Talk:Action of 9 November 1822

Red Flag

Why is the red flag here, it's description says it was used by communists in the 1900s and not by pirates in the 1800s. I am removing it now. Also, the pirates were Cuban.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 04:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

If you read the sources cited in the text, all accounts (including the log of the Alligator) state that the pirates raised a red flag right before attacking the american boats. There is no source that states the nationality of the pirates, though if you can find one please feel free to change it so long as it can be cited.XavierGreen (talk) 05:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

As for the campaign name, the offical name used by the US navy is Operations Against West Indian Pirates 1822–1830s, there is even a naval streamer issued that uses the name.XavierGreen (talk) 05:16, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright I understand your point and sorry for changing around your edits in the beginning there, a few sources, apparently less detailed and accurate than the ones you found, say two schooners were captured, which would also explain why I changed the "result" section. (Capturing two of three scooners can't be considered indecisive if you know what I mean). Still I don't think a communist flag should be used here, even if it is exactly the same in appearance as the one the pirates used, but I guess it doesn't matter. Also, I have seen terms similar to Operations Against West Indian Pirates 1822–1830s but it didn't sound very official to me particulalry since the specific year in the 1830s is not present. Also, when it comes to the "part of" section, I thought it might be convenient to have a link there and the Piracy in the Caribbean article is a good harbor of information that at least briefly discusses the time in which we are writing about. You clearly have more info about this event than I do but typically the pirates in that time, most of whom were Cuban and Puerto Rican, operated off their own shores so as to easily be able to escape to shore or into shallow water where larger draft vessels could not pursue. Both tactics helped alot of outlaws escape the US Navy. When the US and Britain began operations, piracy became very dangerous so the pirates (of Cuba and Puerto Rico) almost always operated off their own coasts because their own country is where they could and did expect the best possibility of evading punishment. Alot of Puerto Rican and Cuban citizens did not dislike the pirates, many where loved like Roberto Cofresi. I know this doesn't necessarily mean the pirates were all Cuban nationals but they were definately pirates that operated out of Cuba and that is why "Cuban Pirates" was used. For example, alot of the pirates attacking ships today off Somalia are not Somali, many are Yemeni or from Somaliland but they are all generally recognized as Somalia pirates in the various articles about them because of where they operate. Somalia is a war-zone (as I'm sure you know) without a sovreign government to fight the pirates which is why the pirates attack ships primarily in those waters. Just the same was true for the Caribbean back then, the Spanish navy was in a decline, as well as their empire which is why there were so many Cuban and Puerto Rican pirates. The U.S. navy was small too and the British were in the post Napoleonic Wars era, a time when the Royal Navy was reduced from it's war time strength. Another example would be Eli Boggs an American but a famous Chinese pirate because of where he became famous. I don't know if you have ever heard of the term "China Sailor", it referred to American sailors stationed in China. I hope you can see why I did what I did, I think adding "Cuban Pirates" should be okay but I also believe it is sort of the same situation as the flag issue. Sorry for the conflict and good job, it's nice to see that at least someone on wiki hasn't forgotten about the 1820s-1830s pirate campaign in the West Indies.

One more thing, if I add the "piracy in the Caribbean' link again, please do not remove it as I do believe it is appropriate and I will not remove the term you added (I'll make it a link too, even though the page doesn't exist, yet). I think that if it is possible (and it may not be) we should try to find out what exact year the pirate operation officially ended and then I would be more than happy to add the term to the other related articles. I was thinking about creating an article about the operations but I did not think a long title like what you have stated is official would be accepted by other users. I figured it would likely be renamed something ridiculous or merged. Thanks and sorry again.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 06:35, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I think leaving both Piracy in the Carribian and Operations Against West Indian Pirates 1822–1830sin the header is a fine comprimise. The problem with adding cuban pirates is that it is unsourced, I literally have scoured all the sources i can find and there is no mention as to where the pirates came from. Like you said most of them were likely cubans, but without a source it would be original research. As for the red flag, the same flag is used in a wide variety of articles requiring a red flag such as the flag of various african states and even the flag of morroco in the 19th century. For simplicity the same image is used over several articles since having multiple files of the same red flag would be redundant.XavierGreen (talk) 07:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Action of 9 November 1822/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jim Sweeney (talk) 02:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

1. Buccaneer is slightly different from pirate can I suggest you stay with pirate
2. despite the lack of wind, using its sweeps - are sweeps oars clarification required for us non nautical types

--Jim Sweeney (talk) 02:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

1. 1. I believe i have fixed both these issues.XavierGreen (talk) 07:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

• Passed GA a tidy little article. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Action of 9 November 1822. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100817130215/http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org12-2.htm to http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org12-2.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)