This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Russian submarine Losharik 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 |
Archives: 1 |
A news item involving Russian submarine Losharik was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 3 July 2019. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this source acceptable? If not, is there any better one? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
In its print form the UK's Daily Mirror is viewed as a tabloid. Are we still happy to use the online website as a source here? Perhaps a better source could be found. Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 11:28, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Is this blog source of any use? I found the images quite instructive (if they may be believed, of course). Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Martinevans123 (
talk ·
contribs) wrote in his edit summary: (→History and features: move ref to end of sentence; but is that a WP:RS? does it need to be named (or perhaps entrirely discounted ?))
I submit that is a perfect reference for belief, rumor, conjecture, disinformation, and so forth. To prove an actual fact, not so much. Rumors are a legitimate part of any clandestine subject, and sources which are less than solid otherwise have a place in illustrating them. Qwirkle ( talk) 15:59, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Two of the men killed appear to be notable, possibly. Does this justify listing the names of all 14 who died? I don't think we generally include entire lists of fatalities. The rank or status of some of those killed may be notable. But I think that is already mentioned? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 09:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
Is this article written in British English, US English, or something else? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 13:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
The link for the claim that this sub can go to 2500m depth - a figure that is extemely unlikely, is linked as item [3] which is itself a far from reliable non-independent source and the words "it is known that it can dive to" is therefore complete rubbish. Sorry not a wiki expert but many thanks to those of you who are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:7221:9201:10D1:1559:592E:A873 ( talk) 21:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Russian submarine Losharik 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 |
Archives: 1 |
A news item involving Russian submarine Losharik was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 3 July 2019. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is this source acceptable? If not, is there any better one? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
In its print form the UK's Daily Mirror is viewed as a tabloid. Are we still happy to use the online website as a source here? Perhaps a better source could be found. Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 11:28, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Is this blog source of any use? I found the images quite instructive (if they may be believed, of course). Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Martinevans123 (
talk ·
contribs) wrote in his edit summary: (→History and features: move ref to end of sentence; but is that a WP:RS? does it need to be named (or perhaps entrirely discounted ?))
I submit that is a perfect reference for belief, rumor, conjecture, disinformation, and so forth. To prove an actual fact, not so much. Rumors are a legitimate part of any clandestine subject, and sources which are less than solid otherwise have a place in illustrating them. Qwirkle ( talk) 15:59, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Two of the men killed appear to be notable, possibly. Does this justify listing the names of all 14 who died? I don't think we generally include entire lists of fatalities. The rank or status of some of those killed may be notable. But I think that is already mentioned? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 09:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
Is this article written in British English, US English, or something else? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 13:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
The link for the claim that this sub can go to 2500m depth - a figure that is extemely unlikely, is linked as item [3] which is itself a far from reliable non-independent source and the words "it is known that it can dive to" is therefore complete rubbish. Sorry not a wiki expert but many thanks to those of you who are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:7221:9201:10D1:1559:592E:A873 ( talk) 21:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)