I am nominating the Invincible class battlecruisers for GT because I believe that it meets the criteria. All four articles are at GA and they share a common layout and navbox.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturmvogel 66 ( talk • contribs)
_British_Battleship.jpg)
- Support - excellent work on such an innovative class of vessels for naval warfare. I am a participant in WP:OMT, of which this topic is a part of. - MBK 004 02:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support - meets the criteria, good work Sturm. Your articles are always good for a fun read! ^am also an OMT member — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 07:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Great. Two 'invincible' nominations at the same time. Great effort by Sturm. - DSachan ( talk) 13:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support - good to see a British class! I too find the two "invincible" nominations ironic - rst20xx ( talk) 03:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
CommentSupport Great job! Just a couple consistency concerns: Armour or Armor? For Invincible, put the three battles under "World War I" like the others. Notes or References? Reywas92 Talk 20:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)- These vessels are British, so armour should be used. -
MBK
004
23:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Armour is used consistently, now.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- These vessels are British, so armour should be used. -
MBK
004
23:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support it's good to see that GTs have caught onto the WPShips and WPMilHist projects, one of the most prolific ones around wikipedia. Nergaal ( talk) 18:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support Another triumph for OMT. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - can you create a book on this topic? Just click on the link in the top left of the topic box and create a book there, copying the formatting used in other existing books -
rst20xx (
talk)
20:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- Done - MBK 004 on the iPhone 16:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx ( talk) 22:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
I am nominating the Invincible class battlecruisers for GT because I believe that it meets the criteria. All four articles are at GA and they share a common layout and navbox.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sturmvogel 66 ( talk • contribs)
- Support - excellent work on such an innovative class of vessels for naval warfare. I am a participant in WP:OMT, of which this topic is a part of. - MBK 004 02:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support - meets the criteria, good work Sturm. Your articles are always good for a fun read! ^am also an OMT member — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 07:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Great. Two 'invincible' nominations at the same time. Great effort by Sturm. - DSachan ( talk) 13:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support - good to see a British class! I too find the two "invincible" nominations ironic - rst20xx ( talk) 03:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
CommentSupport Great job! Just a couple consistency concerns: Armour or Armor? For Invincible, put the three battles under "World War I" like the others. Notes or References? Reywas92 Talk 20:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)- These vessels are British, so armour should be used. -
MBK
004
23:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Armour is used consistently, now.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- These vessels are British, so armour should be used. -
MBK
004
23:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support it's good to see that GTs have caught onto the WPShips and WPMilHist projects, one of the most prolific ones around wikipedia. Nergaal ( talk) 18:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- Support Another triumph for OMT. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - can you create a book on this topic? Just click on the link in the top left of the topic box and create a book there, copying the formatting used in other existing books -
rst20xx (
talk)
20:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- Done - MBK 004 on the iPhone 16:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx ( talk) 22:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)