Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Rolls-Royce R/archive1

2c issues

From Project Page due to length Fifelfoo (talk) 02:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of your short citations don't end in a fullstop (en_US: period). Consider adding a fullstop on the end of those.

Flight is a magazine. Try treating it like a journal: " [Staff author] 2 October 1931. "The Rolls-Royche Racing Engines" Flight p.990 www.flightglobal.com. Retrieved: 14 November 2009. " (in reference to, for example): ^ a b c Flight, 2 October 1931, p. 990 – The Rolls-Royce Racing Engines www.flightglobal.com. Retrieved: 14 November 2009

National archives is miscited, you can't cite a whole archive (unless you're a historian, off wiki) you're citing a document within a file within an archival holding within an archive... This is of course a primary source remember. Try: " Document author, Document date, Document title within archive, ie, the specific page of correspondence or test you're citing. AVIA 13/122 (Air Ministry and successors: Royal Aircraft Establishment (from 1988, Royal Aerospace Establishment)). The National Archives, Kew (United Kingdom).

Schneider Trophy 70th anniversary, consider treating as named pages? Try " RAF (UK). The Schneider Trophy - 70th Anniversary, The 1927 Race. Retrieved 17 October 2009. " (from example:) ^ Schneider Trophy – The 1927 Race www.raf.mod.uk. Retrieved: 17 October 2009.

Science museum? Try treating as an exhibit. Supermarine Seaplane, S.6.B. S.1595, Inventory number: 1932-532 [exhibit]. www.sciencemuseum.org.uk. Retrieved: 15 October 2009.

In general, a number of your weblinks are really courtesy links to other items you're citing, please consider citing the actual object: the exhibit, etc. instead of citing as weblinks.

Mis positioned colon: "Historical Series no 16: " instead of "Historical Series no 16 :" in Rubbra, A.A. Rolls-Royce Piston Aero Engines - a designer remembers: Historical Series no 16 :Rolls Royce Heritage Trust, 1990.

Can you please briefly convince me that you've exhausted the literature? A short paragraph summarising how you've exhausted search possibilities?

Thanks, I will let Red Sunset look at your reference formatting suggestions, we have taken great care to apply reference formatting consistently throughout the article. On exhausting the literature, I bought a used copy of 'Leap into Legend' recently through eBay, my daughter bought me 'The Fast Set' last Christmas (I only recently picked it up again after realising how much information there was on this engine in there) and I recently borrowed 'The Schneider Trophy Story' from a public library, this rare book was very useful. I also own Lumsden 'British Aero engines and their aircraft', an expensive volume that only has one page on the Rolls-Royce R sadly. Another book that I own is Gunstons's 'World Encyclopaedia of Aero Engines', no more than a paragraph in there. I found one usable cite in Gunstons other publication 'Development of Piston Aero Engines' that I also possess. There may be more information in Leo Villa's book noted in 'Further reading' but being out of print and probably rare I don't hold much hope in getting hold of one at a reasonable price. Another book is mentioned, a speedboat publication of 1959, again I will look for it but fear that I won't be able to find a copy. I did travel to various museums to take my own photographs as you noted but stopped short of contacting Rolls-Royce directly although I may do that for my own interest and it could not be used here as original research in any case. I have tried to avoid use of web references as they are often classified as non-reliable sources at FAC level, Flight being the exception. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for explaining your literature search. It certainly sounds exhaustive and confirms my suspicions from checking your citations. Regarding citation style, a number of these are stylistic, a few are mandatory (Flight being a real journal, that happens to have back issues online). Flight, of course, being a focused trade journal is a HQRS for this article. Will look forward to clearing up the few cite issues with Red Sunset when available. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly did read quite a few books, the problem was that the snippets of information were scattered through them at places that I could not remember later! I think that we do have a Flight specific cite template in the aviation project developed shortly after the PDF archive was published online but it is rarely used for some reason, will have a look for it. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The National Archive file on this engine is cited (current cite note 32), my learned colleague recently wikilinked to the generic The National Archives which may be misleading? Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 02:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of issues; all to do with Verification of the document (ie, allowing other researchers to access it). There are multiple national archives (the UK needs to be specified). The UK national archives has multiple repositories, Kew needs to be included in the cite. Series AVIA 13 Subseries 122 should include the generating authority's name (ie: Air Ministry and successors: Royal Aircraft Establishment (from 1988, Royal Aerospace Establishment)). Also AVIA13/122 is likely to be at least 10cm of archives; so, finally the document within the subseries really needs to be included in the cite, say, "Royal Aircraft Establishment, proposal relating to destructive testing of Rolls-Royce R engines, October and November 1932." Assembled this becomes Royal Aircraft Establishment, proposal relating to destructive testing of Rolls-Royce R engines, October and November 1932. AVIA13/122 (Air Ministry and successors: Royal Aircraft Establishment (from 1988, Royal Aerospace Establishment)). National Archives, Kew (UK). Fifelfoo (talk) 02:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, the paragraph is formally Original Research within the meaning of wikipedia; but you use it very very closely to acceptable uses of primary sources (photograph type illustration, rather than citing facts). I'd suggest keeping it in. Its a specific document, and it isn't a social history article where you'd be inferring political / cultural outcomes from archives. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that the National Archives document reference was in the article before I attempted to improve it and took it in good faith, I have not viewed the document personally but maybe I should but that would also be original research. I found the Flight template, Template:Cite flightglobal, has four 'what links here' hits. Seems to relate to the modern version of this magazine and appears wholly unpopular for some reason. I bow to your greater knowledge of researching archives, I am a mere wikipedian with some books, a background knowledge of the subject and the ability (hopefully) to string this all together into a comprehensive and factually accurate article. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 02:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out how we can improve the citing style here Fifelfoo. I'll set to and implement your recommendations, but please note it may take longer than I would like as both Nimbus and I are experiencing extremely slow Internet connections at the moment – probably something to do with the abysmal weather keeping everyone indoors looking at YouTube!!! Cheers. --Red Sunset 19:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "Flight" Template still wikilinks the date of issue and the access date; I take it these will no longer be used? (I also note that there is a [template for Jane's]). Minorhistorian (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There may have been a discussion about the Flight template in the aviation project, might be worth bringing it up there but as I noted nobody is using it. The template is not much use for this article as it relates to the modern Flight International and not the magazine as it was in 1930. I think that RS has resolved the cite formatting suggestion in this particular article. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Minor; however, as Nimbus points out I've modified (satisfactorily I hope) the citing format, but that Jane's template would come in useful for future use elsewhere. I'm sure Fifelfoo will let me know if/where I've gone wrong though! --Red Sunset 23:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdent)

These three further reading items need fullcites (which I can't provide):Fifelfoo (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Royal Aeronautical Research Committee Reports & Memoranda 1575 – British High Speed Aircraft for the 1931 Schneider Trophy Contest"
"Supermarine Schneider Seaplanes". Aeroplane magazine, October 2001.
Villa, Leo and Desmond, Kevin. The World Water Speed Record