Talk:Lancelot Holland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Military work group.

[edit] NPOV

Seems to me as if a military person wrote part of, if not most of or all of this article. Jmlk17 06:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

The section removed on July 14, 2007 was emphatically not a PoV. It was a reasonable summary of the situation. Does anyone seriously think that the Hood and the Bismarck were evenly matched? Or that Admiral Holland was not driven by a sense of duty rather than by a sense of self preservation?

The gap was not that great. If the Royal Navy had fitted Hood with updated armour under her decks then the Hood would have been a match for Bismarck. Dapi89 (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

But the extra armour was never added. And Hood remained quite vulnerable, a 20 year old battlecruiser up against a brand new battleship. So they were not a match and my point stands. Polycarp

No it doesn't. Your missing the point. Firstly to say that Bismarck outmatched Hood implies that any modification to Hood would not have helped her, I disagree. You then seem to admit that if the extra armour was added it would have made a difference, which contradicts the claim that Bismarck outmatched Hood. Bismarck's early hit was fortunate. The same luck that was with Bismarck in the B.D.S deserted her during the final battle. An early hit from Nolfolk disabled her gunnery control station preventing Bismarck from defending herslef effectively. Using your logic, just because Norfolk delivered a severe blow, the cruiser was a match for Bismarck. Your opinion is OR, and fails to take into consideration the circumstances of the engagement. Dapi89 (talk) 16:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The battle was between the Bismark and the Hood as they actually were, not between the Bismark and an imaginary, much improved Hood. 02:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Again you miss the point. Even if you consider them as they were, had Hood delivered a similar blow like Norfolk first, Bismarck would not have been able to blow Hood out of the water. Dapi89 (talk) 10:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)