Talk:CSS Appomattox

Nominator: Gatoclass (talk · contribs) 06:48, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

GA review

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

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 00:09, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

I'll review this soon. This covers some of the same ground which I read about when I brought CSS Beaufort and CSS Winslow to GA a few years ago. Hog Farm _Talk 00:09, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay - things are choatic with an infant at home. Hog Farm _Talk 23:48, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

No probs - family comes first :) Whenever you're ready - Gatoclass (talk) 04:39, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• "The steamer was laid down in March" - are we sure this is right? The launching announcement refers to "The small tow boat built by Mr. William Cramp [...] for Michael Molloy" which seems to be separate from "the frames of two propeller steamboats, one for the Ericcson and the other for the Merchants' and People's Baltimore transportation lines" which had at the date of the article not completed the keel-laying process. So I don't know that this source can actually support that Empire was launched in March, as Empire is presumably the referenced Merchants' and People's ship, not the Molloy one

The source states: "Mr. Cramp has in progress the frames of two propeller steamboats, one for the Ericsson and one for the Merchants and People's Baltimore transportation lines, the keels of which will be immediately laid." Given that this report was published on 6 March, it seems reasonable to assume that the keels were laid the same month.

Somehow I had read launched instead of laid down. Hog Farm _Talk 03:06, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

• The article body text states her beam was 20 ft even, but the infobox has 20.5 feet

Fixed, thanks.

• "an error echoed by some later sources" - wouldn't it be best to provide a citation as an example of such a source?

Oops, sorry, oversight - fixed.

• "Advertisements for the Merchants and People's Line also abruptly cease at the time of this report." - I'm not a huge fan of unsourceable aruments from silence
• "Empire's disposition between 1857 and 1859 is not known. " - see the above comment

I know some people don't like this, and I'm not crazy about it myself, but the alternative is to have gaps in the narrative with no explanation, which I think can lead to confusion on the part of readers and does them a disservice. Nor am I sure there is anything in the guidelines to specifically prohibit the practice.

Regardless, I think in this particular instance, it doesn't hurt to leave the latter statement out, so I have deleted it. I really think the comment about the cessation of advertising should stay in though, because it is corroborating evidence that the company did indeed sell out at the time.

• I don't know if this helps for trying to sort out the possible sale, but per p. 106 of this book, the Ericcson Line was another name for the Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat Company. What content Wikipedia has for that steamboat line is at A. H. Bull Steamship Company#Ericcson Line.

Yes, I know the full name of the company was the Baltimore and Philadelphia Steamboat Company. Unfortunately, they rarely advertised, and when they did they did not bother naming which vessels were in service. Regardless, the Wiki link is useful and I have added it to the article, thank you for pointing it out!

Stopping before the Civil War material for a break; I have more sources and better familiarity with the Civil War stuff. Hog Farm _Talk 02:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• "Empire was used in late April 1861 to tow a barge loaded with six Paixhans guns and 200 rounds of ammunition to Richmond" - source says "200 rounds of shell for each gun" so 1,200 shells total

Oops, missed that - fixed.

• " at the time a militia unit" - the source only supports that the Grays were a militia unit in 1859, not anything about 1861 status. I'm not sure that it's correct, either. The Richmond Grays were part of the 12th Virginia Infantry Regiment in July 1861 (see this) and this source indicates that it entered active service on April 19, 1861. a later page indicates that it had been detached and sent to Norfolk in April. I think this can just be ommitted

You're right, I got the chronology mixed up - for some reason I was thinking this happened in 1860 - fixed, thanks.

• The link for the 'Monticello goes to a set index article; you want USS Monticello (1859)

Fixed.

Apologies for how longg this is taking; I have been busier than expected when I took up the review. Hog Farm _Talk 03:06, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

No problem, I am struggling to find the time to wrap up my own open GAN review, so I know how these things can happen :) Gatoclass (talk) 07:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)