Talk:Unicorn (Tintin)

The flag in the Spanish edition by Editorial Juventud

"El Unicornio" flies a white flag -which, incidentally, was the French 18th-century pre-revolutionay naval ensign. At times, by the Spanish editor's mistake, I presume, it can be hardly noticed what seems to be the vessel's original ensign: a blue flag dotted with golden fleurs-de-lys, that is, a French 17th-century naval ensign. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.85.148.202 (talk) 11:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Great comment. See my comment below. Prhartcom (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The Union Jack

A mistake on the part of the English editor. The 17th-century English warships, with the exception of Cromwell's fleet, flew the Red Ensign and the Blue Ensign, in both cases with the English red cross of Saint George in the canton. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.85.148.202 (talk) 11:52, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Great comment. The warship in the book prominently shows the Union Jack (barely visible in the image from the Tintin book appearing in this article but more visible in other views of the ship in the book). In the original Casterman edition, as you say in the previous comment above, I have no doubt the French flag is shown. The English publishers may have substituted the wrong flag. We'd better leave the text in this English-speaking article according to the source. Prhartcom (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 16:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll make it snappy and quick. — Ssven2 ^{speak 2 me} 16:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Lead

• I feel it should be expanded to at least two paragraphs (the current para remaining as it is and the second para explaining about Sir Francis's Battle with Red Rackham).
  • Fair enough; I have made this improvement; I agree that it was needed. Prhartcom (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

In The Adventures of Tintin

• "In Hergé's original French version as well as in many international versions," — "many international versions" sounds anonymous. I feel "In Hergé's original French version," would suffice, (even though the international versions may have the same name).
  • I have made this correction. Prhartcom (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I see that you have made several changes to the article yourself rather than stating them here in the review. I agree that all of your changes are an improvement (with one exception); I appreciate the second pair of eyes. Question: Can you think of a single sentence description of the Unicorn we can add following mention of the 2011 film (in the Fictional history section)? Prhartcom (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Prhartcom: Don't need to as Spielberg reproduces that portion as per the book. But, if you insist, we can add that "the difference being that Haddock remembers it while walking through the Sahara desert with Tintin, while in the book, he reads Sir Francis's journal and narrates the story in his apartment to Tintin". — Ssven2 ^{speak 2 me} 06:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ah yes, that was the difference. I couldn't remember any difference but felt the need to say something. I agree that it isn't worth mentioning anything after all. Prhartcom (talk) 11:05, 17 February 2015‎ (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations! — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 13:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Name Unicorn

I think the article is confusing as at one point it states that "No ship named the Unicorn was listed in the annals of...the Royal Navy" but in the notes (and in my own research) it is clear that a ship of 50 guns from c. 1650 was named Unicorn. (I cannot verify that a Haddock was the captain, as the notes say.)

Suggest we delete the line in question. Lordjim13 (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

That's not according to the reliable sources the article provides, which say otherwise. On Wikipedia, our own original research counts for nothing. Prhartcom (talk) 19:28, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

(Sorry for late reply, don't come here often.) The two reliable sources listed are books on Tintin, whereas I have a book on The Royal Navy, which lists a ship named Unicorn several times in the 'annals' of the fleet. So the claim seems factually incorrect, and at the least imprecise. Lordjim13 (talk) 14:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely, if you cite the source, you can improve the article and make this change. Prhartcom (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2015 (UTC)