Talk:HMS Sirius (1786)

Untitled

The link to New South Wales is a bit misleading as at that time New South Wales had a different geographical and political meaning. The Commonwealth of Australia had not yet been established and N.S.W. had been declared as being the whole eastern side of Australia. Not sure how to fix this. --Wm 23:28, 21 September 2005 (UTC) It doesn't need fixing Cwiki 00:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

The Sirius was wrecked on the reef south east of Kingston Pier, in Slaughter Bay. The coordinates given in this article "29°2′36.9″S 167°57′18″E" is for Taylors Road in the Township of Norfolk Island. This position is 304 feet above sea level,and 2 kilometers from the wreck of The Sirius. Please note: The Sirius was a ship, and not a car or truck!

Try 29°03′39.38″S 167°57′25.64″E. The misleading coordinates should be removed. 2/2/2016.asitwas

https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Australian_National_Heritage_List&params=29_2_36.9_S_167_57_18_E_type:landmark&title=HMS+Sirius Then View this location in Google Maps.

Infobox for HMS Sirius (1786)

This message was left on my talk page. I've copied it here where it is better addressed and accessible to others who may have an interest in the topic.

Hi, you undid my edit of the HMS Sirius (1786) article where I placed the wreck site location information in the infobox. If ship has been wrecked, I think it is appropriate to include such information in the infobox as this adds completeness to the information about the ship. The code that I used (if that is the correct word) was copied from another article and I have applied it to a number of articles in my area of interest. Can you suggest a better way of doing this? Cowdy001 (talk) 02:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the information that you placed in the ship's infobox is appropriate to the article. I removed the {{Infobox settlement}} template because that just doesn't seem like the correct tool to do the job. I'm not opposed to embedding other infoboxes in the ship infobox (Edward M. Cotter which see) as long as the infobox and the information that it contains is about the ship.

I retained the coordinates and included them in the |Ship fate= field of the {{Infobox ship career}} section. Wasn't quite sure what to do with the |elevation_m= so I left it out. I notice that I also dropped the ref / cite; I'll fix that.

How best to proceed? I'm not sure. I guess that depends on the type and amount of information that the shipwreck would bring to the article. I think that you should raise the topic at WP:SHIPS.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Restored cite ref and added the phrase "in 9 m (30 ft) to the |Ship fate= field.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Trappist the monk , thanks for reinstating the information re the wreck site coordinates & the elevation of the site. This information is relevant to the ship from an archaeological perspective. As I has a long list of ships (that are now best described as wrecks) to write about, I will raise the topic at WP:SHIPS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowdy001 (talk • contribs) 06:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

the concurrent use of the FATE and STATUS fields

I noticed that the entry (i.e. 'historic shipwreck') that I placed in the infobox has been removed. I don't agree with the position argued by Benea that the 'status and fate field should not be used concurrently'. In Australia, wreck sites will receive statutory protection on the basis of age (>75 years) or significance (i.e. military service, historical role et al) by national (aka 'Commonwealth') and complimentary state & territory legislation. As a result, there are about 8000 sites are protected by law - refer the following link that mentioned the appropriate quantum of shipwrecks -'Korean nationals fined for entering SS Yongala shipwreck', http://www.environment.gov.au/about/media/dept-mr/dept-mr20120106.html, retrieved 30/07/2012. In Australia, these sites are known as 'historic shipwrecks which succinctly describes their legal status - please refer 'http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/shipwrecks/index.html, retrieved 30/07/2012. Therefore, I believe it is both possible & appropriate for both fields in the infobox to be populated. I will raise this manner at WP:SHIPS 07:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC) Cowdy001 (talk) 07:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

It is WP:SHIPS that mandates this particular position. Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide states that the 'status field' is "Used to indicate that a ship is currently in service, or has been removed from service but is available for future use or preserved in some form. Rule of thumb: "Is the ship above the water and intact?"". If the shipwreck has some particular legal status in the jurisdiction of the country in whose waters it lies, explain that in the text. Simply putting 'historic shipwreck' in the infobox status field reveals the limitations of your approach. All shipwrecks everywhere can be described as historic shipwrecks. Benea (talk) 14:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on HMS Sirius (1786). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/places/national/sirius/pubs/hms-sirius-factsheet.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}}).

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} 06:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on HMS Sirius (1786). 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/20150412182709/http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/content/sydney-ferries-fleet-facts to http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/content/sydney-ferries-fleet-facts

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) 11:39, 27 October 2017 (UTC)