Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/HMS Cardiff (D108)

HMS Cardiff (D108)

• Featured article candidates/HMS Cardiff (D108)

Self Nominator: The main issue raised in this article's "A" class review, was the need for a copyedit, this has since be done by Maralia (it's also had a peer review since then). I'm going AFK now, but I'll next be able to reply at approx 17:00 (UTC) tomorrow, cheers. Ryan4314 (talk) 21:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.wingweb.co.uk/
  • http://www.historyofwar.org/index.html
  • http://www.wrecksite.eu/wrecksite.aspx
  • http://www.falklandswar.org.uk/
  • http://www.naval-history.net/
  • http://www.harpoonhq.com/?page_id=2
  • http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/index.htm
  • http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/index.htm
• Current ref 34 "Morgan, David (2007) "Hostile Skies" ... is WC2H 9EA the publisher? If so who the heck are they? or is Phoenix the publisher? I've never heard of either.
• Okay, while they aren't unreliable, I'm not sure that using either "The Mammoth Book of Eyewitness Naval Battles" and "The Complete Idiots Guide to the Gulf War" are exactly the highest quality source either.
• This ref Current ref 57 "Access World News - Document Display" requires login and a password. If it's an archive, it needs the original publication information. It's certainly lacking something about the referencing, it doesn't say why it should be reliable.

Otherwise, sources look good. Some of the above questioned sites are probably reliable, they are just way outside my field of study. Better to question than assume. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

WC2H 9EA is a London post (ZIP) code, of course (I'm impressed that there is an article on WC codes).--Grahame (talk) 08:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi guys thanks for commenting;

• I'm a little unsure what you want me to do, shall I replace all the sources that come from the websites you listed above?
• Phoenix is the publisher (here's a little piccy: File:Phoenix Publishers.jpg ), at the moment the ref text says "|publisher=Phoenix |location=WC2H 9EA", shall I change it? (maybe put the postcode's location instead?)
• I could probably drop the whole "Complete Idiots Guide to the Gulf War" ref anyway, it only states the fact that Qaruh Island was the first Kuwaiti territory to be liberated.
• Hmmm I don't why the ref is doing that, here's the url, is it working now? (it is for me) If not I have another ref for it.

Sorry, on a side note, the Naval-History ref is actually a book called "BATTLE ATLAS of the FALKLANDS WAR 1982 - by Land, Sea and Air by Gordon Smith", it's just been "digitised" (lol don't what this process is called) on to the website, which is itself a part of the Navy News (the Royal Navy's official newspaper). Ryan4314 (talk) 17:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You didn't reply, so I assume you wanted me to replace all those sources with ones more official, which I've done and I just removed others that we're "spare". I also changed the "WC2H 9EA" in the Morgan ref to "London" :)

• Comments regarding criterion three:
  • Image:Argentine Boeing 707 crew.jpg and Image:Canberra Bomber B-108.jpeg need verifiable sources per WP:IUP. How can we verify when they were first published in Argentina?
  • Image:HMS Cardiff rusted name.jpg: image's source page explicitly says "All rights reserved". What is the basis for the claim that this has been released as GFDL?
  • I'm suspicious of Image:SAS Parachute down to HMS Cardiff.jpg and Image:Lynx 335 HMS Cardiff March 1982.jpg (fortunate that we had a Wikipedian serving on her in 1982; same uploader as aforementioned Argentinian images listing self as source; etc.), but I don't have time to scour Flickr or Google images. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 19:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The rusted name pic was taken by Griffiths911 then given to that website (it's run by former crew). He also took the Lynx and SAS pics, although obviously he didn't take the Boeing and Canberra pics (he was on Cardiff at the time) he was sent them by an Argentine friend and then he sent them to me (hence why he isn't called "author" but "source" instead), I didn't know about the published thing. The Canberra pic must be over 25 yrs old though, as it was destroyed during the war. Ryan4314 (talk) 20:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can vouch for the Lynx and SAS images, that's enough for me. The "rusted pic", however, should have further support given the contradictory implication present on the website; it would be best if Griffiths911 provided an email to OTRS. Publishing and existing are different notions; there's no doubt it existed in 1982, but we need to support the claim that it was published at least 20 years ago. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 20:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll just remove the rusted name pic and get Ken to add it at Commons under public domain. Don't know about the Boeing and Canberra pics though, I can't find them on Google, what should I do? I'll next be able to reply at approx 12:00 (UTC) Ryan4314 (talk) 23:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)