• USS President (1800) for TFA 16 May 2011 Little Belt Affair. Place pending on 16 February 2011. Points: age=1; timing=6; Contributor history=1.
• USS Constitution TFA for 19 August 2012-
• USS United States (1797) TFA 25 October 2012-
• USS Chesapeake for 1 June 2013 -Capture
• Brad (talk) 07:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I noticed that you prodded Akra Aktion (which is in terrible shape), which I recently added a couple of wikiproject tags to. Just wanted to know if there is any sort of guideline/policy for notability of ships/shipwrecks or if we should just follow the WP:GNG. Would save you some time in future if I knew, as I could have already prodded it as non-notable? regards, ascidian | talk-to-me 21:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notability can be difficult to prove for some ships. Generally the wp:ships scope allows ships like Akira Aktion but I prodded only because of the condition the article is in. However, Akira Aktion might be merged to Empire Strength depending on what another editor who has worked extensively on Empire ships decides what can be done with it. I left a message on his talk page. Brad (talk) 02:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, my source does not say that she was renamed Akira Aktion. The source in that article (link 1) gives an IMO of 5340912 for Akira Aktion, whereas the New Zealand Maritime Index gives an IMO of 5291381 for Empire Strength (but this would have been under a later name), so it would appear that they are separate ships.

We have two choices here, either allow the deletion without prejudict to recreation later, or we bash the article into a shape resembling a ship. Mjroots (talk) 11:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Empire Strength was built in Belfast in 1942. She became E Evangelica in 1965 and ran aground in 1968. Akra Aktion was built in 1957 in Amsterdam as Steven and was later renamed Akra Aktion. She ran aground in 1981. So they cannot be the same ship. Mjroots (talk) 11:50, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your help with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Jan-Mar 2011, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:55, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Hi Brad, I am trying to expand the text on RN Cesare Rossarol so that this reading may flow well, but I am Brazilian. Could you take a look and make the appropriate changes if you see fit ?
Thanks, learning is nice ! Krenakarore (talk) 17:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brad, thanks for your assessment of the article on the Charles Martel class battleship (1883). In your assessment you said that it met all the B class criteria except structure. Please you suggest a structure here that you think would enable to article to become B class.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basic structure for an article is a lead section that summarizes the entire article and then sections below it which contain all of the information. See WP:LEAD. Brad (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the references that were double wikilinked, but other than a couple, I couldn't see where they were "a mess". Perhaps you could show me what I am missing, so I get clean it up right quick. I have also left you a response on the A-Class review discussion. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:45, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please take a look at the A-Class review and see what else needs to be done? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:13, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You participated in the Frank Buckles A-Class review. If you have any further comments on the article or are satisfied with the article as it is, please post on the A-Class review page. Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]