Talk:USS Helena (CL-50)

Untitled

Battle of Cape Esperance lists Furutaka rather than Furutawa. Are these two different ships, or is one an error? — B.Bryant 09:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's an error. The actual IJN heavy cruiser at Cape Esperance was the Furutaka. There was no "Furutawa". Darkstar8799 (talk) 17:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Propeller, anchor, and bell

A little while ago, I added a bit of information about Helena's propeller, bell, and anchor being kept at a park in Helena, MT. This was removed, with the explanation that they probably came from the next Helena (CA-75). However, stamped onto the propeller is the statement that it was made in the 1930's, which makes the propeller too early to belong to the latter vessel. Keegsshipguy (talk) 03:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

on the post side of the harbor?

I am unfamiliar with this terminology. What is meant by "on the post side of the harbor."?

Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 21:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I think what the author meant is on the side of the harbor near the "post" (base). Most of the base facilities are over there. I tweaked the language to make this clearer.Busaccsb (talk) 17:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

USS Helena CL50

Not noted in the Wikipedia article that I just read about the USS Helena CL50 is a nickname that the survivors that had to stay in the water until they reached land. I am a member of the Helena Organization which is an organization that was started by the crew that served aboard the CL50 crew. As the years went by after forming the Organization they invited the crew of the USS Helena CA75 to join them which many of us have. It has been a humbling feeling to listen to some of the stories of the survivors of the CL50. The nickname that has been mentioned by the survivors that had to stay in the water all night is, "The Kula Gulf Swim Team."

                     Bob Parry  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.113.111.148 (talk) 17:13, 24 May 2017 (UTC) 

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Helena (CL-50)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CPA-5 (talk · contribs) 19:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Claim my seat here. I have to tell you I'm hungry for a new nomination. :p Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks CPA - this was a beast of an article to write, so take your time reviewing it. Parsecboy (talk) 11:58, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

• No thank you, every new B-, GA-, A- or FA-class makes Wikipedia a better place. I'd love to be polite to people who work hours and hours every day to make Wikipedia a better place. We probably won't finish all warships to at least GA-class in the coming ten years. I'd love to see an FA-MILHIST where almost all articles are FA-class. Let's hope we're still alive if that ever happens. :p

Part 1

• limited to 10,000 long tons (10,000 t) Link both tonnes.
  • Done
• resulting in the St. Louis sub-class Link St. Louis
  • There's no link for that
• Helena was 607 feet 4.125 inches (185.11838 m) Both numbers are really specific.
  • I went with the figure provided in Friedman
• in the mounts for the .50-cal guns Isn't .50 the same as in .5? Or is this really part of the gun?
  • Yeah, they're always called ".50" - see for instance .50 BMG, the name of the round the guns fired
• was equipped with an anti-aircraft battery Add "(AA)" behind anti-aircraft.
  • Done
• battery of eight 20 mm (0.79 in) Oerlikon cannon British plural form of cannon.
  • Is it? According to merriam-webster, the "plural [is] usually cannon"
• Link US Navy.
  • Done
• She stopped in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba Guantanamo Bay isn't really part of Cuba.
  • Yeah it is, it's just leased to the US.

• Hmm I know it is leased to the US, but do we really count it as leasing if the owner doesn't want the money and wants you to leave? That's exactly what the current Cuban government wants. it claims that the US "illegally occupied" the bay since the American–Spanish War. Of course, both countries say that the bay lies in Cuba but it's a de facto US territory. However, we're talking about the mid-1930s when a pro-US Cuban government was active, which means it's not really a problem here. But if we're talking the geographic region the bay itself then we better can use "in" instead of the comma after Bay. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:22, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

• True, it's no different from any other colonial acquisition (like Hong Kong 1841–1997). How about "She stopped in Guantanamo Bay, an American-leased naval base in Cuba..."?

• Pipe Hawaii to the Territory of Hawaii.
  • Done
• Link California.
  • My sense is, California would fall into the category of WP:OVERLINK geographical entities.

• True, I understand your sense. But personally, outside the US it is not that popular or wide-known. I mean we Belgians (non-English natives) only know Holywood, LA and San Fransico at the West Coast. Before I was an editor I didn't know in which state those places were. I know they were at the West Coast but as a non-American, I can tell you we're not good in American states' geography. Nor Americans are about the EU. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

• That's a fair point - linked. Parsecboy (talk) 13:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

• ship received her 1.1-inch guns No metric units?
  • It's converted earlier
• Is so weird that you and Sturm always use day/month/year instead of month/day/year style is there a good reason why?
  • The modern US military uses DMY so that's what we follow for modern American warships - this is long-established practice at WP:MILHIST (and everybody else on Earth uses DMY, so that's what we do for non-US ships too)
• high-level bombers, and thirty-six fighters What kind of fighters?
  • Added the specific aircraft types
• to block a Japanese squadron if it was detected by air Do we know which squadron?
  • It wasn't directed against a specific Japanese unit
• lookouts aboard Helena and Boise Is there a link for lookouts?
  • Surprisingly, there is
• attack from elements of the 164th Infantry Regiment Link the 164th Infantry Regiment.
  • It's linked earlier

I'll later continue. Stay tuned. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:25, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good. Parsecboy (talk) 19:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

• Helena thereafter went to Sydney, Australia Unlink Sydney because of common term.
  • Done
• were then transferred to New Caledonia Add France here.
  • Changed to "transferred to the French colony of..." as saying "New Caledonia, France" suggests to the reader that New Caledonia is in Metropolitan France.

• That sounds better. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:20, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

• with many of the remainder from bomb You mean remainders?
  • No, it's the remainder of the casualties, those not killed or injured in the torpedo explosion
• they were accidentally shooting at the leading You mean shot?
  • No, the gerund is right there
• Scott missed a second group of warship Remove the "a" and replace it with "the".
  • In this case, because we haven't introduced the second Japanese unit, "a" is the right choice here
• resupply their forces fighting on and around Guadalcanal You mean "in" instead of "on"?
  • To me, it sounds correct to say that one fights on an island, not in it.
• supplies for the army already on Guadalacana Typo of Guadalcanal.
  • Fixed
• despite the fact that he had not assigned Remove "despite the fact that" and replace it with "although".
  • Done
• group of eleven float planes to scout Merge float planes.
  • Done
• as a large Japanese air strike was detected Merge air strike.
  • Done
• around the Kula Gulf on a number of occasions Remove "a number of" and replace it with "several".
  • Done
• short skirmish at long range produced Long range needs an hyphen.
  • I don't think it does here - it's the same as "X class", in that it only needs a hyphen if the two words form a compound adjective. In this case, "range" is a noun and "long" is the adjective.
• behind to help ferry men to American Merge ferry men.
  • No, "ferry" is the verb here.

• Damn a double verb. I didn't know it was a verb at all, I thought it was a compound adjective (probably misread the context). Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:18, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

That's it I will have a look in the sources, images and the infobox later. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Images

• Look good to me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:39, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources

• Why does have ref 74 no second-page number?
  • Fixed
• Bonner's book should be linked with a Google Books' URL.
  • A bot has been going around and adding the archive.org URLs for some reason - I'm not particularly in favor of it, but I haven't bothered to fight the bot - and in any event, readers can click on the ISBN to find the book in any number of locations (including google books)
• Domagalski's book is in the same situation as above.
  • As above
• Damnit I cannot review Hanson's source due legal reasons!
• Hammel's book need¨s "New York" as its location.
  • Good catch
• Kilpatrick's book title needs a "the" article before Naval.
  • Added
• Where are the publisher and location of Wright's source?
  • Added
• Both the "Naval History and Heritage Command" and "USS Helena, Report of Pearl Harbor Attack dated 14 December 1941"'s external links are dead.
  • Cut them - the latter is cited in the article anyway, with a link that works.

Infobox

• "Standard: 10,000 long tons (10,000 t)" Link both tonnes.
  • Done
• "Full load: 13,327 long tons (13,541 t)" Link full load.
  • Done
• "100,000 shp (75,000 kW)" Link both units.
  • Done
• "12 × 20 mm (0.79 in) Oerlikon anti-aircraft cannons" In the infobox we use "cannons" as plural and in the body it is "cannon"?
  • Fixed the box

That's anything, I'll put it on hold. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 19:53, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

• No worries took me some time to review. But I'm happy to pass it. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

About rewriting of this article

Let me say that while some parts were improved vs earlier, by no means the WHOLE article needed such 'overhaul'. Some parts were perfectly fit in the article, with citations and primary sources that were much interesting to read. So i rate the work on this article actually worseing the item instead to improving it. The part 'survivors' without any citation of the australian priest, as example, is quite partial to say the minimum. I prefer by far the earlier versions before the ones made by parsecboy. 62.11.3.98 (talk) 13:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes it did. Remember that this is an encyclopedia (i.e., a tertiary source quarried from secondary sources), so primary sources should generally not be used (and the block quoting of documents is wholly inappropriate). And again, as an encyclopedia article, it should not go into unnecessary detail; the article is already very long as it is. If readers want to learn more about the survivors’ ordeal, Domagalski’s book is available. Parsecboy (talk) 14:28, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

"Class" discussion.

See Talk:USS St. Louis (CL-49) for discussion of references and how the Navy classed the ships. Palmeira (talk) 14:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

No reason to split discussions off from where they started, see Talk:Brooklyn-class cruiser. Parsecboy (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Commissioning date

The ship was commissioned 18 September 1939, not 14 December 1939. I'm not sure why a secondary source is preferred over a primary source when the secondary source is obviously in error and the primary source can correct this. However, if you insist, I have a secondary source with the correct date too.68.226.52.62 (talk) 20:05, 26 May 2023 (UTC)