Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Constant (1801)

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 ^talk 13:10, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

HMS Constant (1801)[edit]

(

)

... that the 12-gun brig HMS Constant captured at least seven enemy vessels while at sea between 1806 and 1813?

ALT1:= ... that the 12-gun brig HMS Constant captured at least seven French and Dutch vessels while at sea between 1806 and 1813?

Created by Euryalus (talk). Self-nominated at 10:38, 29 March 2016 (UTC).

Template is inexplicably not working for me, so adding this as a comment: QPQ: Reviewed: Stephen Jurika -- Euryalus (talk) 11:15, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

New enough. Long enough. Very well written and informative. In neutral tone. Citations throughout. AGF on book-based and pay-walled citations. I did check Lloyd's Marine Lists about it being mistakenly reported as HMS Constance. I can't find anything about Constance in the 24 Feb and the 3 March report. I do see the Fortune mentioned. I'm probably missing something. As for the hook, I prefer ATL1. Also, it'll be *nice* if the fact about it capturing at least seven ships can be cited to a single source. (Right now, one needs to keep track of the captures in the article.) But please review the citation for Constance. Once it's addressed, this will be good to go. Thanks. Hybernator (talk) 00:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

@Hybernator: thanks for the review, and for the kind words about the writing. Apologies that most of the materials are hard-copy or paywalled - annoyingly there is little global interest in digitizing material for very elderly sailing vessels, especially small ones like Constant.

The references in the Lloyd's List sources are

(third column, fourth paragraph) - "... was retaken 16th Inst. by the Constance GB and is supposed to be lost on the Coast of Holland."[1]
(second column fourth paragraph) - "The Fortune ... retaken by Constant GB and supposed to be lost on the Coast of Holland, is arrived at Harwich."[2]

There was a discussion at MILHIST about the identity of this vessel (see here) with a process of elimination ending up at Constant (1801). However, given the mild spelling discrepancy in the first Lloyd's List source I have not included Fortune in the "seven vessels" mentioned in the DYKN.

Alas there is no one source that lists all seven vessels, but I have tried to make this easier for the reader by listing them with the three supporting refs in Note 2 at the bottom of the article. I suspect this will be the best I can do.

Hope that addresses the issue, but please let me know if there's more required - am always happy to discuss the obscurities of these minor vessels. -- Euryalus (talk) 03:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I see them... all garbled and tough to make out. GTG for ALT1. Hybernator (talk) 04:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)