User talk:Rama/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Rama. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Demerliac request 20 November

Hi Rama: In 1814 Hirondelle captured Paragon (1800 Whitby ship). Does Demerliac have anything on Hirondelle? Thanks, Acad Ronin (talk) 12:30, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I have no privateer by that name at this time. There were two naval fellucas in this period, but they were based in Toulon, I doubt they would have ventured in the Channel. Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Demerliac request 26 November

Hi Rama: Eliza Ann (1795 ship) captured the French privateer Venus. Does Demerliac have anything? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 15:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello,

I believe she is the ship mentioned as N°2189, p.278 as "privateer from Nantes known to have been active in October 1804". Not much I am afraide. Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:13, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Unused profile pictures on Wikimedia Commons

Hello Rama. My name is EurovisionNim (or Nim as I like to be addressed as) and I am a fellow Wikimedian. I was going through plenty of profile pictures that have been unused and was thinking that they should be removed based on this deletion policy. Although I would have begun the deletion request, two years ago, i was blocked for nominating my own low quality junk like File:2011 Mercedes-Benz ML 300 CDI (W 164 MY11) BlueEFFICIENCY Grand Edition wagon (2014-06-01).jpg and also Wikimedia blocked OSX for nominating low quality files for deletion. Whilst I can understand these mistakes, I have never heard about nominating unused profile pictures for example, File:Ahsanullah mohsen.JPG & File:Paula Gómez.jpg as I do not believe these would be suitable examples of images of people in the profile picture. I was wondering if you were to help me out, but not proceed as I want to know as I do not want Admins such as A. Savin & Steinsplitter to reblock me again for nominating low quality junk for deletion & knowing you're the expert, thats why I asked you. Best regards --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 02:43, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Demerliac request 5 December

Hi Rama, Apologies. Somehow I missed your two replies above. Not much, but at least it gives me an excuse to cite Demerliac for Venus. I have just finished HMS Hazard (1749), which captured some three small French privateers. Does Demerliac (1715 A 1774) have anything? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello!

• Subtile (1755):
• Saint Thomas (Dieppe, 1757):
• Duc d'Ayen (1760):

I am afraid that none registers in my documentation. There are ships by these names, but they are either naval ships or East indiamen (not for the rights dates anyway); it seems that the further we go back in time, the less we have records for smaller ships. Better luck next time hopefully. Cheers! Rama (talk) 22:49, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for looking. The lack of info is not surprising. However, I have a new challenge for you: French ship Courageux. I am working on the redlink, for which you already provided Demerliac info. However, in researching her, I came across the other three (#1, #3, and #4) and wonder if he has anything on them. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:29, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

By the way, is the only difference between "Courageux" and "Courageaux" one of a shift over time in usage? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

I do not think that "Courageaux" has ever been a spelling for "Courageux", this probably stems from errors in retranscriptions. Cheers! Rama (talk) 15:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Interesting re orthography; probably an English approximation. I have done French ship Courageux#French privateers and wonder if Demerliac has anything to offer. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh yes, I was losing sight of the essential. Courageux is a rather common name, I have 16 listed in 1792-1799 alone, and more Courageuse.

• Courageux (1797), naval lugger bought by the French Navy while sill under construction in Dunkirk. (n°625, p.101)
• Courageux (1798-1799), 420-tonne privateer corvette from Bordeaux, commissioned in 1798. First course from 1798 to April 1799 under a Captain Fr. Beck with 29 officers, 179 to 187 men and 26 guns. Second cruise from May 1799 to June under Jean Barnard with 153 men and 28 guns (8-pounders and 6-pounders, probably 26 8-pounders as battery and 2 long 6-pounder chasers). Captured by HMS Alcmene on 23 June 1799 (n°2378, p.270)
• Courageux (1799), privateer from Dunkirk under Jean Vanvlième with 60 men and 14 guns (n°1772, p.221)
• Courageux (1797-1800), 53-tonne privateer commissioned in Saint-Malo in 1797; first cruise in 1797 under Méquet with 44 men; 2nd under François-Auguste Blanchard from November 1797 to February 1798 with 44 men; 3rd from March 1798 under Beaumont; 4th from December 1798 to January 1799 under Alexandre Legrand; 5th under Arthur Leroux from February 1799 to March 1799; 6th under Alexandre Legrand again from December 1799 to 1800. She was armed with 4 small guns and one carronade. (n°208.3, p. 245)

Cheers! Rama (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rama, many thanks for this. I have implemented the additions. The Fr Wikipedia should be pleased with their expenditure on Demerliac. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 20:39, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Demerliac request 27 2018

Hello Rama, i was wondering if any of your sources had any information on the French privateer Flambeau which was captured by the American sloop USS Enterprise off Dominica on July 23, 1800. Any information at all would be most helpful. Regards, XavierGreen (talk) 20:31, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello,

yes, Flambeau is listed among the privateers for which little is known, but she is there: 14-gun ship captured by the 12-gun USS Enterprise on 23 July 1800 (Nomenclature des navires français de 1800 à 1815, p. 335).

Cheers and best wishes for the new year! Rama (talk) 21:08, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

French ship Courageux (1753)

Hi Rama, I see you were an early contributor to this article, and even added a reference here [[1]]. That link appears to be dead now but I see you have access to a few French sources and wonder whether any make reference to Courageux carrying 24-pounder guns. I assume this was during her French service because she appears to have carried 18-pounders on her upper deck while in the Royal Navy, and the only reason I can find for her being referred to as a 'heavy' seventy-four, was due to her size. Hope you can help --Ykraps (talk) 09:00, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Ykraps:,

Courageux is listed in Roche (vol1, p. 131), but he does not give details on the armament. Demerliac has an entry in 1715-1774 (n°207, p.39), where is describes her armament as 28 36-pounders, 30 18-pounders and 16 8-pounders, which is the standard equipment for that sort of ship in the French Navy. So I am afraid I cannot confirm the "heavy 74" line of thoughts, sorry.

Best wishes for 2019! Rama (talk) 19:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

That's very useful, thanks, and a happy New Year to you too.--Ykraps (talk) 07:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Demerliac request 20 December 2018

Hi Rama, I have just posted Otter (1807 ship). In 1813 the French privateer Babiole captured Otter in the Med and took her into Toulon. Does Demerliac have anything on Babiole? Thanks, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

OK. I just discovered that you posted to wikicommons a picture that may have been Babiole. I also discovered a half dozen references in Lloyd's List to her prizes. If Demerliac has enough basic data, we can do a small, pretty article on her. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:23, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

I do not remember the image, would you happen to have a link ? A drawing by Leroux, perhaps?

I'll check if Demerliac has something. I am always a bit disappointed that none of our privateers ever appear in the histories of privateers, however verbose they seem.

My best wishes to weather the winter solstice! Rama (talk) 19:02, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Corsaire_encalmine-Antoine_Roux-p41.jpg If Demerliac has basic info on displacement, armament, commissioning, etc., I will be delighted to give her an article. I have Lloyd's List mentions of her prizes. Also, that a Brit frigate captured her during the 100 days.

And best wishes to you to on this Teutonic pagan winter solstice season. Acad Ronin (talk) 19:22, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Acad Ronin:,

Babiole, a privateer corvette built at La Ciota in 1811 with a coppered hull. First cruise from 1811 to early 1812. Second cruise from Marseille, fom March 1812 to later the same year. Third cruise under Jean-Joseph Roux between December 1812 to March 1813. Fourth under Roux again from October 1813 to January 1814 (N°2514, p. 302)

Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:24, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. It is all consistent. I just wish Demerliac would have a tonnage of some kind, and an armamament. Still, beggars can't be choosers and I will go with what we have. Regards,Acad Ronin (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Do you have any access to:Vergé-Franceschi, Nichel (1991) Guerre et commerce en Méditerranée: IXe-XXe siècles. (Editions Veyrier)? All I have is a snippet view on Google books. It does mention Jean-Joseph Roux, but apparently not Babiole. Acad Ronin (talk) 21:06, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Done. See Babiole (1811 ship). Thanks for the help.Acad Ronin (talk) 22:47, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Wonderful! Congratulations on the new article

I have found a used copy of the book you mentioned somewhere on the Internet, I will tell you what I find inside when it arrives. Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:22, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, there are quite a few interesting details in there, notably a table that describes 26 prizes taken by Roux on three privateers. I will add them as I read through the article. Cheers! Rama (talk) 08:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Demerliac request 3 January 2019

Hi Rama: Happy New Year. Let's see how much luck my first request of the new year meets with. I have just finished Commerce (1791 ship). The French privateer Glaneur, of Calais, captured Commerce in 1805. Does Demerliac have anything on Glaneur? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I have a Glaneur from Boulogne that would match the dates: a lugger commissioned in 1804. First cruise under Charles-Robert Cornu de Lassalle with 64 men and 16 guns between 1804 and 1805; second under Thomas Souville in 1805; third from November 1805 and January 1806 under Charles-Robert Cornu de Lassalle; fourth under Thomas Souville from February 1807. Another from November 1807 to February 1808 under Léonard-Louis Merlière (or Merlier). Last from some time in 1808 under Thomas Souville until captured by a British ship on 30 November 1808.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you have the Demerliac number and page? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 13:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Darn, I forgot. N°1742, p.243 Rama (talk) 14:14, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

——SerialNumber54129 08:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Arbritation request

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Clarice Phelps and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Iffy★Chat -- 09:47, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice of motion

The Arbitration Committee is considering a motion which concerns you. You can view the motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Motion to open: Rama, and you are invited to make a statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Statement by Rama. Thank you. – bradv🍁 20:04, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom case page

Hi Rama. I have moved your response to BU Rob13 to your own section. As you are unfamiliar with ArbCom, you were not aware that on ArbCom pages people only comment in their own sections. There is an editnotice which says this, but in my experience most people do not read editnotices. It is, however, in the circumstances an unfortunate thing to have done, as it gives the impression that you are out of step with the community both in understanding process, and in being in agreement with consensus. I am sympathetic to what you have done in undeleting the article, but your lack of understanding of why the community are concerned, and instead taking up a battleground stance to attack the community is worrying. SilkTork (talk) 08:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for the move.

You are framing the terms of the debate in ways that I cannot accept, so let me rephrase. It is widely acknowledged that Wikipedia has diversity problems: that amounts to saying that the usual processes sometimes bring about undesirable results — I do not think that this is controversial. Of course one cannot solve the whole issue with executive decisions such as the one I took in restoring the article, this can only be exceptional. Rama (talk) 08:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

If you would be so kind

You could save yourself, ArbCom, Wikipedia and the biography subject some trouble by stating that your recent action on Clarice Phelps was not ideal, that you recognize the error and will be more careful going forward. Then, head to WP:DRV and appeal the deletion through normal process. My own opinion is that the biography was harmless, and there was no need to delete it. "Just following the rules" is not a good argument. If the rules are broken, then we change them. Jehochman ^Talk 14:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Good idea, let's try this and see what happens. Rama (talk) 14:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Rama Arbitration case

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:46, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Political cartoon about the aircraft carrier 'Charles de Gaulle'.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Political cartoon about the aircraft carrier 'Charles de Gaulle'.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Phelps

Hi, what on earth are you doing in restoring the three-times deleted Clarice Phelps article? We have processes for this, as you should know. - Sitush (talk) 08:13, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, Rama. The community has decided—in at least three discussions—that this is not the time for an article. Short of you reversing your undeletion, you will be welcome, I suspect, at Arbcom. Cheers, ——SerialNumber54129 08:19, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Sitush (talk) 08:24, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

We have processes, and we also have things like WP:BOLD etc. Processes exist to decide on a appropriate outcome, not entrench decision that are questionable in the first place and become utterly inappropriate later on.

In this instance:

• there are a great many sources for the article, indicating that the subject was likely to be notable in the first place. It would be interesting to compare the threshold for male and white third-rated sportsmen.
• there are now almost enough source on the deletion of the article to make that a notable subject in itself
• the deletion of the article is a source of embarasment for Wikipedia, and an emergency restoration of the article seems quite appropriate to me to avoid making Wikipedia look indifferent, incapable of correcting its mistakes, or even militant in its invisibilisation of women and minorities. Being an administrator is not merely blindly following protocol, but also taking appropriate action when needed.

"Short of you reversing your undeletion" sounds suspiciously like a threat, and I do not respond well to this.

Rama (talk) 08:51, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Then you will well understand how the community feels on having their discussions discarded as a mere irrelevancy by one who clearly considers themselves an arbiter on notability. ——SerialNumber54129 08:56, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• For misuse of administrative tools and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities as outlined in WP:ADMINACCT, Rama (talk · contribs) is desysopped. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, GoldenRing (talk) 13:41, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama closed

After the display of opinionated statements, loaded questioning and oriented procedural anomalies that this process has been, I cannot say that the decision comes as a surprise. It is nevertheless disappointing that the Arbcom, as a body, would not only prove incapable of detecting clear patterns of recent harassment, but would deliberately turn a blind eye to their continuation during the very proceedings. I fear it will discredit the Arbcom in the eyes of actual victims, and further embolden bullies who have nothing to fear from it and can even instrumentalise it as their weapon.

I want to thank User:CyrilleDunant, User:Levivich and User:Fæ, with whom I share the opinions that human beings are people, and that applying rules selectively is merely injustice; as well as User:Jesswade88, who exposed herself to further aggression for my sake. I also want to salute Arbitrator User:Opabinia regalis: it shows courage to clearly express dissenting opinions in such a threatening environment. These are the qualities that, against ignorance and bigotry, will in the end make Wikimedia projects more and more civilised, just and diverse. Rama (talk) 15:09, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rama, stupid decision. The most the situation warranted was the common verdict in Royal Navy court-martials of officers who had lost their vessels while performing their duties, "Lieut. Rama was admonished to be more careful in the future." Acad Ronin (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. The Royal Navy served as an instrument of progress and justice, for instance in ending slave trading, so your witty formulation resonates with me as well as your vote of confidence. Hope to see you soon around one of our naval mysteries! Rama (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited French frigate Vendémiaire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RTL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Alsace.svg question

Hi - I got a question about the sources used to create this image during a review of List of battleships of France - can you add whatever sources you used to the image page (or tell me here and I'll do it)? Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 13:28, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

it does not seem to be online anymore, I'm afraid.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

That's unfortunate - I'll have to check Jordan & Dumas to see if their sketches can support the information. Thanks, Parsecboy (talk) 20:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Parsecboy: do let me know if there are amendments to apply to File:Alsace.svg to make it more rigourous. Rama (talk) 17:43, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

They have a top view drawing of all three Alsace variants, and a side drawing of the No. 1 variant too (the one with three triple 380mm turrets) - they look very similar to your drawing. Do you think you could draw up a triple turret variant so we'd have both? I can send you scans of the drawings if you'd like. Parsecboy (talk) 12:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

I must have found a scan of the page you mention on a forum and it would have disappeared since.

I would be delighted to give a modest hand with the article, I'll send you an e-mail so you can reply with the drawings and I can use them as documentation for my own. Cheers! Rama (talk) 16:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Demerliac request 4 August 2019

Hi Rama, Does Demerliac have anything on a Saint-Malo privater named Milan, launched in 1807 and captured in 1809. She became HMS Achates. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 23:37, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

A naval brig, in fact: French brig Milan (1807). Off to you! Cheers! Rama (talk) 19:08, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks for the article. I have already started to add the English info. Regards,Acad Ronin (talk) 23:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

stellar and instructive work, as always! Rama (talk) 16:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I have pushed that article almost as far as I can for now. On to other pieces of the puzzle, though does Demerliac have anything on the privateer Lion that we mention in the article? She seems to have been active enough to have drawn his attention. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

I have two or three sparse entries that could match; do we have any clue as to the homeport of Lion? Rama (talk) 20:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, neither of the sources in the item lists her homeport. Worse, there appear to have been American privateers named Lion operating at the same time. I think we should just drop the matter for now. Eventually we may stumble across a useful clue. Thanks and regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Demerliac request 6 August 2019

Hi Rama, I was just updating HMS Apelles (1808) and saw that she had captured two French privateers:Somnanbule and Raviseur. I hope these prove to be more identifiable than Lion. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Acad Ronin:,

Sorry I let these two slip.

• Somanbule (p.252, n°1865), a shooner commissioned as a privateer in Dieppe in October 1810, with 56 men and 18 gun, under Pierre-Antoine Sauvage. Captured on 18 October by HMS Niobe and Apelles, Sauvage killed in action.
• Ravisseur (p.236, n°1645), privateer commissionned in Dunkirk in 1812 under Lieutenant René-Antoine Happey, with 51 men and 11 guns. Captured on 22 February 1823.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 07:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for the info, which I have implemented.

Demerliac request 17 August 2019

I was just updating HMS Persian (1809) and saw that she captured three French privateers in the Channel: Ambuscade, Gozelle, and Petit Jean. I hope Demerliac has something to add. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 11:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

• Embuscade (in French, spelt with an "e"), n°1847, p.251: brand new ship commissioned as a privateer in Diepper in September 1808. Two cruises under Antoine-Joseph Preira, aka "Balidar", with 89 to 100 men (Balidar seems notable, I might draft an article [2] [3]). Third cruise under a Captain Le Duc. Two more under a Captain Rodrigues from August 1809 to February 1810. Sixth and last cruise under a Captain Briganda from February 1811 to her capture by HMS Persian in April.
• Gazelle (as you noticed, this is a mispelling), n°2068, p.268: originally a 172-ton merchant schooner from Saint-Malo built in 1808 for Blaise Fils, she was rebuilt as a brig in March 1810 and given a letter of marques in October 1808 ("en guerre et en marchandise", i.e. she was carrying goods on a commercial route but was allowed to prey on enemy shipping). First course from October 1808 under François-Jean Giron with 26 men and 4 guns, arrived at Ile de France on January 1810. Second journey from March 1810 under Thomas Le Blanc with 22 men and 4 guns, arrived at Ile de France in February 1811. Recommissioned as a privateer in September 1811 and cruise under René Morin with 91 men and 14 guns, until captured off Saint-Malo by HMS Leonidas on 16 February 1812.
• Petit Jean, n°1871, p.253: lugger from Dieppe commissioned as a privateer in November 1811; first cruise with 60 men and 8 guns until captured by HMS Persian.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 21:22, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Wonderful. I will add the info. Acad Ronin (talk) 21:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Done. If you do the Balidar article let me know and I will see what I can add from UK sources. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 22:14, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I have started Antoine-Joseph Preira, I have to go now but I'll come back to is later on. As you can see, a substantial part of the article is already constituted of your own work on John Bull. I think that with the bits of information we have on some of the privateer ships that Balidar captained and the parts of his own biography, we might have enough material to give his ships their own articles as well. Cheers! Rama (talk) 07:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any idea of what ship might have been involved on the British side of the action of 30 December 1808 where Embuscade fought? Rama (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rama, I have not been able to find anything. I was looking for any mentions of Ambuscade as a French privateer, and also under the names Preira and Balidar and all I could find was a two-hour engagement in April 1809 in which she captured the British merchantman "Vanguard". Do you have any other clues? Regards,Acad Ronin (talk) 23:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Ha. Sometimes, with a little more looking and a lot of luck, two pieces of the big puzzle just click together. The British lugger was Sandwich. I have linked the Balidar article (and future Emuscade article) in the article on her, and the article on her in the Balidar article.Acad Ronin (talk) 20:40, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Amazing feat of sleuthing, congratulations! Rama (talk) 12:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Rama/Archive 13,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on and off wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages. [4]

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English). [5]

Find more information about this project. [6] Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 16:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Rama/Archive 13,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation's annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well the Wikimedia Foundation supports your work on and off wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 20:10, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Demerliac request

Hi Rama, I have just put up Bush & Dreghorn (1798 ship). A French privateer (Eleonore, or Leonore) captured her in 1812, and HMS Doterel (1808) captured the privateer and recaptured her. This was near the Isles of Scilly so I am hopeful that Demerliac has something. Also, I have requested the book and should have it by Thursday next. Acad Ronin (talk) 12:38, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

She is mentioned in the "don't know much about" section as Léonore, of 80 men and 10 guns (p. 337).

I have finished detouring Héros, and the result, File:Heros-32.146-IMG 5063-white.jpg, is now on the article.

Thank you for the research on the Boston models, I look forwards very much to what this might teach us.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Attentes concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Attentes, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:35, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Spanish ship San Ildefonso

Page of slight sketches of fighting vessels, including 'Espoir' and 'Al-de-Fonso', 1813 and 1814 RMG PY3793

May I ask for your opinion: do you agree that this image is of the Spanish ship San Ildefonso, the date of the sketch doesn't fit in with the prose. Thanks P.S. Apologies I don't understand the formatting here on how to get the para numbering right... Broichmore (talk) 08:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I am afraid I can bring nothing new on the matter that would provide more certainty. This being said, from what we have, I would agree it is a safe guess to posit that "Al-De-Fonso" is San Ildefonso.

As an aside, it seems consensual that "L'Espoir" is in fact HMS Espoir (1804).

Season's greetings and cheers! Rama (talk) 10:36, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Demerliac request 1 January 2020

Hi Rama, Happy New Year. Let's get the year off with a difficult query. In late 1809 the RN captured two French privateers named L'Aigle, one in the Indian Ocean and one in the Med. In 1810 a French prize named L'Aigle appears in Lloyd's Register. She then becomes a West Indiaman and later a whaler. She is wrecked in the Pacific in 1830. I wonder if the whaler is one of the prizes. The entry in Lloyd's Register gives her launch year as 1802, and her burthen as 466 tons. What I am trying to do is see if I can link one of the French privateers to the later merchantman/whaler. Given that both captures took place far from the Channel, I doubt that we will be able to find much, but it is worth a shot. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:49, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

Happy new year too! I enjoyed the quiet part of it while it lasted.

Aigle was a rather popular name, as you can imagine. There are 12 or 13 in 1800-1815.

I think I have the Mediterranean one: Aigle (n°2547, p.305), a Genoan xebec commissioned in Valanza in May 1809 under Gaetano Scotto, with 54 to 80 men and 10 guns. HMS Pylades captured her on 14 December 1809. Unlikely to be the whaler you are seeking, though.

There is also an Agile from Saint-Malo (n°2075, p.269), commissioned in February 1809 under Olivier and captured by the British in 1809; but she was 204 tons, with 27 men and 4 guns, I doubt she could be the whaler either.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rama, Thanks for looking. It was a long shot that you would find anything. Unfortunately we don't have an article for Pylades yet so I can't even add the info on the xebec. I'll simply go ahead and publish the article on L'Aigle that I have been working on and omit any mention of privateers. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 21:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Marius Bar

Hello, Rama

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Buidhe and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Marius Bar, should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marius Bar.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Buidhe}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

buidhe 05:50, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome, much appreciated after 17 years on the site. Welcome to you too. Rama (talk) 10:04, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

I have done what I can to bulk up the Marius Bar article. Are you aware of any sources about the history of photography in France that we could cite? Clearly he was important, but I suspect that because he took pictures of ships he never got the attention he would have received if he had done soft-core Orientalist porn. Acad Ronin (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Echec request 4 January 2020

Hi Rama, let's see what we can find. Here are four existing articles about privateers that may have been from Boulogne: Adolphe (1803 privateer lugger), Adolphe (1807 privateer lugger), Duc de Dantzig (1808 ship), and HMS Defender (1809). By starting with, and improving existing articles, we avoid deletionists. Acad Ronin (talk) 00:02, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

I have made some progress on Adolphe (1803 privateer lugger): we have the names of a few prizes that you might find interesting, if it is possible to reconcile the French transliterations with actual names. It seems that the ship identified as Bassett in British source was in fact a brig that the French call Marguerite.

Also, in October 2018, I had noticed that the Museum of Dieppe has a model of a cutter name Adolphe on display, and even exchanged a few mails with them on the subject in the hope of determining whether it was the 1803 privateer of the 1807 one; Échec identifies her as the 1803 privateer. I'll still need to find a photographer in the region, or make the 10-hour trip myself. You can just see her on File:Château-Musée de Dieppe-8017.jpg, she is the smaller ship in the most distant of the displays.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 10:28, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rama, I have followed up on Adolpe (1803) and Duc de Dantzig, making of the Echec leads what I can. The Duc de Dantzig led me to create the small article Bonetta. In some, but unfortunately not all, cases it is possible to identify the prizes in Lloyd's Register or Lloyd's List. Net-net Echec is a unseful addition to our sources. As far as the model is concerned, if the Museum is not willing to make the photo in return for our mentioning the museum in WP, is there any way to identify a Wikipedian in Dieppe would be willing to take the photo? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations, I am always amazed by the material you manage to find on merchantmen.

About the names of the ships, I notice that we tend to have quite of lot of badly-spelt names; would it not make sense to use the actual names of the ships with maybe a note to mention the creative alternatives?

I have made inquiries to find a photographer in Dieppe, but we appear curiously short-handed in the North. The images we have are from an eminent colleague from Germany.

Cheers! Rama (talk) 07:33, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Rama, I have thought quite a bit about the issue of names. I generally try to use the name used in the source so that someone wanting to follow-up can readily search, even though doing so results in a certain untidiness in the article. The idea that there is a correct way to spell a name is a fairly modern notion. In the period we work in orthography was quite unsettled. For instance, if you are looking for HMS Reindeer, you have to look under Reindeer and Rein Deer, at the very least. I have even seen RN officers vary their signatures. Then we add the problem of the writing in English of foreign names. Sometimes standard usage in English deviates strongly from native language – Leghorn vs Livorno. This may also be the result of phonetic approximations to non-English names. I have just started work on some ships named Barossa, or Barrosa, or Barosa, all variants appearing in Lloyd's List. I have an article – List of ports of call of the British East India Company – that I created so that anyone running into some of these long-lost names could easily identify them and their modern equivalent. I could create a standard disclaimer: "The variant spelling of names reflects the usage in the sources", but I have so far been too lazy. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 11:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Théodore Gudin

Hello, just curious...were you planning to add more images to this article? WQUlrich (talk) 06:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Not really, but I certainly could add a selection with references to the events depicted, if you think if would be useful. Cheers! Rama (talk) 07:07, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I was planning to do it, but thought I should ask first, considering how recent your edit was. Thank you! WQUlrich (talk) 07:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

That is very considerate of you, but don't hesitate. I would suggest File:Combat d'Ouessant juillet 1778 par Theodore Gudin.jpg and File:Bombardement de St Jean d Ulloa en 1838 devant Veracruz.jpg for the historical significance of the event depicted, and File:Napoleon III visiting Genoa in 1859-Theodore Gudin-MnM 2003.28.1-IMG 6331.JPG and File:Flotte française se rendant de Cherbourg a Brest-Théodore Gudin-IMG 8921.JPG as examples of contemporary propaganda works. But I am sure you have your ideas and I will be happy to see them. Cheers! Rama (talk) 07:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Good suggestions...there is quite a bit to choose from! WQUlrich (talk) 05:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Le Corsaire la Fortune Commandée par Cap.ne Bartholani

Hi Rama, Do you have any ideas about this picture; the text with it is Le Corsaire la Fortune Commandée par Cap.ne Bartholani etant sur le point de perir dans la Bàye de Tabarco en Barbarie...? Broichmore (talk) 14:30, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

that French ensign was introduced on 15 February 1794, and the shape of the ships suggests that the scene in happening some time during the Fist French Republic or First French Empire. I looked up the entries for Fortune, Fortuné and Fortunée in Demerliac's books for 1793-1800 and 1800-1815, but I did not encounter a mention of a Captain Bartholani. Maybe it might help if we had a more precise date to focus on.

The ship on front is very interesting: it seems to be a square-rigged xebec, a cross between the light xebec and the powerful square rig. The French call this a "mistic" (RN called it a Mistico (boat)), you can see a model from the Musée national de la Marine here: File:Chebec Mistic-IMG 8860.jpg. There was also a least one naval ship of a similar type with the name Fortune (but the name Bartholani does not appear in the archive indexes I have).

The half-xebec Fortune that the French Navy captured and used has an OK history.but I too have been unable to attach the Bartholani name to her. She appears both in Winfield and Roberts, and the Fonds Marine. I too have been unable to attach the Bartholani name to her. It is just too bad we can't make the link as it would be a nice article, given the picture, her history, and the unusual nature of her rig. Regards,Acad Ronin (talk) 19:58, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for bringing rather disappointing news, and thank you for a very interesting image! Rama (talk) 15:09, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. The artist (an end of pier painter) was Maltese and worked in Marseilles for a while, unfortunately I've noticed, spelling was not his strong suit. Broichmore (talk) 18:40, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Spelling at the time was not set as it is today, so we can't really hold him grudges, even though it does not make our work any easier. Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

A quote attributed to Mark Twain: "It is a poor sort of mind that cannot think of more than one way to spell a word." Acad Ronin (talk) 19:58, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Rama

Thank you for creating Thomas d'Estienne d'Orves.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 20:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 8

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

French schooner Belle Poule (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Falmouth

French schooner Étoile (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Falmouth

HMS Hannibal (1779) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to First officer

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

"T52 class" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect T52 class. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 8#T52 class until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of French ship Bien-Aimé

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on French ship Bien-Aimé requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Fuddle (talk) 03:54, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Antoine Pierre de Clavel

You added a short reference to Troude 1867, but didn't add a long reference to Troude. Could you add it please? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:43, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah yes, thank you for noticing Headbomb. It's now sorted out. Cheers! Rama (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Likewise HMS Ceres (1777) has an issue with Demerliac 1796 / 1996. If you haven't, you should install User:Svick/HarvErrors.js to get noticed of such issues in articles when making use of short footnotes. If you don't know how to install that, let me know, I'll walk you through it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

If you install it correctly, you should see that, for instance, French cutter Lézard (1781) has a missing reference to "Lacour-Gayet (1910)" and that Expédition Particulière has a missing reference to Roche (2005). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that works. Thank you, very convenient. I'll try not to break links form now on. Cheers! Rama (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

No worries. If I were you, I'd review [7] to see if there are others with such missing references. That link will probably take a while to load however. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

From a quick perusal of [8], there are issues at

• Jacques-Marie Cramezel de Kerhué‎ (Roche 2005)
• Pierre Alexandre Pastour de Costebelle (Roche 2005)
• Jean Baptiste Christy de La Pallière (Roche 2005)
• René Joseph Bouvet de Précourt‎ (Roche 2005)
• Chevalier de Villeneuve-Cillart‎ (Roche 2005)
• HMS Fortune (1778)‎ (Lacour-Gayet 1910)

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah, thank you Headbomb. Now that I have the tool you recommended I see how easy it is to make a pig's breakfast of these references. Cheers! Rama (talk) 23:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Indeed! I converted some references to a proper {{sfnp}} which revealed additional issues at HMS Fortune (1778). Take a look please. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Done, thnk you. Rama (talk) 08:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

"Action of 23 April 1782" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Action of 23 April 1782. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 13#Action of 23 April 1782 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

French ship Brillant (1690)

There's quite a few errors in the citations of that article. Could you take a look? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:43, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Seems that you have sorted most of it, thank you! The translation tool is quite good in aiding the work but it's not completely automated yet I see. Cheers! Rama (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

French frigate Fine (1779)

That one's missing the full ref of 'Lacour-Gayet (1910)'. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, fixed! Rama (talk) 19:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)