Talk:Russian destroyer Letun

Russian destroyer Letun 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.
Review: May 26, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Maritime / Russian & Soviet / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War I task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

Soviet Union: Russia / Military Low‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Russia portal This article is supported by WikiProject Russia (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force.

This article was created or improved during WikiProject Europe's "European 20,000 Challenge", which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help out!

GA review

Latest comment: 1 year ago6 comments2 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Russian destroyer Letun/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 09:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: GGOTCC (talk · contribs) 20:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Comments

was one of eight Uncited in the article and contradicts both the template at the bottom of the article and the class's article
- Western sources generally consider the Orfeys to consist of a single class with three sub-classes. Soviet sources consider them three separate classes. I've chosen to follow the Soviet sources in this judgement and haven't gotten around to editing the class article and template accordingly.
  - Templates are fundamental parts of the article, and it should not contradict the prose. Would you like to pause the review to give you time to update the bottom template? Also, what source are you using to cite the claim of eight ships in the class?
    - I've never really considered them fundamental in that many articles don't have a navigation template even if they need one. That said I'll rework the template tomorrow. I'll use cites from Apalkov and/or Verstyuk & Gordiev.
      - Done--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
Grom normally displaced Wrong ship?
- Copy-paste error
Should the infobox also list the Soviet/Red Navy as an operator?
- Good catch.
, in April 1918 in what became known as the "Ice Cruise" as the harbor was still iced over. Not mentioned in the article
- I thought that mentioning Helsinki, Kronstadt, icebound, etc. in the main body would clue a reader that this incident was the Ice Cruise, but I guess not.
  - It's best to assume the reader would not catch the cues. if something is important enough to be named in the header, it should also be mentioned in the lead section.
German supply of high-quality Swedish iron ore before the Gulf of Finland was iced over late in the year either by combat or the laying of minefields. Laying minefields does not cause the ocean to ice over? What are you trying to say?
- Reordered.
  - I reworded the sentence. How does it sound?
    - I've tweaked it again; see if it works for you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
Some details can be added, such as the purpose of the Baltic destroyers or when she was deactivated for the first time. The article states The ship was briefly reactivated but fails to mention how/when she was deactivated. ~~Info about the Ice Cruise of the Baltic Fleet should also be incorperated.~~ Context around Her crew joined the Bolsheviks during the October Revolution can be added about Russian naval mutanies. Where was she when she struck the mine?
- The purpose is better left to the class article, IMO. The sources are unclear about the state of Letun's repairs by the time of the Ice Cruise. The fact that she had to be towed to Kronstadt and was immediately placed in reserve there suggest that her repairs were incomplete and she was never formally deactivated after hitting the mine. Being under repair during the Revolution probably meant that she had only a skeleton crew aboard and there was no actual mutiny. At any rate, the sources don't give any specifics. I've added the location of the mine hit.
  - Okay, that makes more sense
Infobox contradicts prose on most lines. Contradictory launch date, completion, torpedo tube count, range, speed, etc. Please check the entire infobox over.
Done.
Only ref I have access to is Ref 1. None of the cited info is on page 310 and nothing about the Orfey-class. I seriously question the accuracy of all other statements now.
- Look again, class header is on page 309 and Letun is listed under the ships from Metal Works

S66, you are one of the best editors of military history on the site. For such a short article, I am shocked at the scale of issues here. Did you mean to nominate this article? GGOTCC 21:45, 12 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Obviously I wasn't as careful as I should have been.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Altight, the article looks good for me! Good job!