Talk:History of the Royal Australian Navy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Former good articleHistory of the Royal Australian Navy was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 27, 2006WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
September 7, 2006Good article nomineeListed
September 16, 2006WikiProject A-class reviewNot approved
November 12, 2009Good article reassessmentKept
August 21, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Which is the notable Garden Island

Something that stands out in the article is that HMAS Kuttabul is referred to as Garden Island in the press where as Stirling is referred to as Stirling. That by associating Garden Island only with Stirling could lead to confussion when using this as a reference. Gnangarra 11:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oops, good point, ill change that. Hossen27 11:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA

Congratulations on the good work. You're not far from an FA. Durova 20:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Congratulations Hossen! --
    Nick Dowling 07:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]

WWI - first shots

There's a plaque at the enterance to port phillip bay, victoria that claims the RAN fired the first shots of WWI on a German merchant vessel attempting to leave the bay just after the declaration of WAR. The plaque is near queenscliffe? also a number of other memorials there to the navy as well. Gnangarra 10:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I forgot about that incident it would be worth a mention in the article, its a pretty big claim it would need to be referenced. Unfortunatly like you Gnangarra im in WA thats a little far to go to get a pic. Hossen27 10:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Found an Age article on it [2]. Hossen27 10:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you're looking for a photo, the Australian War Memorial's online database has several good-quality photoes of this battery in WW1. --
Nick Dowling 11:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Pacific Patrol Boat Program

I think that the Pacific Patrol Boat Program is being covered in too much detail. The RAN didn't crew or operate any of these ships, and this was a defence co-operation and diplomatic program rather than something which forms part of the RAN's history. I think that the RAN's role in the program should be the subject of a single paragraph, at most. --

Nick Dowling 07:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Your probably right Nick, but into what section to stick it, a single para is usually too short for a separate heading. Hossen27 10:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest that it go in the Two Ocean Navy Policy section. The current material on the Pacific Patrol boat program would, of course, be a great addition to that article. --
Nick Dowling 10:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

The opening sentence

"The History of the Royal Australian Navy can be traced back to 1788 and the colonisation of Australia by the British."

But the Royal Australian Navy was only formed out of the Commonwealth Naval Force in 1901. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.108.238.234 (talk) 10:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Perth sydbridge.jpg

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

talk) 14:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Image copyright problem with Image:Cyclone tracy aerial view darwin.jpg

The image

requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation
linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boxer Rebellion

No mention at all of the Australian Naval China Contingent to the Boxer Uprising

http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/boxer.asp

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/other/boxer-handy.htm

http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ausnavy/Military%20Action.htm

138.217.120.205 (talk) 03:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a history of the Royal Australian Navy, which was formed in 1911, well after the Boxer Uprising Nick-D (talk) 03:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is
transcluded from Talk:History of the Royal Australian Navy/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article is being reviewed as part of the

GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2006, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant.Pyrotec (talk) 14:38, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Initial comments

This article is quite comprehensive in respect of its scope and is fairly well referenced; however there are many unreferenced paragraphs and some references are broken or are inadequately referenced. I will add some details below. Pyrotec (talk) 21:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pre-Federation navies -
  • Reference 2 is inadequately specified.
  • Formation -
  • The final two paragraphs, half the section, are unreferenced.
  • World War I -
  • Ref 9 appears to be a book. The relevant page number or pages numbers should be citated.
  • Ref 10 is a broken web link.
  • Ref 11 is a broken web link.
  • The 1918–19 influenza pandemic -
  • The second paragraph has an undated {citation needed} flag - I'm not certain how long it has been there.
  • Ref 17 leads to a web-based index page. The link as currently given does not provide any means of verification.
    • South Pacific aid mission -
  • In the first paragraph, Ref 18 confirms an apology. Only this one sentence is referenced. The rest of the paragraph is not
    WP:verifiable
    .
  • It is not clear what ref 19 is.

....to be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 21:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are various other sections with {citation} need flags, all of them undated. Pyrotec (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

On balance, the article is reasonably well referenced, the prose is good, the article is comprehensive in scope and is well illustrated. I'm therefore going to close this review and mark the article history as GA-status: "Keep". Pyrotec (talk) 19:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 10:55, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of the Royal Australian Navy. 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:

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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on History of the Royal Australian Navy. 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:

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.

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

History of the Royal Australian Navy

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Significant portions of the article lack inline citations. This is a violation of

criterion 2b. There are also a few old maintenance tags. (sidenote: this article received a GAR 13 years ago, see Talk:History of the Royal Australian Navy/GA1) Phlsph7 (talk) 08:24, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IrXISUU7pW84jUB8XAwvLT_b6Bsxu7oB/view?usp=drivesdk 2001:16A4:20F:C0C2:6320:2EA9:7178:6FD6 (talk) 07:34, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_the_Royal_Australian_Navy&oldid=1213271907"