Talk:Tom Crean (explorer)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Tom Crean (explorer) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 17, 2010.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Military (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Antarctica (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Antarctica, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Antarctica 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Ireland (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Irish Maritime
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Irish Maritime, a collaborative effort to improve and standardise the content and structure of maritime, seafaring and inland waterways articles associated with the island of Ireland. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated FA-Class)
MILHIST 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. Featured
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Scott said he could only trust Evans, Lashly, and Crean?[edit]

What is the source of the assertion that Scott said he could only trust Evans, Lashly, and Crean? The original account of Crean's solo trip in this article was factually garbled so I am kind of distrustful of this other statement as well. Dr.frog 12:53, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

  • I've read a number of books on this subject and haven't come across a statement this strong from Scott. There is no doubt though that Scott held these men in very high regard so I modified the statement as such and included a citation from Scott's diary. Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


GA approval[edit]

I have now passed the article GA, so congratulations after all your hard work. I am writing a formal report for the archive, and will let you know where this is when I've done it.

The only late changes I've made are in the lead, where I've extended or combined sentences, adopted British spellings and styles, re-routed the open boat journey (you had it going through Drake's Passage) and other bits of tweaking. I think it's OK now.

You probably need a break, but when you feel ready for a new challenge, if you want another Antarctic project and haven't one in mind, take a look at the list on my userpage This is a summary of projects that I may, or may not, get round to. You are very welcome to pick one of these, and I'd be willing to assist. Don't pick Ernest Joyce, though, as I'm doing some work on that at present.

Also, for your interest, the two big projects, Captain Scott and Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, will be at FAC and peer review respectively, in the next day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 12:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The review discussion and report is on Talk:Tom Crean/GA1 if you want to read it Brianboulton (talk) 13:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Thanks Brian, congratulations to you too for a very thorough GA review. The article is vastly improved over the original. I may take a break from Wikipedia for a bit, as you suggested, but I'll look into the articles you've suggested later. Zatoichi26 (talk) 21:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Images[edit]

As part of the freshening-up process in readiness for an eventual run at FAC, I've played around with the images a bit. I've added a pic of the training ship HMS Impregnable, changed the Hut Point interior shot for an external one (I'm tired of looking at that fossilized pair of trousers), and changed the James Caird launching for a general shot of the Endurance party. I've also shifted the mugshot in the Terra Nova section over to the left, for variety's sake. These changes are by way of experiment - we can always revert to the former images, if preferred.

My personal view would be to transfer the aforementioned mugshot into the lead (replacing the one with the puppies), and to find an image, or images, more related to the Terra Nova Expedition, to put in that section. I'm on the lookout. Also, there may be a problem in keeping the statue image at the end. Apparently there are separate copyright questions arising from photographs of "recent" works of art (where the sculptor may be still alive, or only have died recently). I've had this problem on FACs before. I will at some stage do a careful check on every image within the article - on my own FACs I've had more problems with images than I have with prose. Brianboulton (talk) 16:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

(later) I have now added to the Terra Nova section a photo (taken by Bowers) of the polar party at 87°S. Crean is among the unidentified figures. The photo looks better when enlarged. It is definitely PD, too. Brianboulton (talk) 21:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Brian: I am torn between the mugshot and the puppies photo for the lead. The puppies one is a great photo, with lots of personality. I found the mugshot on the internet somewhere, it's pretty grainy. It's reprinted in the Michael Smith book I have. I'll scan it at high resolution and re-upload it. It would be a shame to lose the statue photo, it rounds out the article quite well. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I moved the mug shot to the Endurance section since this is from that period, and added the photo of Crean & "Bones". Also have a look at Crean & Cheetham.JPG on Wikipedia Commons, I uploaded that one as well but haven't decided if it will fit, or is needed. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:47, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Re Bones and Crean image: What is the source of this picture? When was it first published? Do we have author information? We can't claim it was published before 1923 if we don't have its initial publication details. Nor can we claim copyright expiry on the basis of author's life + 70 years if we don't know who the author is. I can't find the image in my 1913 edition of Scott's Last Expedition. Brianboulton (talk) 15:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

It was from my Michael Smith book. The book credits SPRI and I just located it on their web site at http://www.spri.cam.ac.uk/library/pictures/expeditions/terranova/9.html. I was assuming since it was taken sometime in 1910-13, surely it would have been published before 1923, but I don't have that documented anywhere. Let me know if you have further ideas, otherwise I suppose I'll remove it. Zatoichi26 (talk) 00:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I suggest we leave the images as they are for the moment, get the prose right, and then consider what to do. I'll keep my eyes open for publication details of the "Bones" photo - a possibility is Herbert Ponting's With Scott to the Pole. Brianboulton (talk) 21:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Comparison with Ernest Shackleton Featured Article[edit]

Lead photo:

  • Shackleton's has more info: children, parents, spouse, education. Green tickY Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Middle name - does Tom Crean have one?

Lead section:

  • comparable in detail, Shackleton's is a little longer
  • Shackleton's stays appropriately higher level; Crean's mentions some details such as his rank of "boy 2nd class" and "able seaman" which are perhaps unnecessary in lead section Green tickY Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • reference of when and to whom Crean was married to, could be added in lead as a significant life event. Green tickY Mentioned briefly Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • should make reference to Crean's three polar medals in the lead Green tickY Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
  • little more detail (one-liner) on Endurance expedition can be added, for instance, instead of the ship just sinking, the men were actually stranded in the ship all winter, and when it sunk they were stranded on the ice for almost 5 months. There are not many human beings who have been through an ordeal like this so it should be highlighted. Green tickY Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Early life sections:

  • comparable in types of details
  • Crean's reads a little mechanically - should be rounded out with more details if they exist - will check Michael Smith book.

Subsequent sections:

  • both articles structured the same with separate sections for expeditions and "time between expeditions"
  • Shackleton's is longer with more sections; due to Shackleton's greater number of expeditions, and likely due to more historical reference material on Shackleton than Crean
  • both have legacy/tributes section

Tone:

  • articles have similar encyclopedic tone

Photos:

  • Crean has been improved with more photos. Better quality mugshot will be uploaded.
  • What about the James Caird launch photo? This could be copied onto the Crean site since Crean is surely in this photo.

Citations:

  • not counting web citations, Shackleton has 28 different sources, Crean has 7. At least one or two more should be found for Crean.
  • citation quality (format etc) is comparable

I'll address some of these when I get more time. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Be a bit careful at the moment in using the Shackleton article as any sort of guide or comparator. Its promotion to FA in January was in my view a HUGE mistake - it was riddled with errors, and the choice, range and use made of sources was often bizarre. I have been engaged, on and off, for months in surreptious rewrites, and am by no means finished with it yet. In my view, at present Crean is the better article. I'd say tht either Harry McNish or Ernest Joyce might be better models. Brianboulton (talk) 23:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Brian: OK, I will take a look at those articles. I did make some of the above changes because I think they improve the article regardless of the status of Ernest Shackleton. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I had a look through the Harry McNish article, and didn't see any improvements/ideas to be transferred to the Tom Crean article, that aren't already listed above. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Prose comments[edit]

The lead looks excellent now, after your redrafts. I've added a couple of tweaks myself.

In the Early life and career section I see that all the information in the first paragraph is cited to p. 19 of Smith's book. I don't have the book beside me for the moment, but is all of this really on the one page? Even so, given the variety of the information provided, I think there should be separate citations at the end of second and third sentences.

Also, in the British Navy, Ordinary Seaman is the lowest rating - you can't be "promoted" to it. It would have been automatic, once Crean ceased to be a boy seaman. I suggest something like: "On his 18th birthday Crean was ranked Ordinary Seaman..." And I would delete altogether the final sentence of the section, which doesn't really tell us anything significant. Brianboulton (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I added citations for first two sentences and made the changes you suggested. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
OK, and I've tweaked it about a bit more. Looking at later sections now. Brianboulton (talk) 18:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Analysis of Lead Section Against Guidelines[edit]

Does lead section unambiguously define topic?

Yes.

Article begins with a straightforward, declarative sentence and article title is subject of first sentence?

Yes.

First instance of title is in boldface?

Yes.

Relative emphasis: Is information in the lead reflected in the rest of the text?

Yes, lead section provides synopsis of Crean's origins, expeditions, accolades, retirement, death.

Accessible overview: Does lead briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article?

Yes, see previous point.

Accessible overview: Is specialized terminology avoided?

I think it's OK. Geographic places unfamiliar to some such as "Ross Ice Shelf" and "County Kerry" are wiki-linked.

Lead properly cited?

Guidelines state "The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus." All of the information in the Lead is cited later in the article, and there is nothing controversial here. For ease of reading, recommend leaving out citations from Lead.

Proper length?

3 paragraphs is within Wikipedia guidelines (no more than 4 paragraphs in lead). Zatoichi26 (talk) 00:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Review Against Wikipedia:Manual of Style[edit]

  • The MOS recommends against using the title in a section heading, as we have here for "Tributes to Tom Crean". I am considering changing it to just "Tributes". Brian do you have any thoughts on that or other ideas?
    • Well, yes. Three of the four "tributes" are what might come under the heading of "trivia", and I would strongly advise against ending the article on what appears to be a "trivial" note. My advice would be to ditch this section, incorporate the geographical namings into the previous section and forget the rest. If you feel strongly about the documentary and the stage show, a brief sentence along the lines of "Crean has also been the subject of recent television documentaries and theatre productions" would be OK, but I'd definitely leave out the pale ale. Brianboulton (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
      • Agreed about the Tributes section, it mainly contained unimportant information and caused the whole article to end on a weak note. Surely the man's legacy is not a beer and a one-man play! This would be like ending the Albert Einstein article by saying that his face is used on coffee mugs and posters. (maybe it does, I haven't checked...) Anyway I deleted it, moving the note about geographical features named for Crean, to "Later Life". Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Under "Seasons as dates" the MOS recommends against using winter/spring/summer etc. I was going to change the first instance of "winter" in "During the first winter the Discovery" to "During the first Antarctic winter" but then Antarctic is used again in the same sentence... and then there's the matter of "winter quarters" and what to do with that. In the end I think the article is fine as is, since it is clear we are talking about the Antarctic pretty much throughout.
  • The above two points were the only variants I found from the MOS; the article is pretty solid.
  • Left to do: review against Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
    • Yes, but don't be too hung up by ths. I've done four (poss. 5) FA biogs and never even looked at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). We should concentrate on getting the best quality of prose. One further point: South with Scott is arguably the weakest of the Terra Nova expedition histories. I think there are better accounts of the Last Support Party's journey and Evans's collapse, and it might be advisable to go for one of these. I'll suggest something. Brianboulton (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Terra Nova Expedition - Last Support Party[edit]

I've been reading other accounts of the Last Supporting Party's return journey in Jan-Feb 1912. I don't think Evans's own account is reliable. There was a lot of trouble descending the Beardmore, due to Evans's poor navigation (he was suffering from snow-blindness), and the later efforts of Lashly and Crean to save his life deserve better than Evans's somewhat sentimental account, with Crean weeping etc. David Crane's recent Scott biog is an excellent summary. I realise that this doesn't help you if you don't have a copy; would you object if I prepared a short paraphrase for insertion in the article? You would be welcome to amend it for consistency of style, or chuck it altogether if you don't like it. Incidentally, I got rid of the redlink on Mount Crean by writing a brief article. Brianboulton (talk) 23:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead, sounds like it would be an improvement. Nice work creating Mount Crean. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Further amendments[edit]

I see you've been busy. The article is looking in increasingly good shape. I have done a bit more work on the Tera Nove section:-

  • I've moved the para about the composition of the polar party (should Crean have been in it, etc) to its proper place in the chronology, which is before the long paragraph dealing with the last supporting party.
  • I've also changed some of its wording and added a bit. I thought that Smith's opinion needed backing up, so I found another reference to the issue of Crean's inclusion rather than Evans's, and I've included that and cited it.
  • I've slightly changed the paragraph dealing with the finding of the tent. I've read through several accounts, including Atkinson's first-hand report, and can't find any reference to a black flag sticking out, so I've altered that description.

On a separate issue, I think there are too many external links. Up to you, but I would choose the two or three best. The ones that you keep should probably be put into cite web format.

It is fast approaching the time when the article should go to peer review. Do you have any thoughts about when that might be? Brianboulton (talk) 21:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I shall be away for most of the next week and only intermittently in touch with WP. Brianboulton (talk) 21:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Brian, I re-wrote the "mountainous gales" sentence, can you add your citation from Worsley's account? Also I cleaned up the external links. I'm not sure what the correct formatting is, but I made them look the same as today's featured article, the Cleveland Street scandal. If there's a better format can you correct, or point me to an article which is a better example? One that's done, I think we just need to verify images have proper copyright, then I think the article is ready for peer review. Zatoichi26 (talk) 02:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Done the Worsley thing. I usually ask for the image issues to be sorted out during, rather than before, the peer review. If I were you, as soon as you've finished buffing and polishing, I'd send it to PR. In your review request say you would like a review of everything - prose, images and sources. Then wait and see - sometimes it takes a while, but you'll get some good feedback. I'll keep in touch as & when I can till about 18th. Brianboulton (talk) 00:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
PS can you cite last sentence of Discovery Expedition section, re Scott recommending Crean's promotion? Brianboulton (talk) 09:05, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Citation has been added, and peer review requested. Zatoichi26 (talk) 01:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Good! PS watch out for vandals. Brianboulton (talk) 14:43, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

FAC points outstanding 10 November[edit]

*I will do a run-through in search of the alleged "passive voices". Sometimes they are there, but elusive.

    • I found and rephrased four more. See Article history edit summaries for details. Brianboulton (talk) 18:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Yomangani's point about Crean suffering from snow-blindness on the last support journey return. Worth putting in?
I thought it worth mentioning it as it shows Crean's recovery in contrast to Evan's decline and enhances Crean's later effort (you could argue Lashly was the fitter man for the solo trek). Yomanganitalk 11:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

*A new reviewer is querying the statement that Crean probably lied about his age to get in the Navy. Can you deal with this point? *Another has suggested we reintroduce the information about the Guinness advert and the play. I'm against this, what do you say? Brianboulton (talk) 00:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

    • (Later) On the last point, above, I've been thinking. Although the Guinness ad is trivial, the play may be worth mentioning, as it was performed at the South Pole Inn in in the presence of Crean's octagenarian daughters, who had things to say about it. How about something like this:

A one-man play about Crean's life, devised by Adrian Dooley, has been widely performed since 2001, including a special showing at the South Pole Inn, Annascaul, in October 2001. Present were Crean's daughters, Eileen and Kate, both in their 80s. Apparently he never told them his stories; according to Eileen: "He put his medals and his sword in a box [...] and that was that. He was a very humble man".[1]

I think the article could take that without accusation of trivialisation. Brianboulton (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

(Later): As a reviewer is supporting on the condition that the play gets a mention, I have added the above to the text. I maintain my aversion to the ad, though. Brianboulton (talk) 00:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

My changes[edit]

I've made a few slight tweaks, as I understand it, in the Royal Navy, junior personnel are said to ahve a rate, not a rank. I've also found the official notification of the Polar Medal for the Terra Nova expedition, and his Albert Medal in the London Gazette and added these as references, also in the footnote, I've tried to explain a bit more of the significance of the Albert Medal, since it's not that well known. Apparently, from 1918, hodlers of the Albert Medal were allowed to use the postnominals AM, so this could be incldued after his name in the lede, though given the sensitivities of later Anglo-Irish relations, it may be that he didn't use them, sot hat might be considered anachronous. The notification relating to the Polar Medal also states taht he was awarded only the Silver Clasp on this occasion, as he had already received the Silver Polar Medal, perhaps we need to reconsider how we word this? The other awards of the Polar Medal should also be in the Gazette, but are proving slightly harder to track down, the indexing of the scans can sometimes be a bit hit and miss. David Underdown (talk) 18:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

That portion of his service record which is a available online also refers only to him receiving a further clasp to the Poalr Medal in 1917. It seems to me that it would be more accurate to state that he received the Polar Medal with three clasps, rather than saying he received 3 Polar Medals. David Underdown (talk) 10:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks David, for those additional details. I don't think we need to add "AM" after Crean's name anywhere, since it is a pretty obscure award (maybe it's more well known in GB?). The book that I originally referenced the Albert Medal award from, did not mention the distinction between silver polar medal, or a clasp, but if you have those details in a book somewhere, feel free to add them with citations. Zatoichi26 (talk) 18:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
The Albert Medal probably isn't particularly well known anywhere, due it's supersession by the George Cross. If I could find the other Gazettes with the Polar Medal clasps in, I'd change it, bu they're proving particularly elusive. David Underdown (talk) 09:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Which Daughter died in childhood?[edit]

The article states that Kate died in childhood, but Kate is later mentioned in her eighties! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.131.45 (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Well spotted. Kate died. Yomanganitalk 14:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Use of United Kingdom in birthplace entry in infobox[edit]

While this article was the main page featured article on 17 March 2010, a number of editors removed the mention of [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland|United Kingdom]] (notice piping) from the birthplace field of the article infobox. Crean was undeniably Irish) but at the time of his birth Ireland was part of the UK. The entry for his place of death correctly reflects the fact that by the time of his death) there was an independent Ireland. At the start of the day this was expressed as [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]]) by the end of the day I had removed the piping in an attempt to make the linking clearer (and on the understanding that this was a permitted exception under WP:IMOS) since in the birthplace we link to Ireland as the article on the island as a whole). Prominent among those removing mention of the UK was User:130.83.46.39. I created User talk:130.83.46.39#Tom Crean) and it is as a result of our discussion there that I am raising this RFC. This anonymous user feels that mentioning the UK gives the unwarranted impression that the place is still under British rule. My understanding is that in general we list people under the relevant country at the time they were born) and in this particular case) teh link to Republic of Ireland for his deathplace makes the changed circumstances during his lifetime pretty clear.

I cannot find anything in the Manual of Style that directly touches on this) the closest I can find is WP:MOSICON#Biographical usage which contains: "If someone's citizenship has legally changed because of shifting political borders, use the historically correct country designation, not a later one, and perhaps mention in the article prose the new country name, e.g. 'Belgrade, Yugoslavia (today in Serbia)'" and similar strctures in the "Historical considerations" section of that part of the manual of Style. WP:MILMOS#Flag icons also mentions avoiding anachronistic usage. David Underdown (talk) 17:04, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Delete infobox, solve problem. Yomanganitalk 17:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 A rugged-featured man in a turtleneck jersey, pipe in mouth, is seated holding four small puppies, each mainly light-coloured with dark markings
Tom Crean with sled dog puppies, February 7, 1915
I see that my suggestion has been described elsewhere as "disappointingly facile". I must assume facile is used there in the sense of easy or effortless (though why that would that be considered disappointing I don't know). Despite what the fans of Wikipedia's attempts to produce a rival to Top Trumps would have you believe, infoboxes are by no means mandatory. What useful purpose does one serve here? If it is to service those with too short an attention span to read the article I doubt the nuances of political map drawing will...[sorry, drifted off], if it is to aid automated systems then it is with sadness that I must break the news that we are some way off a machine that can parse the intricacies of Irish history, if it is purely decorative then let's have a detail of those cute puppies instead. A photo with a caption would serve the article better than this attempt to shoehorn Crean into a box that is only loosely relevant and fraught with problems. Yomanganitalk 17:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I would suggest that UK is over-emphasised in infobox. It is clear from the article that he was Irish. His place of birth could be given as "then part of UK". He served in the British Navy, and then retired to the Irish Free State. Conversely does his place of death need to be "Republic of Ireland" rather than "Ireland"? Peterkingiron (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
    Place of death is (now) given as Republic of Ireland. I had rather forgotten this was still running. Having thought of suggesting to the original IP that he should look at George Washington, he seemed happier with how this article has its infobox set up. David Underdown (talk) 16:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
"Republic of Ireland" is a misnomer. You could say that he died in Ireland or in the Irish free State. The term "Republic of Ireland" came around 1948. see Names of the Irish state ClemMcGann (talk) 13:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Damn, sorry, I had tried to get it right. I had noted that Irish Free State ceased to be used in 1937, but failed to pick up that Dominion status technically remained until 1948. In this case, perhaps Eire would be best (this seems to be supported by Names of the Irish state, to maintain a visible distinction from Ireland in birthplace, referring to All-Ireland, and Ireland in deathplace, referring to the mdoern state? David Underdown (talk) 13:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Be careful of the use of eire, for example see: User:Ww2censor#Two Irish history writing Pet peeves. I would avoid the politics and say Ireland (as in the island) ClemMcGann (talk) 17:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
That seems to say taht it's OK if you actually use the diacritic - mind you it does contradict what's in the Name of the Irish state article which says Eire was in common use in English (including in Ireland) at the relevant time. The point is we use simply Ireland for his birthplace, an UK, which is correct, and there really needs to be some way of pointing out that by his death the situation had changed, and the Ireland we're talking about is no longer the same entity that we've linked to in the birthplace. David Underdown (talk) 18:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Statute and nautical miles[edit]

The article uses statute and nautical 'miles'. Based on the text, I've tried to resolve the ambiguity by specifying which one in each case. Please feel free to check each one and see if it's correct. Lightmouse (talk) 13:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Ardada expedition?[edit]

I am working these days on the translation of this article to Hebrew, and I was quite surprised to see there this strange name for the Terra Nova Expedition. Where has it come from? שלומית קדם (talk) 17:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist}} template (see the help page).