This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Home Fleet 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The WWI section needs a lot of help. I'm too lazy, and American to fix it. However, the whole thing about "they remained in the harbour thereafter" makes no sense. I don't know the history. What harbor are we talking about? What was the significance of it? -- drew1718 11:19, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
I have changed the caption to the photgraph. The dreadnoughts on the right are easily identified as belonging to the 'Bellerophon' and 'St Vincent' classes by the twin tripod masts [1]. Since there are four ships visible, the photograph was taken subsequent to the completion of HMS St Vincent in June 1909; and almost certainly at the Spithead Review of July 1909 ( Fleet Review, Royal Navy). John Moore 309 17:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
HMS Hood is referred to as the 'pride of the navy' here but this term is not found on the wikipedia page for the HMS Hood. The wikipedia page for HMS Hood seems to indicate that HMS Hood was old, in poor condition, and out of date by the second world war. I would have thought the King George V class battleships were the pride of the navy at the time of the sinking of HMS Hood since they were quite new (although the term 'pride of the navy' is also not found in the article for the King George V class battleships). However, the King George V class article does not have the lengthy discussion of faults that can be found on the page for HMS Hood. Mattbondy ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:54, 8 July 2011 (UTC).
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Home Fleet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Home Fleet 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The WWI section needs a lot of help. I'm too lazy, and American to fix it. However, the whole thing about "they remained in the harbour thereafter" makes no sense. I don't know the history. What harbor are we talking about? What was the significance of it? -- drew1718 11:19, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
I have changed the caption to the photgraph. The dreadnoughts on the right are easily identified as belonging to the 'Bellerophon' and 'St Vincent' classes by the twin tripod masts [1]. Since there are four ships visible, the photograph was taken subsequent to the completion of HMS St Vincent in June 1909; and almost certainly at the Spithead Review of July 1909 ( Fleet Review, Royal Navy). John Moore 309 17:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
HMS Hood is referred to as the 'pride of the navy' here but this term is not found on the wikipedia page for the HMS Hood. The wikipedia page for HMS Hood seems to indicate that HMS Hood was old, in poor condition, and out of date by the second world war. I would have thought the King George V class battleships were the pride of the navy at the time of the sinking of HMS Hood since they were quite new (although the term 'pride of the navy' is also not found in the article for the King George V class battleships). However, the King George V class article does not have the lengthy discussion of faults that can be found on the page for HMS Hood. Mattbondy ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:54, 8 July 2011 (UTC).
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Home Fleet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)