Talk:HMS Java (1811)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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 Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start	rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale
Mid	rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: 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 not met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Maritime warfare task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force French military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792–1815)

[edit] Merge from "Sinking of HMS Java"

Justification for merger: The only apparent interest in this ship is in its role in the battle whose article I merged into this one, after which the ship no longer existed. And, that battle only involved one other boat which has gone on to have quite an illustrious history. So, the details of the battle seem inextricably to belong together with the only boat that was described to have sunk in it. Precedent for this exists in the article for another boat, also sunk by the USS Constitution, the HMS Guerriere (1806), and it seems to work there quite nicely. Also, I changed the referencing style to footnotes. —Aratuk 21:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually I think I have put more work into this than anyone and I agree with this but... I don't think you should be merging articles out of the blue without listing or discussing it. Tirronan 22:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

As I had never merged pages before, I looked up the guidelines for doing so, and read the following:

"Merging is something any editor can do, and if you are sure that something should be merged, you can be bold and do so. If the merger is controversial, however, you may find your merger reverted, and as with all other edits, edit wars should be avoided.

"If you are uncertain of the merger's appropriateness, you should propose it on the affected pages. After sufficient time has elapsed to generate consensus or silence (at least 5 days), you may perform the merger or request that someone else do so."

I didn't think that in this case it would be controversial, and, having a good precedent, I was not uncertain of the merger's appropriateness, a notion I see vindicated somewhat in your professed agreement with what I did. I'm sorry to have unsettled you, however, and in the future I will be more careful of attaining a consensus before carrying out major changes. Some good news, though: I have permission from the artist linked to at the bottom of the page to upload an image of his painting to Wikipedia under a CC license. :-) —Aratuk 23:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It didn't bother me or I would have reverted it. But its probably a good idea to gain consensus on it as you said. I think the only folks that would have a problem is with it would be the British military task force if they wanted a article with more about the HMS Java's history in the article. Then again if they do they can add it. Except for its capture from the French and its sinking by the US its not that notable a ship. Tirronan 23:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks for adding those bullets in the journal section. I wanted to fix that when I merged the articles but I didn't know how. —Aratuk 00:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)