What evidence is there that the Richelieu photo is actually USN? That's an awfully shitty image. A much crisper, colorized version can be found at
[1] if you can confirm its provenance.
It was taken at the same time and by the same USN patrol plane as
this one (and a few others on Commons) - note the identical elevation of the guns. I'll upload the colorized one
Second London Naval Treaty fell apart Not exactly the most encyclopedic language I've ever seen
No, but I can't come up with any alternatives that aren't of a similar tone (i.e., "broke down") or don't go into too much detail for a minor point in the lead - do you have any ideas?
Watch the roundings for 350 mm in the infobox, the table, and the design proposals section and for 360, 400 and 420 mm
I just went through my old German BB FAs and fixed a lot of these...
I've done this a little bit for mine, but not in any systemic way as I combine it with adding links to the tonnages and a general infobox cleanup.--
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
16:55, 30 August 2019 (UTC)reply
56,000 long tons (57,000 t) ships, though French intelligence initially believed them to be only 40,000 long tons (41,000 t) vessels Turn these tonnages into the adjectival forms
Good catch
(that was to be designated Dock No. 10) that was 275 m proximity alert for "that was"
Fixed
Spell out shp with links on first use in the main body
Done
The table's awfully wide. Consider eliminating the normal displacement column.
I put it in so I wouldn't have to specifically cite it in the infoboxes or mention it in the text
But, just think, you'll be able to improve your HTML table building skills for your employer and get an increase in pay! Oh, wait, you're on salary. And you don't write HTML. :-(
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
20:04, 29 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Hahahaha, you think my employer would give a raise for additional skills...
Right, that's why I went with J&D for the table - I think the line is fine as is, as it's couched as according to their study, which is speculative.
Parsecboy (
talk)
20:21, 29 August 2019 (UTC)reply