This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
HMAS Sydney (D48) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | HMAS Sydney (D48) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Finding Sydney Foundation has released a sonar image of the wreckage. 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 01:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
“ | The Finding Sydney Foundation or other noted copyright must remain on all reproductions of Materials from this Web Site.
You may download, store and use the Materials for your own personal use and research or that of your firm or company. You may not republish, retransmit, redistribute or otherwise make the Materials available to any other party or make them available on any website, on-line service or bulletin board of your own or of any other party or make them available in hard copy or on any other media without HMAS Sydney Search Pty Ltd CAN.096 017 275 and The Finding Sydney Foundation’s express prior written consent. |
” |
Socrates2008 ( Talk) 03:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
“ | The Material (including photographs) available in the "Press Room" section of this Website may be used/reproduced by your organisation (unless stated otherwise within the content description) subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Legal Section AND any Material (including photographs) which you use/reproduce must credit the source as "The Finding Sydney Foundation" and, as an option, you may also link the source statement with the website address http://www.findingsydney.com/. | ” |
203.7.140.3 ( talk) 04:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Sydney is described as being laid down on the 8th July 1933 as HMS Phaeton and then being purchased by the Australian Government, to then be renamed Sydney. She was launched on 22 September 1934. Does this then mean she was scheduled to be named Phaeton but didn't actually receive the name? Does this also mean she therefore never carried the name as she was never launched as the Phaeton? Ozdaren ( talk) 10:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
HMAS Sydney was a modified Leander-class light cruiser of the Royal Australian Navy. The ship had great success in the first years of World War II, but controversy and mystery surrounds the loss of Sydney and her crew in November 1941. Her sinking with all hands represents the greatest ever loss of life in an Australian warship; Sydney was also the largest vessel of any country to be lost with all hands during the war.[2]
It was announced on 16 March 2008 that the wreckage of the German vessel which sank HMAS Sydney, the auxiliary cruiser HSK Kormoran, had been found on the night of 14 March 2008.[3] On the next day, 17 March 2008, the discovery of the wreck of HMAS Sydney was announced by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.[4] Sydney was located on 15 March 2008, 150 kilometres (81 nmi) from Shark Bay and 22 kilometres (12 nmi) from the location where the Kormoran was found.
There are many paragraphs without in line citations, as required at GA level in practice. Presumably these are based on the books in "Further reading", but these will need to be looked at to give specific references.-- Grahame ( talk) 07:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I've seen one or two texts refer to Sydney's class as a "Perth-class" light cruiser. "Leander-class" was the original Royal Navy design, while "Amphion-class" was an upgraded Leander, originally intended for the Royal Navy. However HMS Amphion was never commissioned into the Royal Navy - indeed none of the other ships in the class were, as they were purchased by the RAN. So is "Perth-class" the correct designation, or just something someone assumed, given that HMAS Perth (ex-HMS Amphion) ended up being the first ship in the class? Socrates2008 ( Talk) 09:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
"Perth Class" is one of several correct common descriptions. If you read the battle reports by Captain Detmers of HSK Kormoran he apparently said that when first sighted on 19 November 1941 that HMAS Sydney was identified as a "Perth Class" cruiser. Now either he said it or the investigator or translator at the time in late 1941 translated it that way. So in 1941 one or both navies called her "Perth Class". None the less I agree, leave the name alone. ( Lanyon ( talk) 01:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC))
Finding Sydney Foundation have now released photos of the deck and turrets. [2] 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 00:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. I have a few issues at the moment
Sydney was scheduled to arrive back in Fremantle in the afternoon " paragraphs.
So, some work to do, leave a note on my talk when you have finished. I will pop back in a couple of days. If the issues aren;t dealt with in 7 days, then it will be failed. Thanks. Woody ( talk) 17:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Excellent work. Before FAC, I would consider rejigging the refs further; I have not seen the subheadings used before. That is not to say they are not allowed under the FAC though. Well done overall. Woody ( talk) 13:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Lifeboats have been found near the wreck. [3] 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 04:34, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Check out the latest batch from the Finding Sydney Foundation press room. [4] [5] 59.167.40.126 ( talk) 13:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Completed Inquiry: The loss of HMAS Sydney. [6] I think a summary of this would be important in getting FA status.
The Sinking of HMAS Sydney: A Guide to Commonwealth Government Records by the National Archives of Australia.
An episode of ABC TV's Rewind had an item about the search of archival records about the Sydney in 2004. [7] 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 00:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I propose the following revision. I have given a few specific examples indicating the tone of some submissions. I am not sure that I have given the references correctly. Help & comments welcome:
A Commission of Inquiry into the loss of Sydney was announced following the finding of the wrecks, since no formal inquiry had previously been held. The president of the inquiry is The Honourable Terence Cole AO, RFD, QC. Submissions closed in October 2008 [1] and are available here.
Some submissions in defence of Captain Burnett claim that credible eye witness and circumstantial evidence already in the public domain show that Sydney may have been the victim of an illegal ruse de guerre [2] [3]. It is argued that such evidence casts reasonable doubt on the 'official' account of the battle (based on enemy evidence), and that Burnett should be exonerated [4].
GilesW ( talk) 13:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Weasel-like statement "It is claimed..." might work better in active tense. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think WP uses quotes for things like "not guilty" to convey irony - however I can't think of a better way to convey the implied accusation of incompetence. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 22:06, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
This section would be better moved to the article on the battle with Kormoran (whatever other issues there may be with it). PatGallacher ( talk) 03:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
References
The National Archives has made a lot of previously classified documents available online. http://www.naa.gov.au/whats-on/online/showcases/hmas-sydney/ 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 05:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I've removed this unreferenced section as it does not add to the story of Sydney, and furthermore was laced with weasel words. If you have a strong argument for bringing it back, please discuss here first, and ensure that you have reliable references to back the information up. This is currently a good article - please help to keep it that way. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 06:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Relevant information from the recently declassified sources should be digested and added over the next few months with the aim of making this the featured article for 22 November 2009, the 75th anniversary of her launch. 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 04:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm not familiar with this article but just read these to stories. I thought it might be helpful. Sorry if it's old news.
regards -- Merbabu ( talk) 10:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
PS, nice article. Great reading. thanks -- Merbabu ( talk) 10:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I have taken the plunge and nominated the article for FA. Feel free to leave comments. ShipFan ( talk) 14:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm housebound for the duration of October following an operation, so I figured I could put that time to good use by expanding this article towards FA (unless anybody else has dibs on this).
I've identified seven books about the ship available from my local libarary network, but instead of borrowing them all, I was hoping that those more familiar with the subject could identify the two or three 'best' texts on which to base the expanded content, or (approaching it from another angle) indicate which works (or parts of works) may not be as reliable as desired or should otherwise be treated with caution.
In no particular order:
On top of this, I will be borrowing other books with a broader subject area (mostly histories of World War II or the RAN) plus drawing from internet-accessible books (like Gill's World War II histories) and my own small collection to supplement the info and ensure a bit of diversity in the referencing.
So... your thoughts? -- saberwyn 10:47, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:HMAS Sydney (AWM 301473) cropped.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 09:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC) |
Since the Sydney didn't immediately sink, is there any explanation why the crew didn't abandon ship and evacuate the vessel before it sank? 69.125.134.86 ( talk) 00:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on HMAS Sydney (D48). 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
hi everybody, i've just come across a booklet, H.M.A.S. Sydney (1971) OCLC 534081 by John Collins, its a great read, providing further details on the ship, including the actions, some photos, and has a full listing of the hands lost. just wondering if this could be included in a "Further reading" section or "External links" (to its worldcat library listing) of the article?, thanks. Coolabahapple ( talk) 04:44, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I have minimal understanding of Naval stuff but noticed these photos from the ANMM on Commons that could massively enrich the article if not just plonked in by a naive person like myself. Thoughts? PatHadley ( talk) 20:07, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
HMAS Sydney (D48) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | HMAS Sydney (D48) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Finding Sydney Foundation has released a sonar image of the wreckage. 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 01:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
“ | The Finding Sydney Foundation or other noted copyright must remain on all reproductions of Materials from this Web Site.
You may download, store and use the Materials for your own personal use and research or that of your firm or company. You may not republish, retransmit, redistribute or otherwise make the Materials available to any other party or make them available on any website, on-line service or bulletin board of your own or of any other party or make them available in hard copy or on any other media without HMAS Sydney Search Pty Ltd CAN.096 017 275 and The Finding Sydney Foundation’s express prior written consent. |
” |
Socrates2008 ( Talk) 03:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
“ | The Material (including photographs) available in the "Press Room" section of this Website may be used/reproduced by your organisation (unless stated otherwise within the content description) subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Legal Section AND any Material (including photographs) which you use/reproduce must credit the source as "The Finding Sydney Foundation" and, as an option, you may also link the source statement with the website address http://www.findingsydney.com/. | ” |
203.7.140.3 ( talk) 04:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Sydney is described as being laid down on the 8th July 1933 as HMS Phaeton and then being purchased by the Australian Government, to then be renamed Sydney. She was launched on 22 September 1934. Does this then mean she was scheduled to be named Phaeton but didn't actually receive the name? Does this also mean she therefore never carried the name as she was never launched as the Phaeton? Ozdaren ( talk) 10:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
HMAS Sydney was a modified Leander-class light cruiser of the Royal Australian Navy. The ship had great success in the first years of World War II, but controversy and mystery surrounds the loss of Sydney and her crew in November 1941. Her sinking with all hands represents the greatest ever loss of life in an Australian warship; Sydney was also the largest vessel of any country to be lost with all hands during the war.[2]
It was announced on 16 March 2008 that the wreckage of the German vessel which sank HMAS Sydney, the auxiliary cruiser HSK Kormoran, had been found on the night of 14 March 2008.[3] On the next day, 17 March 2008, the discovery of the wreck of HMAS Sydney was announced by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.[4] Sydney was located on 15 March 2008, 150 kilometres (81 nmi) from Shark Bay and 22 kilometres (12 nmi) from the location where the Kormoran was found.
There are many paragraphs without in line citations, as required at GA level in practice. Presumably these are based on the books in "Further reading", but these will need to be looked at to give specific references.-- Grahame ( talk) 07:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I've seen one or two texts refer to Sydney's class as a "Perth-class" light cruiser. "Leander-class" was the original Royal Navy design, while "Amphion-class" was an upgraded Leander, originally intended for the Royal Navy. However HMS Amphion was never commissioned into the Royal Navy - indeed none of the other ships in the class were, as they were purchased by the RAN. So is "Perth-class" the correct designation, or just something someone assumed, given that HMAS Perth (ex-HMS Amphion) ended up being the first ship in the class? Socrates2008 ( Talk) 09:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
"Perth Class" is one of several correct common descriptions. If you read the battle reports by Captain Detmers of HSK Kormoran he apparently said that when first sighted on 19 November 1941 that HMAS Sydney was identified as a "Perth Class" cruiser. Now either he said it or the investigator or translator at the time in late 1941 translated it that way. So in 1941 one or both navies called her "Perth Class". None the less I agree, leave the name alone. ( Lanyon ( talk) 01:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC))
Finding Sydney Foundation have now released photos of the deck and turrets. [2] 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 00:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. I have a few issues at the moment
Sydney was scheduled to arrive back in Fremantle in the afternoon " paragraphs.
So, some work to do, leave a note on my talk when you have finished. I will pop back in a couple of days. If the issues aren;t dealt with in 7 days, then it will be failed. Thanks. Woody ( talk) 17:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Excellent work. Before FAC, I would consider rejigging the refs further; I have not seen the subheadings used before. That is not to say they are not allowed under the FAC though. Well done overall. Woody ( talk) 13:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Lifeboats have been found near the wreck. [3] 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 04:34, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Check out the latest batch from the Finding Sydney Foundation press room. [4] [5] 59.167.40.126 ( talk) 13:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Completed Inquiry: The loss of HMAS Sydney. [6] I think a summary of this would be important in getting FA status.
The Sinking of HMAS Sydney: A Guide to Commonwealth Government Records by the National Archives of Australia.
An episode of ABC TV's Rewind had an item about the search of archival records about the Sydney in 2004. [7] 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 00:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I propose the following revision. I have given a few specific examples indicating the tone of some submissions. I am not sure that I have given the references correctly. Help & comments welcome:
A Commission of Inquiry into the loss of Sydney was announced following the finding of the wrecks, since no formal inquiry had previously been held. The president of the inquiry is The Honourable Terence Cole AO, RFD, QC. Submissions closed in October 2008 [1] and are available here.
Some submissions in defence of Captain Burnett claim that credible eye witness and circumstantial evidence already in the public domain show that Sydney may have been the victim of an illegal ruse de guerre [2] [3]. It is argued that such evidence casts reasonable doubt on the 'official' account of the battle (based on enemy evidence), and that Burnett should be exonerated [4].
GilesW ( talk) 13:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Weasel-like statement "It is claimed..." might work better in active tense. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think WP uses quotes for things like "not guilty" to convey irony - however I can't think of a better way to convey the implied accusation of incompetence. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 22:06, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
This section would be better moved to the article on the battle with Kormoran (whatever other issues there may be with it). PatGallacher ( talk) 03:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
References
The National Archives has made a lot of previously classified documents available online. http://www.naa.gov.au/whats-on/online/showcases/hmas-sydney/ 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 05:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I've removed this unreferenced section as it does not add to the story of Sydney, and furthermore was laced with weasel words. If you have a strong argument for bringing it back, please discuss here first, and ensure that you have reliable references to back the information up. This is currently a good article - please help to keep it that way. Socrates2008 ( Talk) 06:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Relevant information from the recently declassified sources should be digested and added over the next few months with the aim of making this the featured article for 22 November 2009, the 75th anniversary of her launch. 203.7.140.3 ( talk) 04:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm not familiar with this article but just read these to stories. I thought it might be helpful. Sorry if it's old news.
regards -- Merbabu ( talk) 10:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
PS, nice article. Great reading. thanks -- Merbabu ( talk) 10:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I have taken the plunge and nominated the article for FA. Feel free to leave comments. ShipFan ( talk) 14:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm housebound for the duration of October following an operation, so I figured I could put that time to good use by expanding this article towards FA (unless anybody else has dibs on this).
I've identified seven books about the ship available from my local libarary network, but instead of borrowing them all, I was hoping that those more familiar with the subject could identify the two or three 'best' texts on which to base the expanded content, or (approaching it from another angle) indicate which works (or parts of works) may not be as reliable as desired or should otherwise be treated with caution.
In no particular order:
On top of this, I will be borrowing other books with a broader subject area (mostly histories of World War II or the RAN) plus drawing from internet-accessible books (like Gill's World War II histories) and my own small collection to supplement the info and ensure a bit of diversity in the referencing.
So... your thoughts? -- saberwyn 10:47, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:HMAS Sydney (AWM 301473) cropped.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 09:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC) |
Since the Sydney didn't immediately sink, is there any explanation why the crew didn't abandon ship and evacuate the vessel before it sank? 69.125.134.86 ( talk) 00:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on HMAS Sydney (D48). 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
hi everybody, i've just come across a booklet, H.M.A.S. Sydney (1971) OCLC 534081 by John Collins, its a great read, providing further details on the ship, including the actions, some photos, and has a full listing of the hands lost. just wondering if this could be included in a "Further reading" section or "External links" (to its worldcat library listing) of the article?, thanks. Coolabahapple ( talk) 04:44, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I have minimal understanding of Naval stuff but noticed these photos from the ANMM on Commons that could massively enrich the article if not just plonked in by a naive person like myself. Thoughts? PatHadley ( talk) 20:07, 9 June 2019 (UTC)