Talk:ORP Kujawiak (L72)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ORP Kujawiak (L72) 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

Military history: Maritime / British / European / Polish / World War II

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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Polish military history task force
	World War II task force

Ships

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

Shipwrecks

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

???

This article has not yet received a rating 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

Malta Low‑importance

	Malta portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta 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.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

ORP Kujawiak[edit]

Hi-

I’m obviously not a wikipedia expert but I’m puzzled as to why you made small and pertinent edits to this page for months and then yesterday deleted all information about the search for the wreck and its discovery, noting “Wreck of kujawiak, that’s all that needs to be said.”

Ovbiously it was my father’s ship and I was involved in finding it. Was that inappropriate to mention?

“A team of Divers” hardly describes the months of research and preparation, coordination between two sovereign nations, and involvement of University personnel and independent explorers and marine archaeologists.

There are numerous wikipedia pages detailing the location of wrecks, their discoverers, etc. I’m just trying to understand why you felt none of the information was warranted.

Is there a better way the information can be added? Perhaps on another page?

Thanks for your time.

Chris Chriskraska (talk) 01:09, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Chriskraska it appears your question is directed to Lyndaship. I won't speak for her, but will say that she is an experienced editor that knows how to improve articles. Also, I will add that per your comments here, you should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest guidelines. I would strongly suggest that you do not make any edits to this article, and instead continue to communicate here on the talk page. If you have any changes you would like to see made, please suggest them here, (be sure to include reliable sources) and another editor can review and possibly make the edit(s) for you. Thanks - wolf 10:31, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping Wolf - I missed this post on the talk page. In answer to the question I deleted nearly all the info about the wreck finding primarily because I thought it wasn't warranted, the article is about the ship and the subsequent finding of its wreck is really a footnote to its history. I disliked the list of bare names associated with its finding, maybe I should have left the principle one. The sources did not seem too good to me, the salient points I thought was had the wreck been designated by the Maltese government and I couldn't find a source which said yes it had and the recovery of the bell which was unsourced. I have no problem if you want to expand the wreck finding and diving info a bit but bear in mind it should not overpower the info we have on the ship. Obviously the months of effort your team put in is less important than the Polish sailors who lost their lives in the sinking and we not memorialise them so why should we mention a group of divers by name? Lyndaship (talk) 10:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you for your thoughtful and well stated responses. I will assemble sources for the information regarding the involvement of the Maltese and Polish governments and the protection of the wreck which was visibly damaged by commercial shipping between our series of dives. I will also suggest a small blurb about the search and discovery of the wreck for your review along with a link to the 90 page Explorers Club flag report when I have a chance.

Thank you.

Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriskraska (talk • contribs) 12:31, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Having noted the potential COI I've added a bit to the prose to make it easier for you. The other refs in the original text added nothing, the orpkujawiak one has been hijacked and the gdansk radio one when I finally got beyond their latest news page to the article said nothing of significance. Likewise my quick google search only turned up primary sources, company sites, social media and regurgitated press releases none of which were usable or added anything more to what is already there and sourced. I expect you will do a deeper search and find something which can be used Lyndaship (talk) 13:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-

I have these references for a start. Thank you.

Chris

Article detailing the designation of the wreck site as a protected area prohibiting diving.

https://www.rp.pl/artykul/1208573-Kujawiak-pod-szczegolnym-nadzorem.html

Article detailing the planned creation of a 3D map of the wreck site and the effort to locate and recover the ship’s bell.

https://wpolityce.pl/historia/290707-ekspedycja-do-wraku-polskiego-niszczyciela-orp-kujawiak-przypomina-o-chwale-marynarki-wojennej-rp

Article detailing the recovery and conservation of the ship’s bell and the placement of a commemorative marble plaque in the Upper Barrakka Gardens in Valetta, Malta (a UNESCO World Heritage site).

https://dzieje.pl/artykuly-historyczne/wydobyty-przez-nurkow-dzwon-niszczyciela-orp-kujawiak-odzyskal-dawny-blask?fbclid=IwAR2zY2MBJfclFiNq2cKUOpLt7HbKobgcFPsXkQbg_qVs9l99wC46E36f8dc user chriskraska — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriskraska (talk • contribs) 20:34, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]