# Talk:HMS Brazen (H80)

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-10DD-15B-Brazen.htm. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Brazen (H80)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 21:12, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Dabs and external links are good (no action required)
In "description" it might be worthy to note how the ship design deviated from the typical B-class destroyer as a frame of reference. Even if it was an exact specification of the class, just say so.
Why? This is unnecessary as I've presented her info as provided by my sources. If she varied significantly, I'd have mentioned it.
"The ship was ordered on 22 March 1929 from Palmers Shipbuilding and Iron Company at Hebburn under the 1928 Naval Programme" - is there a link to this program? If not, add a sentence or two explaining what it was (I assume it was a naval expansion plan)
Linked, it was the annual shipbuilding authorization.
"The ship received a refit at Devonport from August to October 1933 and another at Malta a few months later." - any idea the nature of these refits?
Nope, just the standard sort of things.
Also, any idea of the number of convoys the ship escorted in the war?
No, that sort of detailed data isn't available for the coastal convoys.
Will check back soon. —Ed!(talk) 21:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)