Talk:HMS Sheffield (C24)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on HMS Sheffield (C24). 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/20140811110717/https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/libraries/archives-and-local-studies/research-guides/hms-sheffield to https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/libraries/archives-and-local-studies/research-guides/hms-sheffield

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 13:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright Issue

This appears to be a reverse copyvio. Most of the articles on the http://www.russianconvoyclub.org.nz/RoyalNavyShipsPT.html page are close copies of their corresponding WP articles. The Sheffield-related text on that site dates back to at least 2008 (https://web.archive.org/web/20080516112448/http://www.russianconvoyclub.org.nz/MembersShips.htm) and if the copyright dates on that page are accurate, was first created in 2007 (the domain was first registered 2007-05-11 according to https://www.dnc.org.nz/whois/search?domain_name=russianconvoyclub.org.nz).

The bulk of the WP article was written on 2006-11-02 by User:Folks_at_137, but the supposed "source" contains corrections made by User:Cosal on 2007-01-22 (but not the further corrections made by other authors in August 2007, indicating that it was copied between these dates; likely around the date of the domain registration in May 2007), thus, it cannot be the original source.

Mallardtheduck (talk) 13:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

It certainly seems quite bizarre that this was even listed as a potential copybio when it's so obviously a reverse copybio. 2600:1702:1870:74D0:B56C:CB57:8785:608 (talk) 04:19, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Agreed - this seems a pretty clear case where it's been copied from us. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:05, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:HMS Sheffield (C24)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Klutserke (talk · contribs) 21:48, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 08:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 08:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comments: @Sturmvogel 66 and Klutserke: Where are we regarding the status of this article? It's been a while since this review was updated and with the GANR backlog drive coming up I want to make sure all potential articles are able to be included. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 23:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

  Hoi @IntentionallyDense, this is my first GA review submission. I will pick up any remarks mentioned here but I don't have an idea when remarks will be logged Klutserke (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

• Images appropriately licensed
• Earwig reports only 16%
• The lede is a bit short for such a long article; see German cruiser Prinz Eugen for an example on how to write a lede for a ship. Remember that you're summarizing the main body (WP:LEAD), so don't fill it out with excessive detail. It's hard to find a balance, but do your best.
• Let me add to your difficulties with the lede by noting that you refer to the actions with the Bismarck and Scharnhorst twice. Once is enough.
  • I had a go at it, could you review ?
• The motto, nickname and pennant number in the infobox need citations unless they're cited in the main body or lede, which is preferable
  • I reffed the pennant and yard nbr, the nickname is ref'd in the characteristic chapter
• All measurements should have imperial and metric conversions and the unfamiliar ones should be linked, including long tons
  • fixed on tonnage and oil capacity, any other places left ?
• The ship was built and scrapped before the British went to the metric system. All measurements should be in imperial first with a metric conversion
  • fixed - I checked how it's done on other pages.
• I'm fussy about the infobox and have fixed a large number of minor issues myself. That said you need to spell out quadruple and add links to the radars where they have their own article
  • Ok done
• There are a lot of missing links to nautical and aviation jargon: class, laid down, launched, battleship, torpedo bomber, scrapped, decommissioned, reserve, etc.
  • I added some links. just a few doubts : town-class is linked, is that what you meant with 'class' ? Also, commisioning and decommissionning are covered by the same article, should i link twice nevertheless ?
• The ship had an aircraft catapult, hangars and aircraft. Why are they not in the infobox? Or the main body?
  • added in characteristics and infobox
• Similarly, where's the range information?
  • added both in characteristics and infobox
• Are you aware that the ship has a biography? Ronald Basset's HMS Sheffield: The Life and Times of 'Old Shiny'. Might be useful borrow or acquire a copy.
  • Added under 'further reading'.
• I'm not trying to denigrate your work here; you've done pretty well for a first-time GA nomination. I just think that's it's essential to refer to a book specifically about a ship, when writing about said ship.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

  Hoi, thx for your effort. indeed it's a first time GA nomination, For B-class referencing seems to be the most important thing, for GA it's more about content i see. I had no idea to what kind of thing to pay attention to for GA, so that's more clear now. I'll pick up your points one by one and add comment inline. Klutserke (talk) 22:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• I'll start going through the service section later tonight or tomorrow.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: @Sturmvogel 66 and Klutserke: where are we at with this review? It doesn't look like there's been much activity recently and I just wanted to check in. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 01:12, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  I have addressed the above points and once Sturmvogel 66 continues the review I'll kick in again. Klutserke (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  Sounds good, thanks for the reply. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 19:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)