Jump to content

Talk:CSS Alabama

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Manning

[edit]

Wasn´t it so that almost the entire crew was compiled of Non-Americans, fighting for prize money? And only the officers were from CS? Regards, Tekko 16 May 2007

Disovery of the Wreck

[edit]

Though the French Navy is credited with discovering the wreck, much of the leg work had already been done by Clive Cussler and his NUMA organization. In his account "The Sea Hunters", Cussler comments that while near the wreck site, his vessel was boarded by the French Navy when they came to close to the nuclear submarine base at Cherbourg. All of NUMA's charts and logs were confiscated. Later, when the French Navy was announcing "their" discovery one of the NUMA charts indicating Cusslers previous search grids was actually shown on French TV.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on CSS Alabama. 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. 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) 01:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

[edit]

Some of the language in the current version seems to belong more to a tribute to rather than an article about the Alabama. This will require some attention. I invite other editors to help out. Jd2718 (talk) 00:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I added the POV and Tone banners to the article. The history section sticks out as the most innaporpriate; it's well written, but not encyclopedic in tone, and certainly borders on WP:NPOV ("back-breaking work", "floated free on the breeze", "Semmes changed his tack"). The discussion of the flags also seems problematic. Referring to the "Stars and Bars", especially in a section heading, is not neutral. Certianly needs additional citations as well, although those banners are already present. ThunderBacon (talk) 15:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was struck by exactly the same thing as soon as I read the article, not taking too much notice of the banners. I started editing the article for grammar plus some punctuation and found myself changing the more emotional stuff. I only saw your comment here later and note that I have dealt with your three examples. I have left the banners so that other editors can judge what more has to be done.
Incidentally, I think that the whole section on the battle should be considerably reduced here as it is substantially the same as the text in the Battle of Cherbourg (1864) article. Freeman501 (talk) 18:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Jumping in here because I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to do this: I noticed that there's a bunch of small, low effort articles on various parts of the Alabama's service with the CSN that should probably be combined with the main article.
Full List:
CSS Alabama's Eastern Atlantic Expeditionary Raid
CSS Alabama's New England Expeditionary Raid
CSS Alabama's Eastern Atlantic Expeditionary Raid
CSS Alabama's South Atlantic Expeditionary Raid
CSS Alabama's South African Expeditionary Raid
CSS Alabama's Gulf of Mexico Expeditionary Raid
CSS Alabama's Indian Ocean Expeditionary Raid Zatack7 (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of contents about similarities to Nautilus without discussion

[edit]

Recently User:Fangz removed (or massively condensed) a lot of info (with references) →‎Claimed Links between the CSS Alabama and Captain Nemo’s fictional submarine the Nautilus without adding {{cn}} like <nowiki>[citation needed]<nowiki>, or discussion here. Removed contents included links to sources, but additional, and better, citations might be requested before removal.

For next editors: most of this article lacks inline citations, but Bibliography section, at a glance, seems to support the article, so the task would IMO be to go through Bibliography sources, and use that for inserting necessary inline citations, please, not just silently removing not (inline/exactly) supported contents. (If/as i'll find time to go through those, I'll add inline citations).

I understand the now condensed section might previously be, or look un-encyclopaedic, and that also influenced this reduction.

But I was looking for features of this ship (how she was sailed, steamed, faught...; how she survived cyclone in October 1862... because that was reasonably well documented for the time of transition from sailships to powered ships). Verne wrote elsewhere about similar ships (e.g. in Children of Captain Grant) and I was interested in details (and where I live, there are no (more) sailors with experience on such ships). So info in the removed part included several of the references that were interesting to me, and after you removed that (and expected newer edits accumulate in history of the article) that will be harder to find. If you gave link to diff of what was removed here to the talk page - like I did above - I'd already be happy and wouldn't grumble here. Otherwise, good job condensing that part... Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that the section is in violation of Wikipedia's rules on original research. Most of it was in the form of "this happened with Nautilus" (reference to novel), this happened to the Alabama (reference to Alabama), therefore a connection". It's definitionally WP:SYNTH. Individual aspects of it might possibly be readded but the comparison is hugely problematic and it breaks the flow and structure of the rest of the article. Further, it's not exactly true that I removed it without discussion. The section has been discussed and previously removed from a number of other articles where it had been copy and pasted in, this is one of a couple of instances where it was missed. The user had admitted that it was original research on their talkpage. It seems a very open and shut case. Honestly in the current condensed form we're already going out on a limb because we're using a self published blog. Most of the citations etc can be found in there, in the link I retained. Fangz (talk) 10:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Cherbourg

[edit]

What's the sourcing behind the detailed account of this battle on this page? Also seems odd that it's longer than the "main article". Fangz (talk) 10:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CSS Naming

[edit]

This is just a general question for ALL confederate ships. There is not a single nation on earth that recognized the confederacy as a legitimate state, they were a rebelling territory of the United States. So why is CSS added to their ship names?

Won't make any article changes. Aldrich.Faithful (talk) 23:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CSS_Alabama&oldid=1257638362"