Talk:Sinking of U-864

Focus

This article's title is does not identify its subject well, and its content is excessively broad in scope. For instance, it should not explain the particulars of how Enigma keys were obtained by Bombes. DulcetTone (talk) 21:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the title - something more like "HMS Venturer sinks U864" or "First confirmed kill in a submerged submarine action" would say more about the article. However I beleive that changing article titles is almost impossible to do? Or am I wrong.

I've reread the article and it seems focused enough to me; the extra bits which you might want to remove may be held necesssary to inform readers who don't have a complete knowledge of WWII. It certainly never struck me as irrelevant or offtopic in the narrative. Could you give more examples other than the one re Bombes perhaps? Thanks to all for grammar/punctuation edits :-)Mungo Shuntbox (talk) 11:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Error

Near the end of this article it states "U-864 was the last U-Boat sunk as the result of enemy action prior to the end of the war in Europe...". This must be a mistake of some sort, since U-881 and U-853 were sunk on 6 May 45 in seperate actions, as well as 107 others lost after U-864 before 8 May 45. 164.236.0.11 (talk) 16:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I concur, as written the statement was patently wrong. [3] lists U-boat losses in 1945, there were many many more U-boats lost between 9 February and 8 May 1945 to a variety of enemy causes, warships, aircraft, mines, etc etc. I've removed the statement, which was unsourced. Benea (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Action of 9 February 1945. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kystverket.no/arch/_img/9818147.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 07:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Action of 9 February 1945. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100414104731/http://www.mikekemble.com/ww2/britsublist.html to http://www.mikekemble.com/ww2/britsublist.html

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927074336/http://www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=103001 to http://www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=103001

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• 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.

? A help request is open: archived page is dead.. Replace the reason with "helped" to mark as answered.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

checked Redalert2fan (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Tone deaf?

I'm troubled by the treating of the Brit CO as a hero & U-864 as nothing but a target. Does the German CO get no credit? (Even on the U-864 page, he's barely more than a footnote!) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 06:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 27 January 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Sinking of U-864. However, I do not particularly like suggestion to move without a proposed target. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

---

Action of 9 February 1945 → ? – Unsure as to what the best title would be. DesertPipeline (talk) 01:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this subsection with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

I think that this article should be renamed, as its current title does not adequately describe the article itself. My suggestion would be "Sinking of U-864". Does anyone have objections, or a better title to propose? Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 01:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

• If reliable sources don't consistently refer to this by some obvious WP:COMMONNAME then Sinking of U-864 would seem like the most obvious WP:NDESC. The current title completely fails to describe the article's contents in any meaningful manner. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

CE

Thought that tidying this one would be a formality but the RN OH and Rohwer came up empty. I've found a few sources but citing the text will take a while. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 15:55, 7 August 2021 (UTC)