Talk:USS Charlotte (SSN-766)

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

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States

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 met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Untitled

Was this the same USS Charlotte that was destroyed in Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor?

The Gwai Lo 23:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. This is the one. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sovereignty dispute

The source, thewolfchild (talk · contribs), is the article NORTHWEST PASSAGE, simply reworked for this article. The news story about the Charlotte at the North Pole is already referenced in this article.

Please restore my edit or tell me what more you want plus edit NORTHWEST PASSAGE to match. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 02:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is your edit in full:

The submarine is presumed to have followed a route which violates Canadian sovereignty.^[1] However, The United States claims the Northwest Passage is an international strait.

References

^ Most of the activities involving American submarines (including their current and past positions and courses) are classified, so therefore under that policy the U.S. Navy has declined to reveal which route(s) the Charlotte took to reach and return from the Pole.

The first sentence uses "presumed", which like "assumed" shouldn't be in an encyclopaedia. In that sentence you added a link to "classified" and ended with a ref which isn't really a ref, it's just a note from you. (See WP:RS for proper sourcing.) The second sentence has a link to the NW Passage, but no sourcing attached. Now, I don't know what's in that article that supports the statement in this article that a US sub "violated Canadian sovereignty", (who knows? Perhaps there's an agreement there, in the spirit of NORAD and all that, that USN ships are allowed to transit? Either way, it's worth looking into for sure). Anyway, people shouldn't have read a different article, and all it's sourcing, just to confirm your statememt. If there is info in that article, with a ref attached, that supports the content you've added to this article, then just bring that info over. (And don't forget WP:ATTRIBUTION.) Thanks - wolf 04:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And here is the information I thought would improve this article. I didn't write it, but thank you for pointing out the deficiencies in NORTHWEST PASSAGE.

"...in late 2005, it was reported that U.S. nuclear submarines had travelled unannounced through Canadian Arctic waters, breaking the "Arctic Cooperation" agreement...

The allegations arose after the U.S. Navy released photographs of USS Charlotte surfaced at the North Pole.[106][107]

106:

"Ozeck, Dave. "USS Charlotte Achieves Milestone During Under-Ice Transit". Navy News Service. NNS051201-11. Archived from the original on September 13, 2007. Retrieved October 25, 2007.

107:

"Most of the activities involving American submarines (including their current and past positions and courses) are classified, so therefore under that policy the U.S. Navy has declined to reveal which route(s) the Charlotte took to reach and return from the Pole."

Again, I didn't write any of the above, but I made the mistake of trying to improve the article about the Charlotte. I don't know how to make it fit your expectations, so I'll concede. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 05:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Humphrey Tribble: My only "expectations" are the same that is expected of any of us... that we properly source any content we add or change, as per our policy on verifiability and our giudelines on reliable sourcing. You added two sentences, each making a statement, therefore each one needs to be reliably sourced. If you want to state the sub violated Canadian sovereignty, then find a source that supports that and add it (and write the statement in the affirmative, instead of saying "presumed"). The second sentence is easier, everytning you need is in the Northwest Passages article, just find what you need and add it (and again, don't forget to attribute any content or sourcing you use from that page). Or search out what you need independently and add it. The object here is not to have you "concede" and walk away, but instead to request that you properly write and source any content you add. - wolf 23:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Most of the activities involving American submarines (including their current and past positions and courses) are classified, so therefore under that policy the U.S. Navy has declined to reveal which route(s) the Charlotte took to reach and return from the Pole.

[1]