Talk:CSS Alabama

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the CSS Alabama article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 365 days

Ships Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States / American Civil War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Shipwrecks Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Alabama

This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

South Africa Low‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Civil War Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	American Civil War portal This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - American Civil War task force.

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Merseyside Mid‑importance

	North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Merseyside, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Merseyside-related articles. In so doing it works and collaborates with its mother project WikiProject UK Geography. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.MerseysideWikipedia:WikiProject MerseysideTemplate:WikiProject MerseysideMerseyside articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Manning

Wasn´t it so that almost the entire crew was compiled of Non-Americans, fighting for prize money? And only the officers were from CS? Regards, Tekko 16 May 2007

Disovery of the Wreck

Though the French Navy is credited with discovering the wreck, much of the leg work had already been done by Clive Cussler and his NUMA organization. In his account "The Sea Hunters", Cussler comments that while near the wreck site, his vessel was boarded by the French Navy when they came to close to the nuclear submarine base at Cherbourg. All of NUMA's charts and logs were confiscated. Later, when the French Navy was announcing "their" discovery one of the NUMA charts indicating Cusslers previous search grids was actually shown on French TV.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on CSS Alabama. 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:

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) 01:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

Some of the language in the current version seems to belong more to a tribute to rather than an article about the Alabama. This will require some attention. I invite other editors to help out. Jd2718 (talk) 00:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I added the POV and Tone banners to the article. The history section sticks out as the most innaporpriate; it's well written, but not encyclopedic in tone, and certainly borders on WP:NPOV ("back-breaking work", "floated free on the breeze", "Semmes changed his tack"). The discussion of the flags also seems problematic. Referring to the "Stars and Bars", especially in a section heading, is not neutral. Certianly needs additional citations as well, although those banners are already present. ThunderBacon (talk) 15:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was struck by exactly the same thing as soon as I read the article, not taking too much notice of the banners. I started editing the article for grammar plus some punctuation and found myself changing the more emotional stuff. I only saw your comment here later and note that I have dealt with your three examples. I have left the banners so that other editors can judge what more has to be done.

Incidentally, I think that the whole section on the battle should be considerably reduced here as it is substantially the same as the text in the Battle of Cherbourg (1864) article. Freeman501 (talk) 18:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jumping in here because I'm not quite sure how I'm supposed to do this: I noticed that there's a bunch of small, low effort articles on various parts of the Alabama's service with the CSN that should probably be combined with the main article.

Full List:

CSS Alabama's Eastern Atlantic Expeditionary Raid

CSS Alabama's New England Expeditionary Raid

CSS Alabama's Eastern Atlantic Expeditionary Raid

CSS Alabama's South Atlantic Expeditionary Raid

CSS Alabama's South African Expeditionary Raid

CSS Alabama's Gulf of Mexico Expeditionary Raid

CSS Alabama's Indian Ocean Expeditionary Raid Zatack7 (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of contents about similarities to Nautilus without discussion

Recently User:Fangz removed (or massively condensed) a lot of info (with references) →‎Claimed Links between the CSS Alabama and Captain Nemo’s fictional submarine the Nautilus without adding {{cn}} like <nowiki>^{[citation needed]}<nowiki>, or discussion here. Removed contents included links to sources, but additional, and better, citations might be requested before removal.

For next editors: most of this article lacks inline citations, but Bibliography section, at a glance, seems to support the article, so the task would IMO be to go through Bibliography sources, and use that for inserting necessary inline citations, please, not just silently removing not (inline/exactly) supported contents. (If/as i'll find time to go through those, I'll add inline citations).

I understand the now condensed section might previously be, or look un-encyclopaedic, and that also influenced this reduction.

But I was looking for features of this ship (how she was sailed, steamed, faught...; how she survived cyclone in October 1862... because that was reasonably well documented for the time of transition from sailships to powered ships). Verne wrote elsewhere about similar ships (e.g. in Children of Captain Grant) and I was interested in details (and where I live, there are no (more) sailors with experience on such ships). So info in the removed part included several of the references that were interesting to me, and after you removed that (and expected newer edits accumulate in history of the article) that will be harder to find. If you gave link to diff of what was removed here to the talk page - like I did above - I'd already be happy and wouldn't grumble here. Otherwise, good job condensing that part... Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that the section is in violation of Wikipedia's rules on original research. Most of it was in the form of "this happened with Nautilus" (reference to novel), this happened to the Alabama (reference to Alabama), therefore a connection". It's definitionally WP:SYNTH. Individual aspects of it might possibly be readded but the comparison is hugely problematic and it breaks the flow and structure of the rest of the article. Further, it's not exactly true that I removed it without discussion. The section has been discussed and previously removed from a number of other articles where it had been copy and pasted in, this is one of a couple of instances where it was missed. The user had admitted that it was original research on their talkpage. It seems a very open and shut case. Honestly in the current condensed form we're already going out on a limb because we're using a self published blog. Most of the citations etc can be found in there, in the link I retained. Fangz (talk) 10:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Cherbourg

What's the sourcing behind the detailed account of this battle on this page? Also seems odd that it's longer than the "main article". Fangz (talk) 10:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]