Talk:HMS Pandora (N42)

Possibly useful

• mentions planes
• Pandora Flotilla
• Odin class info

Citation removal

WP:CITEKILL is an essay that clearly doesn't reflect current practice, citations left at the end of the paragraph leave questions as to whether individual sentences in a paragraph are unsupported or are supported by the citation at the end. See User:Yannismarou/Ten rules to make an article FA which recommends one citation for every sentence. The essay you linked to even says "a good rule of thumb is that one footnote after a sentence is almost always sufficient" and the intent of the essay was clearly meant to get rid of things like "statement^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]}". Also note that there was no reference to using the same citation multiple times until User:Nightscream added it in March 2011. Ryan Vesey 02:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Referencing each sentence of a paragraph to the same source just creates visual clutter—an unchanging that signal conveys no new information. I don't have a problem with cites at the end of every sentence when they are different, but having the same cite at the end of each succeeding sentence is just pointless redundancy.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:50, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with you. The superscripted citations do little to nothing to affect readability. You have no policy grounds to revert this. Ryan Vesey 13:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

You know better than that. There are very few "policies" at Wikipedia because there is no hierarchy, no bureaucracy, no dictator to support and enforce Policy. What there is (we hope), is a lot of rationally thought-out opinion on various topics which over time has been refined into the few bits of policy that we do have. In this case, many editors created WP:MOS (a policy). It links to WP:CITE (another policy also created by many editors). That links to (1) WP:CITEKILL (an essay, yep, created by many editors) and (2) WP:IC (information, yet again created by many editors). If these subsidiary and supplementary documents are not to be consulted when editors make decisions about what we do, then what is their purpose? And surely, if we aren't to consult them, then the "policy" documents should never, ever, link to them.^{Sky is blue}

In the article paragraphs where I removed extraneous named ref tags, all of the named ref tags were the same, one at the end of each sentence.^{Sky is blue} The reader got nothing new from the article because we repeated the same reference over and over again.^{Sky is blue} If all of the statements in the paragraph are supported by a single reference, then stating it once at the end of the paragraph is wholly sufficient—even for featured articles.^{Sky is blue}

Even though I've repeated my reference several times, the reader has learned nothing new about the sky.^{Sky is blue} I hope to illustrate my point that a constant, unchanging signal conveys no new information.^{Sky is blue}

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on HMS Pandora (N42). 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/20100619212514/http://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/3404.html to http://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/3404.html

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) 11:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Rigault de Genouilly

Both the HMS Proteus and HMS Pandora pages claim to have torpedoed and sunk Vichy France' aviso Rigault de Genouilly. 2601:195:C380:1FC0:0:0:0:71E6 (talk) 11:50, 26 March 2022 (UTC)