royal blue paint work on its crown as well as its interior. The bell was recovered in August 2015 and subsequently preserved for display at the National Museum of the Royal Navy, Portsmouth. [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohawk82 ( talk • contribs) 23:18, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@ Sturmvogel 66: In this edit you changed "QF 6-pounder guns" to "QF 6-pounder Hotchkiss". How do you know they were the Hotchkiss model?
There was a Nordenfelt 6 pr QF gun. For example, HMS Camperdown used Nordenfelt 6 pr.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Hood had no Barbettes. She was a sheer turret ship. The completely cenclosed armoured shields around the turrets were known as barbettes for some years after its introduction though but they wasn´t barbettes as we know them today. See: Burt British Battleships p. 85 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Lovecraft ( talk • contribs) 15:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
@ User:Sturmvogel 66 Hood had no Barbettes. She was a sheer turret ship. The completely cenclosed armoured shields around the turrets were known as barbettes for some years after its introduction though but they wasn´t barbettes as we know them today. See: Burt British Battleships p. 85 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Lovecraft ( talk • contribs) 15:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | HMS Hood (1891) 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. | ||||||||||||
![]() | HMS Hood (1891) is part of the Predreadnought battleships of the Royal Navy 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. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
HMS Hood (1891) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This paragraph conflict with my understanding of stability. Since the next paragraph depends on it, I am trying to look up this term, rather than simply changing it now. David R. Ingham 19:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I find "As the ship is inclined through small angles of heel, the lines of buoyant force intersect at a point called the metacenter." For stability, the center of gravity must be below the metacentric hight. Will try to fix article to agree with this. David R. Ingham 20:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Canadian Paul ( talk · contribs) 14:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll take on this review later tonight - I haven't done a ship in quite some time. Per the toolbox at the side, there is one disambiguation link in the article, and resolving it may help my review. Canadian Paul 14:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Comments:
Not surprisingly, just a few minor clarifications needed. To allow for these issues to be addressed I am placing the article on hold for a period of up to a week. I'm always open to discussion so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 18:49, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
@ Mohawk82: Please show which sentences justify the statement "The ship's bell was later used as one of two bells on the battlecruiser HMS Hood"?
The citation mentions that this bell was used as a bell on the battlecruiser HMS Hood. It does not mention the Hood having a second bell.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Could have sworn it was there. This source indicates two ceremonial bells [1]
Another source indicates that there were at least THREE bells [2]
Excerpted text
Hood is known to have carried at least three bells; two were large but fairly typical watch bells and the third was this smaller, more ornate bell. This particular bell was the most important of the three. It had previously been used aboard the pre-dreadnought battleship Hood and was given to Admiral SIr Horace Hood following that ship's retirement. Following the death of Sir Horace at Jutland, his widow, Lady Hood, gifted the bell to our Hood.
The bell bears two inscriptions: the first, located around the lower edge reads "This bell was preserved from HMS Hood Battleship 1891-1914 by Late ADM Hon. Horace Hood killed at Jutland 31 May 1916.". The second inscription, located on the side of the bell reads "In accordance with the wishes of Lady Hood it was presented in memory of her husband to HMS Hood battle cruiser the ship she launched 22nd August 1918." In addition to the inscriptions, the bell still wears vivid royal blue paint work on its crown as well as its interior. The bell was recovered in August 2015 and subsequently preserved for display at the National Museum of the Royal Navy, Portsmouth. [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohawk82 ( talk • contribs) 23:18, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@ Sturmvogel 66: In this edit you changed "QF 6-pounder guns" to "QF 6-pounder Hotchkiss". How do you know they were the Hotchkiss model?
There was a Nordenfelt 6 pr QF gun. For example, HMS Camperdown used Nordenfelt 6 pr.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Hood had no Barbettes. She was a sheer turret ship. The completely cenclosed armoured shields around the turrets were known as barbettes for some years after its introduction though but they wasn´t barbettes as we know them today. See: Burt British Battleships p. 85 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Lovecraft ( talk • contribs) 15:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
@ User:Sturmvogel 66 Hood had no Barbettes. She was a sheer turret ship. The completely cenclosed armoured shields around the turrets were known as barbettes for some years after its introduction though but they wasn´t barbettes as we know them today. See: Burt British Battleships p. 85 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.Lovecraft ( talk • contribs) 15:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)