Talk:USS Cassin Young

This was posted to my talk page. Because I believe that conversation about an article should be on the article's talk page, I have moved it here.

You added {{citation needed}} to my edit saying that she had been moved to East Boston. I had cited my photograph showing her in East Boston -- why do you think a photo does not provide the necessary proof? To be sure, it cannot prove the exact date of the move, but it certainly proves the substance of the fact. BTW she was moved back on Tuesday of this week. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 14:34, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Citing your own work isn't strictly proper. See WP:SOURCE and citing your own photograph pretty much amounts to a self published source. I do not doubt for a moment that what you said is true, it is just that it isn't a proper thing to do. And, it wan't just that sentence but the whole section is unreferenced.

Now that Cassin Young has returned to her normal berth, it would seem to me that the entire section can be removed or modified to say that between this date and that date Cassin Young was closed to the public while repair work was conducted at the drydock (reference third-party source).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:57, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. I agree completely that citing one's own book or web site is not OK, but a photograph is a photograph, and who took it doesn't really matter, unless, of course, there is reason to suspect that it is a fabrication. We take photographs of NRHP sites all the time and insert them into articles, or even create articles around them. In doing so, we depend on the photographer's having photographed the correct building, or, in some cases, his or her assertion that the correct building no longer exists (e.g. Charles Marsh House}. In this case, the photograph clearly shows the Logan airport tower, so, unless I fabricated it, it is the best possible documentation that she was in East Boston for some period -- certainly better than some fan site.

However, as you suggest, while she was here in East Boston, it was important to tell readers not to expect to find her in her usual home, but now that she has been moved back, the time here becomes a minor incident in a long career, perhaps not even worth a mention. The Cassin Young volunteers site http://www.dd793.org/ is not up to date, but perhaps can provide a cite when it is.

As for the proper place for the discussion, you're quite correct that it should take place here. However, I have found that many of our colleagues don't pay attention to article talk pages, so it is often necessary to get their attention by beginning on their talk page. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 13:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Last ship damaged by kamikazes?

I don't think the statement is true, even though I read the same thing at the ship when I toured it last week. The CY volunteers own web site shows that several other ships were hit after the CY, the last one being the LaGrange (APA-124), on August 13. I haven't checked on all the ships on that list, but the LaGrange's WP page makes the claim that it was the last ship hit, and on August 13. I was also looking at the WP page for Borie (DD-704), and it was hit on August 9, with substantial loss of lives. At any rate, there seems to be ample evidence that the claim the the CY was the last ship is wrong. Therefore I will delete the sentence making that claim. Busaccsb (talk) 20:53, 15 May 2016 (UTC)