HMS Endymion (1865) was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles
Endymion was always described as a 21-gun ship. The Times of 9-8-1866 gave her armament as 4 × 6½-ton guns, 3 × 110-pounder guns, 14 × 8-inch guns, and on 31-8-1866 stated that she was to be armed with 4 × 300-pounder guns, corrected the next day to 100-pounder guns. This gives a total of 25 guns. Are the 6½-ton guns the same as the 100-pounders? Mjroots (talk) 05:34, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Copied from WT:MILHIST
"I somewhat question the listings of courts-martial for sailors from the ship - unless they were particularly notable I don't think they really deserve mention. Noting every sailor who was convicted of drunkenness smacks of WP:INDISCRIMINATE to me. Regardless, excellent work expanding the article! Parsecboy (talk) 02:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lets see, complement of 450, times 17 years service produced six courts-martial. These would seem to be pretty rare events. I've left names off as none of those CMd were wiki-notable. The Times would seem to be an excellent source for Royal Navy ships in service from 1785 to at least WWI. Mjroots (talk) 05:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the light of further discoveries, the maths are complement 450, times 17 years service produced 13 CMs, or 1 per 588 man-years of service. Still pretty rare IMHO. Mjroots (talk) 08:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also have reservations about the CM's since they're not really part of the ship's history, IMO. They're far more a concern of the ship's crew and officers than anything else.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:INDISCRIMINATE was raised earlier. During her service as a guard ship at Hull, there were many cases of drunkenness being dealt with by the local constabulary and petty sessions, as well as a few cases of drownings and absenteeism. These have not been covered as they are generally too trivial. Endymion is a slightly unusual case, as her service falls into three distinct periods - front line service, guard ship and hospital ship. The last two periods are also intertwined with the social history of the period. This is illustrated by assistance given at various fires, and some background to the use as a hospital ship. The Courts-martial also fall partly under this, although more in the context of military discipline than civil punishment. Mjroots (talk) 14:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, after a third editor questioned the existence of this section it was clear that the was not consensus for it to remain as a stand-alone section. Therefore I've incorporated the info into the main body of the text. Mjroots (talk) 05:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The British Library website hosts these. It is a subscription only site, but free access is available via most UK libraries. For this reason, the url will be different dependant on where in the UK access is gained from, and that is why not urls have been provided in references. The Times also falls under a similar scenario. Mjroots (talk) 09:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the one about target/gunnery practice. It would be OR to try and interpret what was meant by the source. I've wikilinked the term used by the source. As for where Villafranca is, I added that tag myself - Villafranca Sicula or Villafranca Tirrena seem the likeliest candidates. This should not be a big enough problem to prevent promotion IMHO. Mjroots (talk) 12:36, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article cannot pass the review with maintenance templates in place. I suggest different wording or elimination of the passage if it cannot be made clear. Brad (talk) 06:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lot of unnecessary detail surrounding the crew of the ship. The article is reading like a daily itinerary of events. Focus on the ship and summary of events are needed.
For File:HMS Endymion (1865).jpg the life +70 tag does not apply unless the year of death of the author is known and listed. For File:Atlas & Endymion.jpg the life +70 cannot apply if the author is unknown; same for File:Endymion Galley.jpg. Copyright by publication date licenses are probably better but files on commons must clearly be out of copyright for the US.
File:Atlas & Endymion.jpg - This image was published by the Illustrated London News on 23 July 1881. Therefore it is in the public domain. Mjroots (talk)
In the Administration and hospital ship section you have two pics bunched up together. They need to spread out within that section if both pics are relevant to that section.
There is a lot of unnecessary detail surrounding the crew of the ship. The article is reading like a daily itinerary of events. Focus on the ship and summary of events are needed.
I take it this is referring to the "History" section and that the description and construction sections pass muster. The history section is split into three - "Front-line service", "Guard ship" and "Administration and hospital ship". Again, I take it that there is no problem with the latter. Which brings us down to two subsections. Brad, is it the courts-martial or assistance at fires you have issues with, or both? Mjroots (talk) 13:59, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok; here are a few examples:
On 25 February, one of her carpenters was court-martialled on board HMS Hibernia for drunkenness. He was found guilty and dismissed from the ship, being returned to the United Kingdom on board HMS Megaera. and this matters why?
On 27 November, her assistant-paymaster was court-martialled on board HMS Hibernia for being absent without leave. He was found guilty, losing a year's seniority and being dismissed from the ship. and this matters why?
In March 1879, a butcher in Hull launched a lawsuit to recover £47 in respect of meat supplied to the officers of the wardroom mess. A mess-man by the name of Jones had collected monies from various crew, but not paid the butcher. The jury found in favour of the plaintiff, even though notices had been placed in the local press stating that Jones was not authorised to pledge the credit of the officers on board Endymion. and this is an event important enough to mention? Why?
I could list example after example. Remember that the article is about Endymion and should only concentrate as much as possible about things that had effect on the ship. Mentions of court martials, detail of building fires and activities of other ships should be at a bare minimum. Brad (talk) 07:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. IMHO, this article isn't just about the ship. Her crew had an important part to play too. Military discipline was (and still is) a part of miltary life. As noted above, the Courts-martial work out at a little over 1 per 600 man-years service, so were fairly rare occurrences. The details included under the section covering her use as a guard ship give some insight into the socio-economic history of the mid-C19th. Military personnel frequently assisted at fires in the days before the formation of a dedicated fire service on a county wide level. The butcher suing gives some insight into how ships were supplied in those days (what would nowadays be called "logistics"). It shows that where a ship was stationed at a particular place for a long period of time, supplies were often contracted on a local basis, at mess-level in this case.
Whilst at Hull, many crewmembers from Endymion absconded and were arrested by the local police. They were often fined and returned to the ship. You will notice that I've kept these details from the article as I feel that they really are too trivial. Courts-martial on the other hand, were not trivial affairs, and were rarer than many people would imagine was the case.
So, looking to work through this, I could re-add a "courts-martial" section that would give a brief overvwiew of how many CMs there were, when and where they were held - rather than the detailed section that was previously part of the article. I think the sole CM held on board Endymion should stay. Mjroots (talk) 12:10, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is too detailed and appears like an itinerary; practically every other sentence begins with On xxxx etc. Adding a court-martial section would only make things worse. Again, this is an article about a ship and should not be a socio-economic history or an example of how military discipline was carried out. Brad (talk) 06:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would concur with Brad's concerns. There are many trivial details on extremely tangential aspects to the ship herself. While I understand the temptation to include many of the different details that can be collected from contemporary reports, I feel a greater level of discrimination needs to be shown (WP:SUMMARY). It should not be a social history of the Royal Navy of the period, nor should it seek to cover all aspects of the crew's life, let alone the ship's. If you are using these examples to demonstrate how logistics of the period worked, then we are deviating from the true subject of the topic. Brad's examples seem just the sort of detail I would say to cut from the article. Benea (talk) 17:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem, I'm not editing much atm due to health issues. Will keep the above comments in mind and come back to the artice once I've recovered. Mjroots (talk) 17:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on HMS Endymion (1865). 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.
.jpg)
.svg)
b (citations to reliable sources): 
Done - image moved. Mjroots (talk) 13:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
