User talk:Rama/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 → Archive 15

Demerliac requests

Hi Rama, I think an article on privateering under the Republic might be a worthwhile addition to the corpus. One of the interesting issues would be figuring out how to find logical links to the article. In the meantime, here are three more requests, all from the Channel/North Sea, and all involving Hired armed cutter Marechal de Cobourg. 1) Espoir captured 12-12-1796; 2) Revanche captured 25-2-1798); and 3)Bien Venu/Bienvenu captured 2-3-1801. Thanks, and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 02:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Late additional request: Does Demerlia have anything on the privateer Brave, launched at Nantes c. 1797 and captured 24 April 1798. She became HMS Arab (1798). Thanks, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:51, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Sorry for the delay, I am freshly returned from the WikiConvention.
  • Espoir: A 40-ton (load) lugger commissioned in Boulogne in May 1793 under Pierre-Louis-Nicolas Hardouin with 8 swivel guns and 6 smaller pieces (sort of pivot-mounted blunderbusses, I am struggling to find a proper term for that) and 37 men. She was under Jean-Pierre-Antoine Duchenne from October to November 1795, and under Pierre-Antoine-Joseph Sauvage, with 20 men and 2 guns, until her capture by Coburg. (no 1835, p.225)
  • Revanche: Lugger from Calais, commissioned in January 1798. Laid on keel in November 1798 and planned to be launched in December. 62 feet long (57 at the keel), with 55 men and pierced for 12. Commissioned under Jean Hedde with 6 6-pounders according to French records, but seems to have been reported as carrying 16 after her capture. Captured by Coburg, sustaining 7 killed and 8 wounded. Sunk after her capture. (no 1819, p.224)
  • Bienvenue: ship of undetermined type, with 80 men and 14 guns. (unnumbered, p. 333. of 1800-1815)
  • Brave: Goodness, this one is a frigate! 400 tons, 700 full load, commissioned in Nantes circa June 1797. 106 feet long (97 keel), 30'8" beam, 13 to 15 draught, pierced for 22. Under Joseph Robin with 160 men and 22 guns. Captured by HMS Phoenix and recommissioned as Arab with 20 9-pounders and 2 36-pounder carronades. Her plans are at the National Maritime Museum in Greenwitch. (no 2242, p.258)
Cheers! Rama (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rama, No worries re delay as I am in your debt; I hope you enjoyed the WikiConvention.

Great info. Again, the closer we are to the Channel, the better the info is on both sides. Brave/Arab is another of those cases where WP comes into its own. Not only are we combining Demerliac and Winfield, but a few days ago I found a great database on British whaling voyages and was able to pin down her civilian career and fate.
Here's another Demerliac request: the article Capture of the Brillante mentions the French slaver Brilliante that British anti-slavery patrols captured c.1832. It would be great if we would add some Demerliac into the story. Also, she apparently twice fought British warships, sinking one. Is there anything in your records about that?
Lastly, you are an admin and may know something about these things. A few days ago an admin had a ship article of mine deleted as "not notable", and admittedly, the current state of knowledge about this vessel is slim. As you may have noticed though, I am an inclusionist by temperament and this action offended my greatly. What can a mere editor do vis-à-vis an admin when the topic is specialized and the article minor, and so unlikely to stir up a wave of support? Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:36, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Sorry, the only Brillante I have is a naval corvette of the Commission, I doubt it bears any relationship. But there might be information in literature on slavery, I might give it a try. This is an important and much underrated subject.
I have a look at Hired armed tender Elizabeth, is that the one you are thinking about? The admin who deleted to article was merely implementing a deletion procedure initiated by somebody else, so you should not take the deletion to heart; as for the deletion request itself, it was probably initiated by somebody who does not realise that seemingly minor ships can constitute pieces of puzzles. We could put up a Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion and explain the issue.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 10:30, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rama, Too bad about Brilliante. Despite the name, she may not have been French. As for the Hired armed tender Elizabeth, I was not that angry with the admin that deleted it; he was merely unthinkingly implementing an action started by someone else, as you noted. The admin I was angry at was someone by the WP name of "Fram". I tried to get him to undo his action when he listed it for deletion. He clearly believes allowing non-notable articles in Wikipedia undermines its prestige - makes it trivial, rather than an important encyclopedia. Furthermore, he also believes that he is perfectly able to judge what is and is not notable, regardless of the knowledge domain. I disagree with him on notability. I doubt that anyone except high school students is delighted about articles on the big name topics; what he doesn't appreciate is the delight and awe that people feel when they find an article on an obscure topic that only they care about. Anyway, next time I will wait before replying to the deleter so that I am calmer and perhaps more diplomatic, even if the person is a blithering idiot. :-) Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Fram did not act in his capacity as an administrator, what he did is strictly editorial.
As for the rest, I am at a loss to explain the deletionist mentality. Maybe the experience of paper documents is so deeply ingrained that having more information causes some sort of deep-running angst that expresses itself in rationalised ways... I find similar notions when it comes to sexual topics, for instance: bizarre conjecture that people who do not want to see the article will mysteriously stumble onto it and be offended (seriously if your teen child comes running seeking comfort after seeing some really weird sexual practice, reassuring them is a thing to do, believing that they saw it by pure chance is not).
Also, frustration management on Wikipedia is nothing trivial. We are deeply passionned about what we do, we are typically highly sensitive and intelligent people, so we tend to grow attached to the way we think things should be, becoming vulnerable when they are upset. This had caused suicidal episodes in highly valuable members of the community, a mass of departures from the project, and a great amount of unneeded pain (been there, done that, got a t-shirt). Dismissing such episodes as "drama queens" or simply loss of self-control that should be addressed with more stiff upper lip is in my opinion mistaken and creates a haven for toxic people; and that goes both from one user to another, and also from the little voice in your head that blames you for being upset for nothing: it's wrong and unhelpful.
At the Wikiconvention francophone, a friend recently diagnosed with autism, and whose Special Area of Interst on horse landed 180 her Featured Articles (one hundred and eighty, yes) told us that a fellow user casually dismissing her work (gest of it was he was annoyed at seeing horses all the time on the front page and wanted the material moved to a specialised "horse-pedia") caused her three days of insomnia and taking pills. Nobody in their right mind can say that she should not have feld the way she did, or should have controlled herself better.
This was a pressing issue at Wikimania, so I think I can say in confidence that highly knowledgeable and experienced Wikimedians are recognising that we can only go so far by denying problems. At some point we deserve to pay attention to our own feelings, recognise that an emotion is always legitimate, and work from there to find explanations and way to mitigate and manage things. Wikipedia attracts the rational sort, more passioned by hard facts than by folk psychology, but at some point we are intellectual athletes and we deserve to take care of ourselves if we want to keep up on the long term.
Anyway, sorry for the lengthy rant, and rest assured that you work is immensely valuable and that some appreciate it greatly. I certainly do. Cheers! Rama (talk) 05:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rama, Not to worry about my feelings. As you may have inferred from my nom-de-wiki I am a part-time academic, which means that I frequently have the time to do this, and I have a thickish skin. Anonymity often brings out the worst in people:student evaluations can be vicious, and the anonymous referees on scholarly papers submitted for consideration for publication are frequently arrogant, cruel, or simply stupid. As for "Fram", even if they are acting as an editor and not an admin, they are in a position of power: access to tools, familiarity with WP:Whatver policy, etc. But I think there is an insoluble problem. First, Wikipedia is not immune to Michel's Iron law of oligarchy. Second, at Wikipedia we self-select into roles. I suspect that article creators are inclusionist, article polishers (typos, grammar, wiki syntax, etc.) are tolerant, and admin draws disproportionately from people that like rules and enforcing them, and that have a strong view of how standards and central direction make wikipedia better. The only thing I can think of that might help is strengthening the positive reinforcement system; the "Thank" button is a great tool. I use it to thank article polishers that catch my abundant typos on new articles. Anyway, on to more intriguing things. Barnstars and the like need to be easier to award; I know a negative review weighs more on the soul than a dozen positive ones, but your horsewoman might have felt comforted if she could could see that many people liked her articles. 180 FAs - Wow! Anyway,
Vulture was a privateer out of Nantes that HMS Caroline captured on 15 Feb 1800. Her master was Citizen Bazill Aug. Ene Laray. I can't prove anything, but I think she is a piece of a puzzle that fits perfectly into Vulture (c.1800 ship). What can Demerliac tell us? He can't prove anything, but he could disprove the fit. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh yes, as Vautour. This is a copper-hulled corvette, built by Bourmaud Brothers in Nantes in 1797, 300 tons. Commissioned in December 1797 under Jacques François with 171 men and 20 guns (4 12-pounders, 10 6-pounders and 6 others), cruise from December 1797 to May 1798. Second cruise under Joachim Barbier from January 1799 to February 1799, and third from March 1799 to May under Jacques Moreau (22 guns: 4 12-pounders, 16 6-pounders and 2 36-pounder howitzers). Last cruiser under Mathurin (?) Leroy, until her capture by Caroline (no 2177, p.277 of 1800-1815).
Interesting ideas you have on the sociology of interactions on Wikipedia, I feel very much the same way about the "thanks" button. Your observation on power is a classic and there is much truth in it, but you also have lots of people complaining on other users actions by mentioning power they have but did not use, which is not necessarily helpful (the innuendo that they might have done something improper holds admins and above to impossible standards). This has the effect to push the less vindictive outside of policing, with a tendency to leave the rashest of the lot in effective power. It is an interesting subject and quite a useful nut to crack.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 21:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Vautour: that's beautiful. It will shortly make its way into the article. I am finishing an article on HMS Echo (1797) that has two interesting French vessels. One is Alliance/Bonaparte that you found for me last November and that I can finally fit in where it belongs. The second needs Demerliacing, if I may coin a term. She is the corvette Africaine that the British privateer Garland captured on 4 May 1804 outside Charleston and that gave rise to an important legal case whose outcome continues to affect Anglo-Saxon common law to this day. The French government, through their commercial agent in Charleston, was the (unsuccessful) plaintiff in the case. Though Africaine was referred to a corvette, and may have been acting earlier as an escort to a convoy, she was not a naval vessel. (For example, she does not appear in the Fonds Marine or Winfield and Roberts 2015.) Her commander was an enseigne de vaisseau and she may fall into that ambiguous area of semi-official vessels that you were talking about above. I am quite pleased with both Vulture and Echo. Although they will never be any better than B-class, I feel quite chuffed when I succeed in tracking down and putting together pieces from disparate sources. As for admins and WP, I am going to follow Voltaire/Candide's advice and "Je vais cultiver mon propre jardin." (Please forgive my limited French.) Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk)

For Vautour, her armament has me thinking: on single-decked ships, I am used to seeing the mostly larger guns for the main battery and smaller ones to arm superstructures or as chase guns, but here we have a minority of larger guns; do you think they would be installed amidship? If so, that would make an arrangement similar to central battery ironclads, which would be amusing.
Africaine: I have found nothing in either Demerliac, not in Roche or any of my other usual sources. I find that very odd for a ship of that strength, with naval officers on board and with this interesting legal case; could she possibly have had another name in French service? I tried Africaine, Africain and Afrique.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 09:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Roche request

Hi Rama, I have just been doing some sorting out of a confusion between two French brigs, both launched in 1811. French brig Inconstant (1811) carried Napoleon from Elba for the Hundred Days. Swiftsure (1811 brig) (originally Inconstant), didn't, and was wrecked on the coast of Queensland around 1831. Question is, does Roche have anything on the naval Inconstant' service history? The Fonds Marine only goes to the late 1820s, and Inconstant continued to serve until around 1842. As for Vautour, I could make a case for putting the 12-pounders at either end of the broadsides to act as chase guns, and to avoid hogging. I could also put them in the middle to be sure of their being fully available for broadsides. The first scenario would be consistent with a flush-deck vessel. The second scenario better fits a vessel with galliards. As for Africaine, she is a complete mystery. The judge's decision gives the name of the British privateer, and her master, but says nothing about Africaine. Normally I can use a master's name or other detail as a hint for further search. I also searched the Fonds Marine for the period around May 1804 for any mention of anything like the British story, and found nothing. I think this is one of those stories that will simply have to sit in our memories in the hope that someday we will accidentally find a clue. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 02:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
We have entries in both Roche and Demerliac. I'll give you elements not present in our article.
Roche, vol.1, p. 253: Abeille-class (our article says Sylphe class, same thing) squared brig built in Livorno. She was rebuilt in Toulon from September 1822 and relaunched on 14 March 1823. She took part in the war in Spain in 1823, notably recapturing the merchantman Nativité, from Marseille, on 26 June. Station of Brazil from 10 December 1823 to 6 March 1826, École navale from 1827 to 1829. From 1 February 1829 to 9 January 1832 cruise from Brest to Newfoundland and Brazil. Refit in 1834. Cruise from Saint Louis (Senegal) to France from 6 February 1835, ferrying officers of Africain (which was the first steam aviso built for the French Navy). On 8 December 1835 departed Brest, bound for Cayenne. Ran aground in the Amazon river on 8 December 1835 but manager to refloat herself. Station of Guyanne from 1838 to 1840. Condemned on 17 August 1842 and broken up on dry dock no 6 in Brest from 4 December 1843.
Demerliac (no 866 p.114 of 1800-1815) says she was built under supervision of Jean-Baptiste Marestier upon plans by Sané. He says that she was painted yellow and grey in 1814, and was repainted in black and white in February 1815 for the so-called "Retour de l'Île d'Elbe" (as painted by Garneray). Complement between 100 and 159 men in January 1813, and 60 in late 1814. 18 guns: 2 6-pounder long guns and 16 24-pounder carronades, replaced with 18 18-pounder carronades in 1815.
Also, we have an article on her captain, Abel Aubert Dupetit Thouars [1]
Cheers! Rama (talk) 07:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Well that certainly fills out the picture. Thanks. Some detail questions though. What was the war with Spain in 1823? When did Inconstant ground in the Amazon? (You have 8 Dec '35 both for the departure from Brest and the grounding.) The first steam Africain served 1819-1827. The second served 1832-38, making her the more likely one for Inconstant to carry officers for. Could Roche accidentally have conflated the two? Lastly, which Abeille-class? Was the Sylphe class a modification of the earlier one, or a precursor to the later Abeille. All had different designers. I also have one detail question re Vautour. When you say above that she was of 300 tons, is that displacement or "of load". Apologies for the compulsive detail, but I do like our articles to be the definitive word. Again, thanks for the great info. Acad Ronin (talk) 13:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, sorry I had a few hectic days and I shamefully let your questions resting longer than I would like.
  • The war with Spain is in all likelihood the French intervention Hundred Thousand Sons of Saint Louis, in the context of the Trienio Liberal.
  • I think that the Abeille and Sylphe-class are the same thing with different names. I confirmed that Sylphe was listed as an Abeille-class brig herself.
  • For Vautour, it is tons of load. Demerliac always gives his figures as tons of load.
I'll doule-check the grounding date and the Africain question (maybe time to write the article on the name at least).
Cheers! Rama (talk) 12:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
No worries. I have several small projects going at all times to keep me busy. (Some even pay me e.g., I have a lucrative lecture later today.) I also feel guilty about trespassing on your time and try to avoid immoderate requests. I will continue to investigate the Abeille-Sylphe thing. In any case, our Inconstant article is now state-of-the-art and should keep anyone froƎm again confusing the Inconstant that was wrecked in Australia with Napoleon's. Africain is certainly a worthy article topic. If I could just figure out who our 1804 Africain was I might do a small article on the case and tie it in with the issue of territorial waters. Lastly, I have a stupid question: what is the role of Wikipedia categories? Also, is there any way to search for categories? If I want to find articles on whalers I generally have to remember a whaler I have written about, and then access the category form there. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 13:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations on the lecture, I regret not being part of the audience.
French ship Africain, and thus the second aviso of the name, as you said.
My bad for the grounding of Inconstant, the date is 10 January 1836. I confirm 8 December 1835 as the date of her departure from Brest.
For categories, you can search by writing "Category:..." in the search bar, but it is indeed not ideal. Their role is an embryonic way to structure data, what Wikidata does properly. On Commons, we have rather pressing problems with these categories and hope to import structure from Wikidata, hopefully something similar will eventually happen here.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:23, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the info; I have amended the article. I have also fiddled with the Africain article. As for my lectures, trust me, I am not charismatic, especially when I talk economics. Unfortunately, I don't get any opportunities to talk about Age of Sail matters. I will revert at some point re categories when I have thought a little more about the topic. Currently, I just add them mechanically without thinking about how people might use them. Also, when I upload pictures to Commons they ask me for categories, and I really don't know what to put.

In the meantime, here are two more interesting questions where your sources may have something to add:

1) Cyrus was a whaler built at Salem, that operated out of Dunkirk during the Peace of Amiens. She went down to South Africa to whale. There the British letter of marque Scorpion captured her. I have two conflicting bits of info. One says she was built in 1792, and the other (Lloyd's Register), says she was built in 1800; both agree on Salem as her place of origin. I also don't have any info on what she was doing between launch and 1803 when she was captured.

2) Ganges was also a whaler. My sources all agree she was built in 1798 at Philadelphia. She too went to South Africa to whale during the peace of Amiens, and Scorpion captured her too in 1803 at the Bay of Delgado. She made one complete whaling voyage, and then the French captured her in 1806 or so.

Clayton, in her book on whaling, refers to both of these as having been "Rotch" ships, i.e., to have sailed originally for Rotch, and to have been sailing from Dunkirk when the British captured them. They would have had to be under the French flag for them to be legitimate prizes once war broke out again.

As always, help is appreciated. Acad Ronin (talk) 20:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
I am sure I would very much enjoy your economics lectures, provided I was on board with the context.
There is a little something, but it is not much:
  • Cyrus: whaler of 324 tons of load, commissioned in Dunkirk in July 1803 by Louis De Baecque. Departed on 3 August under Archaelus (Achille?) Hammond. Captured by Scorpion. (no 2849, p. 330 of 1800-1815)
  • Gange: whaler of 310 tons of load, commissioned in Dunkirk circa September 1803 by Louis De Baecque (not his lucky year). Departed in late September under Charles Harrax, captured by Scorpion. Recaptured by "a flottilla from Rochefort" (?) on 19 December 1805. (no 2851, p. 331 of 1800-1815)
Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:50, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I have implemented the Demerliac with respect to Cyrus. I will start work on an article on Ganges shortly. It is too bad that Demerliac doesn't answer the big question, but I am astonished that he had anything. All the pieces help build the picture.Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 22:49, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Forgot to mention that the Demerliac had some potential threads in the form of the names of masters and owner. Most of the time when one pulls on the thread it breaks immediately. But every now and then it leads to more info. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:43, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
This Louis De Baecque thread has some length. I just found mention of the following book, which I have ordered through InterLibrary Loan. It seems to have several mentions of both Cyrus and Gange: Les baleiniers français de Louis XVI à Napoléon, par Du Pasquier, J. Thierry. Bit-by-bit. Acad Ronin (talk) 00:56, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
The Archeaus Hammond thread is shorter so far, but you may find the following URL mildly amusing: http://www.anchor-inn.net/rooms/cyrus.php Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Demerliac requests

Hi Rama, First one is the East Indiaman Warren Hastings (1802 EIC ship). Piemontaise captured her on 11 June 1805 and took her into Mauritius. She remained in French hands for some time before she was apparently sold to Danish interests. I am hoping that Demerliac has a little on her in her time in French possession. The other two involve HMS Unique (1804). She was the French privateer Harmonie of UGadeloupe, captured 27 Jan 1804. On 23 Jan 1806, an unknown French corsair destroyed her. Trying to figure out who the victor was will be almost impossible but still. Thanks and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 23:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
  • Warren Hastings: Demerliac (no1264, p.153) says she was built in Blackwall by George Green and William Wells. Nothing of interest, except that two paintings of the ship have been reproduced in Lords of the East by Jean Sutton, Conway 1982, p.40.
  • I have found nothing on Unique, even as Harmonie; on the other hand, if her captor was twice her strength, that would make her almost a corvette-sized ship, certainly something worthy of notice, so I was thinking of trying to find a thread, as you aptly say, from this side. I have a list of the privateers who brought prisoners of war, maybe by cross-referencing this with Demerliac I could chance upon something.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 02:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rama, I assume that Demerliac says nothing about when the French disposed of Warren Hastings, or how. I'll have to check into the builders. The data I have is from the National Archives database but I'll check it. The problem is that there were three vessels by the same name, all owned by the Larkins, and it extremely easy to get confused. I looked into the pictures. The National Maritime Museum has not put the best ones on display on line. Getty has one good one, but one cannot copy it. There is another, but I don't know which Warren Hastings it is. As for Unique, bon continuance. I am off "to sleep, perchance to dream". Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:30, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Alas, no luck with Unique.
Demerliac only notices Warren Hastings dropped from the records and conjectures that she would have been either sold or recaptured, so you know more than he does.
There s a veritable trove of historical images are Getty, this is amazing! I am pondering doing something serious about it. In the meantime, File:Warren hasting piemontaise.jpg. Cheers! Rama (talk) 06:39, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Given that Getty is open source with most of its pictures, they are a natural for Wikicommons. Thanks for the Warren Hastings picture. I have added it to the article. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:12, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Various

Hi Rama, three requests if I may:

1) Demerliac re Robert (1793 ship) in her role as a privateer.
2) Do you have anything on two Franco-American whalers Phebe and Judith, supposedly captured by the British letter of marque whaler Liverpool at Walvis Bay in June 1793? I can find no evidence of a whaler Liverpool, or of a letter of marque being issued to one. I also cannot find in the standard reference of privateers from Liverpool any mention of a Liverpool.
3) In the Fonds Marine at the bottom of p.481, continuing to p.482, there is a list of documents pertaining to the court martial of the commanders of five gunboats (I searched under Calypso) all captured at the same time in the same action. Am I correct in reading that the court martial found against the five? Do we know why?

Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
I'll look into the Demerliac shortly.
for 3), I suppose you are reading into "copie du jugement rendu par le conseil de guerre maritime contre les commandants de ces bâtiments", but this merely means "copy of the jugement of the Court-martial of the captains of these ships", it does not unveil anything as to whether the jugement was favourable to these officiers or otherwise. I have not found anything in my other sources to give more light on this incident, sadly. From the description of the ships, it sounds like the French forces would barely be a match for the boats of the frigate, much less against the frigate herself, so unless their resistance was especially disordered, from other examples, I would expecte the court martial to acquit; of course this is strictly conjecture, only access to the actual documents would be informative enough.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 05:50, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, but I couldn't leave it alone. I looked up Arrogante in Roche (the letter "A" is available on the web), and found the following: "Les cdts furent déchus de tout commandement pendant 3 ans." Clearly, something went wrong; perhaps they had orders to stay out of trouble. Regards,Acad Ronin (talk) 14:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh, excellent! I have seen that sort of things happening when small warships on escort duty escort and try to flee in different directions rather than unite and sacrifice themselves to cover the escape of their convoy. Of course this is only more speculation. Congratulations on pulling on this thread, this is a very nice one! Rama (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello again,
There were two Robert in 1793, one from Nantes and the other from Bordeaux (I have almost nothing on the latter, but just in case we had confusion between the two).
  • Robert: a corvette commissioned in Nantes in February 1793 under captain François-Marie Pied, with 100 to 170 men, 18 6-pounders and 12 swivel guns. 300 tons of load. She was on her first cruise when Syren captured her. Commissioned as HMS Espion in the RN etc., recaputered by Tamise, and commissioned in the French Navy as Espion. (no 2219, p. 256 as a privateer and 530, p89 as a naval corvette)
  • Phébé: whaler commissioned by Coffin (? I suspect Coffyn) in Dunkirk in 1792, 270 tons of load. Captured by the armed whaler Liverpool. She might be the same ship as Hébé, a whaler that the De Baecque brothers considered purchasing in the USA in 1802. (3160 p.329, and 3126 p 326 for Hébé)
  • Judith: Chardon, 370-ton of load whaler purchased by Aget, Kenny and Coffyn in 1787 and commissioned in Dunkirk the same year. Purchased by Benjamin Hussey in 1789 and renamed Judith. Departed Dunkirk in August or September 1792 with 21 men for a cruise to Walwis Bay. Captured by the 20-gun armed whaler Liverpool in July 1793, but retaken by her own crew. In August 1793, at New Bedford and probably operated under a US flag from then on. (3120 p.326)
Wow, whaling seems to have been a bitter business, I knew that there were expeditions by the Navy to disrupt operations but I had no idea that the whalers themselves would prey on each others. This Liverpool seems to have been quite prolific, she also captured Nancy in July 1793.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 05:02, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I was intrigued by this gunboat action. Seems that Calypso (Ensign Deluce), Salamine (EV Bérenquier), Indomptable (EV Eyffren), Arrogante (Baffert) and Diligente (Aspirant Ballot) departed Corfu in January 1813, bound for Otranto, and on 6 January fell upon Baccante and Weasel which captured the lot, except Diligente that sank. (pp.91, 402, 255, 52 and 153 respectively). I have no further insight, and sadly Troude does not seem to mention the action.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 05:15, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
So much good information. I will have to figure out where best to put the stuff on the action of 6 January. Actually, it is a bit of an issue where to put much of this stuff as we don't have enough for an article per vessel, but it is a little extensive for articles on other vessels, where it serves as a digression.
The possibility that Phébé was Hébé makes a lot of sense. I have information on Hébé, but have found no trace of any on Phébé. The biggest mystery remains Liverpool. She may have been a slaver (at least I have found a likely possibility).
One long-range request. I gather that you stop in at maritime museums and take photos that you clean (detour). If you could keep an eye out for a model of a trincadour and a Spéronare that would be really great. I have found almost nothing in terms of online images. They were too local and minor.
Anyway, lots to work on, for which I thank you. It may take me a good few days to assimilate all this, so I may have to take a break from bothering you. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 11:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I will try to keep this in mind. If I recall correctly, there are a number of models of small ships in Paris and Lorient. Very typically, there is a tendency to be attracted to the shiny capital ships of prestige and neglect less prestigious but more historically relevant types.
Never a bother, don't worry! Cheers! Rama (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Demerliac

Hi Rama, I got side-tracked for awhile on another project related to the vessels of the period, but am back to Demerliacing. (Phébé, by the way, is proving very elusive, though I was able to create an article on Chardon (1787 ship).) My current request is that you look at HMS Lacedemonian (1796) when you have the time. She was originally a French privateer that the French recaptured the next year. I am hoping that Demerliac will have info on her both before and after her borrowing by the Royal Navy. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
She was Lacédémonienne. She is listed at no 2845, p 304, but unfortunately I have nothing on her that you do not already.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Ah well. That's too bad. How about the two privateers Buonaparte and Vengeur that HMS Martin (1790) captured in 1797 and 1799? Thanks and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:01, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Bonaparte, privateer from Dunkirk, commissioned in December 1796. First cruise under Jean Meulenaer, with 24 men and 10 to 15 guns, from December 1796 to January 1797 and return to Dunkirk. Second cruise in February under an unknown captain, with 110 men and 16 guns. Captured by Espion and Martin. (no 1695, p.215) She is mentionned in Les Corsaires de la République: "En nivôse, le Buonaparte, de 10 canons, ramena dans le port de Dunkerque un trois-mâts anglais." (p.197)
  • Vengeur: 50-ton of load privateer cutter commissioned in Dunkirk in October 1795 under Joseph-Jean Allemès. Under his command until July 1796. Passed to a Captain Margollé in 1796, back to Allemès in 1797, to Francois Sauvage-Cornu in 1798, Benjamin-Richard Carny in 1799 (58 men and 14 guns), and finally to one Ch.-L.-M. Tack, with 98 to 105 men and 12 to 14 guns. Captured by Martin. (no. 1691, p. 215) She is also mentionned in Les Corsaires de la République, or rather her master is:
This Allamès fellow seems to be an interesting figure, he was still active in 1805. Could warrant his own article if I managed to find other sources.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 05:40, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, speaking of Lacédémonienne, the name rings a bell and I am under the impression that I have seen an engraving of her at some point, though I am struggling to find it. Does that sound plausible at all? Cheers! Rama (talk) 06:02, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for this. I have parked the Bonaparte info in a footnote to the HMS Martin (1790) article, and the Vengeur info under the list of privateers on the French ship Vengeur#privateer ships article. At some point Vengeur deserves her own article. Bonaparte is too stubby for her own article, but also at some point I should do an article on all the Bonaparts. It will be a little tricky finding them because of the ubiquity of his name, and the issue of the variants: Grand Napoleon, Buonaparte, etc. I agree that Allamès too is worth an article, to accompany those about Surcouf and some of the other great corsairs. As for Lacédémonienne there was a later British frigate under the English version of the name. There are non-Commons pictures of a model of her at [2]. I tried Google images for the French version but found nothing. An engraving could exist, but if so it would be in a book and so far I haven't seen any mention via GOogle books. So, bon soir for now. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Demerliac request

This is still concerning French brig Duc de Chartres (1780 Le Havre). First, I found an old footnote concerning Duc de Chartres that referenced Demerliac (1996), and described her as 220 tons, and 26 men.(Demerliac (1996), p.161, #1477.) Is this the same as Demerliac (2004), p. 182, #1777? The 26 men sounds like a very small crew, more consistent with a letter of marque than a privateer. Second, On 9 August 1782, Duc de Chartres encountered the French navy's corvette Aigle, of 22 guns and 136 men. Unfortunately, I have no info on any corvette named Aigle, and the Wikipedia listing under French ship Aigle does not show her. Do you have anything? Thanks and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:24, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
  • Aigle: I think that the brig Aigle (ex-HMS Eagle) could match: she was in service at the time (1780-1783) and although she is listed as a 16-gun, Demerliac also mentions 6 additional swivel guns that would round the total to the 22 you mention. (no 515, p.80 of 1774-1792)
  • Duc de Chartres: The Demerliac I have (1774-1792, 1996) has her at no 1777, p. 182, as 220 tons, but does not specify the crew number. I agree that 26 men would be a skeleton crew for such a ship. We have the name of her captain, Jean-Baptiste l'Écolier.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. On Aigle, this seems to be the relevant vessel. I was just also in contact with Stephen Roberts who is collaborating with Rif Winfield on a second book on the French Navy, covering the period before their existing book. The Eagle that was captured was not a British warship but rather a privateer. Here is what Steve sent me:
  • Aigle. Ex British privateer brig Eagle captured 3.1780 at Saint Eustache in the Antilles. May have been a 220-ton vessel built in Bombay in 1776. 16 guns + 6 pierriers. Arrived at Lorient 1.1782 and listed as a corvette with 20 x 6pdrs. Captured 11.8.1782 by a British corvette off the American coast.
The capture dates almost match 9 August or 11 August). I have not been able to confirm the Bombay. Actually, what seems more probable is a Liverpool privateer built in 1777 of French origin. As for the issue of the 26 men on Duc de Chartres, I cannot recall when I got that. I would have to track down the Demerliac book I used, which I believe came from a library, and try to reconstruct what happened. That will have to wait. Anyway, thanks for the info. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Rama.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rama. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rama. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Long-shot Demerliac requests

Hi Rama, two vessels that were almost surely merchant.

Is there anything in Demerliac or your other sources on these two. I am particularly interested in Butterworth, as many 19th Century references refer to her as a former French frigate. She is too small to have been a frigate, and in any case Winfield and Roberts have no frigate, corvette, or brig named America. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
  • the only two America I have are the 74-guns, but there are a number of Américaine. One was a privateer frigate of Granville, with 32 guns (no 1804, p. 184), active in 1779 and 1780. There is nothing more but it is concievable that she would have been that ship, or mistaken for her. But this is conjecture.
  • The only Abeille I have at that time is a naval cutter, ex-Bonnet Rouge, from Saint-Malo. I doubt she is the one you want, sorry.
Remarkable story on Butterworth, incidentally, it was a fascinating reading and the political implications for Honolulu are mind-blowing.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rama, thanks for the fast response. I will follow up on Américaine to see if I can find a smoking gun, of any sort. (I should have thought of the French version of her name; stupid of me not to.) The Butterworth Squadron/Butterworth story is indeed interesting. I am currently trying to buildout the stories on her two tenders, Prince Lee Boo, and Jackall. It's tough trying to create both single ship articles and the overall expedition article; where does one put what, and how much redundancy is too much. The Bonnet Rouge/Abeille we have already. She became HMS Abeille (1796), though there is no evidence that she actually served on RN active duty. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 20:58, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Rama, that was a great lead. No smoking gun, but very pungent smell of gunpowder. Preponderence of the evidence: name: size, description, and date and timing. Américaine was a highly successful privateer, so I now have a good section in the Butterworth article on her prize-taking. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 15:46, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Wow, spectacular find! I'll try to see if I can confirm the names of the captains you mention. Congratulations and cheers! Rama (talk) 16:35, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Thank you for your efforts at fr:Ingérence russe dans l'élection présidentielle américaine de 2016 from 2016 United States election interference by Russia.

Most outstanding work ! Sagecandor (talk) 19:57, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, very touched. Good continuation! Rama (talk) 08:34, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

3RR at Mammal

You have been insisting on one specific image at Mammal for an exemplary primate. But you have not chosen to engage in deliberation on the talk page, and have simply been restoring an image which you describe as "less depressing". I suggest you propose an alternative picture that addresses the concerns of the current discussion, a clear, diverse, and exemplary image clearly depicting either notable humans or humans participating in a uniquely human activity. Side views of unknown people in a crowd who cannot be identified or whose actions are unclear is unhelpful, and the edit description "less depressing" makes the emotional nature of this choice quite obvious.

Perhaps we have a picture of De Klerk and Mandela?

In any case, you are simply edit warring without discussion, and your next reversion will be reported as edit warring. μηδείς (talk) 05:54, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Stop icon

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

1) Pictures of De Klerk and Mandela will show two elderly males in positions of power. This is not an improvement over my version.
2) I have spent considerable time explaining the image I suggest. "Les depressing" is the just a part of the name of the image. This image has been resisted by overt reactionary militancy in the past, and I am not inclined into investing hours of my life engaging with white supremacists or MRAs not even pretending to have a discussion.
3) I have given considerable thought in the image that is being displayed, which is the fruit of several iterations. I suggest that we leave it there, not reverting to the scandalously inferior version with Nixon and Brejnev, and that those who wish for an even better version propose their own improvements.
Rama (talk) 08:28, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Demerliac request

Hi Rama, Hope you had a good holiday. Now for a tame request: I have just finished Britannia (1794 ship). A French privateer captured her in 1798 and I wonder if Demerliac has anything to add. Thanks, and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 04:00, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, nice seeing you on deck so soon after the festivities, I hope you had an enjoyable time!
I think this is a Huron, after the Indian-American tribe. Héron (for the bird heron) would be plausible, Herion is not a dictionary word (could be a given name but I have no match).
Huron, privateer ship from Bordeaux probably commissioned in 1793, 300 tons of load and 18 to 20 guns, with 9 officiers and between 112 to 180 men (personal note: probably one of these corvette-sized ships, like Surcouf's Confiance). Under Pierre Destebetcho in 1793 (dates not clear); under a Captain Harismedy circa late 1797-1798; Destebetcho (first name not clear) from July 1798 to 1799; Captain Saint Guiron from 1799 in Bordeaux to May 1800 in Mauritius. Captured by HMS Magicienne circa January 1800. (n°2338, p.266)
Cheers! Rama (talk) 08:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for this. I have added the info to both the relevant Britannia page and to the Magicienne page. Incidentally, the letter in the London Gazette puts the capture in January 1801 as Huron was returning from Mauritius with a valuable cargo. Unfortunately, the letter did not give the name of her captain, but the descriptions certainly matched. Regards,Acad Ronin (talk) 10:35, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
One more piece in the Great Jigsaw puzzle! Cheers! Rama (talk) 11:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
But the puzzle is sooo big.

Hi Rama, new request: HMS Oroonoko has two vessels. I have just finished the first. The second is one where perhaps Demerliac can help. She is the ex-French privateer Eugene. However there are two candidate Eugenes, one a French one, and one an American one sailing under French colours. Ideally, I would like to resolve the ambiguity, and add a little information to what will still be a stub at best. Thanks, Acad Ronin (talk) 02:27, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello,
I have only one Eugène (possibly Eugénie) matching the date: a ship commissioned in 1804 in Bordeaux under Captain Limousin, with 30 guns. Reported captured by a British frigate after a 2-hour fight in 1804. I have no information as to what became of her afterwards. (1800-1815, n°2290, p. 286)
Best wishes for the new year! Rama (talk) 12:28, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rama, Best wishes for the New Year.

Your Eugene sounds a little big to be my Eugene/Oroonoko. Still, it gives me a thread.
Here are some more requests to start the year, if I may:
  • Britannia (1772 ship) - captured by Bellone in the Channel in Dec 1803, but recaptured.
  • Britannia (1802 ship) - fought General Ernouf in the WIndies; I have some info on General Ernouf but wonder if Demerliac has more.
  • Young William (1794 ship) - captured early 1802 by Gironde, but RN recaptured Young William and captured Gironde. Also, in late 1805, Bellone captured and released Young William. This is probably the famous Indian Ocean Bellone that became HMS Bellona (1806), but I just want to check/verify.
  • I have several other merchantman Britannias captured by privateers between 1795 and 1805 or so, but no names. If you run across anything please let me know.

Thanks. May we have some success this year too in putting together unexpected pieces. Warmest wishes, Acad Ronin (talk) 13:37, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Britannia (1772 ship): nothing on her, not any Britannia. Sorry.
  • General Ernouf: Nothing you did not already have, except for Lapointe's complete name, which I added.
  • Gironde: privateer commissioned in 1801 in Bordeaux under François Avesou (n°2273, p.285)
  • Bellone: Demerliac does not give detailed information, as you know, but he lists only two privateers named Bellone active in 1805. The other is a 14-gun operating off Cuba, so I believe it safe to identify Bellone as you did.
Best wishes to you and looking forwards to your next bit of naval sleuthing! Cheers! Rama (talk) 13:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Demerliac request

Hi Rama, I have not been able to get any further with Eugene, unfortunately. All the leads led nowhere, unfortunately. However, I do have new requests.

  • I just finished Canada (1786 ship). In August 1794 a French privateer from Bordeaux named Ajax captured her. Do we have anything more on Ajax? Thanks, and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 04:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I have just finished Sandown (ship). At end July 1794 the French privateer Guillotine captured Sandown II. On 2 August 1794, HMS Scorpion captured Guillotine and recaptured Sandown II. This all took place about 100 miles WNW of Havana. Does Demerliac have anything? Thanks. Acad Ronin (talk) 03:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
the last few days have been particularly hectic, but I should be able to look this up this evening. Cheers! Rama (talk) 11:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
No worries. Acad Ronin (talk) 11:21, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
We resume our regular broadcast:
  • Ajax français, or Ajax: Privateer commissioned in Bordeaux in 1793 under Captain Gourrège (n°2330, p.266)
  • Guillotine: privateer known to operate in the Carribean in 1794, with 110 men and 14 guns. Captured by HMS Scorpion. (n°2844, p.304)
Nothing on Sandown II, but that was not unexpected. Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:35, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
PS: I realise that my broadcast joke is getting old, sorry ^^;;. Rama (talk) 18:36, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks. A couple more pieces come together. At some point I may do a shipindex page of French ships named Guillotine. As for jokes - not a problem. These days my memory is such that old jokes often seem new again. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

HMS Alexander (1796)

Hi Rama, this one involves three French privateers. One operating out of Nantz, so we have a good shot, and two operating in the Caribbean, so a worse chance. Still, we can always hope. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 19:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, not much but we do have mention of them all:
  • Alexandre: privateer schooner, commissioned in Nantes in March 1796 under Jean-Pierre Edet, with 66 men adn 10 guns. (n°2229 p.257)
  • Coq: privateer schooner, commissioned in February 1797 in Saint-Domingue with 34 men and 6 guns (4- or 6-pounders). (n°2633 p.290)
  • Epicharis: privateer schooner commissioned in Guadeloupe in 1797 with 74 men and 8 guns (probably 4-pounders). (n°2748, p.297)
Cheers! Rama (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Rama. That is so much more than I expected, especially with the two Caribbean privateers. I started with a tiny stub of info in Winfield, and gradually built it out, adding a piece here and a piece there, and now I have a cake with three bougies on top. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
For a ship that size, your result is remarkable.
I wonder whether Signior Montcalm could be a former French ship.
Cheers! Rama (talk) 22:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Again, Hah! I pulled on the string "Jean-Pierre Edet", and found a little more that I have added both to this article, and to the article on HMS Hind. I have a library request out that may yield another sentence. Unfortunately, Signior Montcalm is a garbled English version of a Portuguese name.Acad Ronin (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Still pulling on threads - I found a reference that says that Epicharis, on one cruise, garnered prizes worth a total 1,000,000 LC. I am trying to figure out what LCs are. I am pretty sure that the L is Livre, but the C? Constitutionnelle? Coloniale? Any ideas? Also, in the article on HMS Enchantress (1804) that I have just done (Boring career but great painting, which is why I did the article), there is mention of a French vessel named Rencontre. However there is too little info on her in my source for me to figure out more. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 17:22, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
There is no mention of a Rencontre that could match these date and location, neither in 1800-1815 nor in the next volume. Sorry. Rama (talk) 23:03, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for looking. I didn't hold out much hope, but you never know till you try. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:42, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh I don't know, Enchantress looks at least corvette-sized, which is fairly large for a merchantman . I am surprised not to find anything, and I would not rule out the probability of chancing upon a lead later on.
Charming portrait, incidentally. The way the ship is matter-of-the-factly part of this delicate landscape is really lovely; I fell even more intimate with the ship because there is no trying-too-hard to exalt her
Cheers! Rama (talk) 06:36, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Remote Islands

Rama, you may recall that not too long ago I asked you how to create the category Category:Remote Islands. I did so and you remarked that you would let your friends at Wikidata know. If they are interested, they should move fast as there is a proposal to convert the category to an article, or to delete it under WP:Overcategorization. Once again the deletionists are on the prowl. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:23, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rama/Archive_9&oldid=769857867"