Talk:History of the Royal Australian Navy

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of the Royal Australian Navy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

History 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
Date	Process	Result
August 27, 2006	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
September 7, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
September 16, 2006	WikiProject A-class review	Not approved
November 12, 2009	Good article reassessment	Kept
August 21, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Military history: Maritime / South Pacific

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:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has failed an A-Class review.

Australia: Military history / Maritime High‑importance

	Australia portal History of the Royal Australian Navy is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian maritime history (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

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]

Thanks Nick but you deserve more than a little credit. You started the article and have contributed alot to it, now onto FA. Hossen27 08:03, 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

Image:Perth sydbridge.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at 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.

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

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

The image Image:Cyclone tracy aerial view darwin.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the 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

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

Image:Manoora Dili (20060528ran8098578 008).jpg

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 WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet 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 History of the Royal Australian Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{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. 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{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. 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) 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. 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) 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]

Delist needs significant cleanup ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:14, 13 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]