# Talk:Graham Island (Mediterranean Sea)

Congratulations to the editor of this article it's has been promoted to Good Article Gnangarra 13:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

This article was formerly listed as a good article, but was removed from the listing because Footnote #3, which is supposed to support the story about the island being mistaken for a submarine and bombed links to an article that makes no mention whatsoever of that story.  The story is unsupported and the footnote is irrelevant —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.180.136.7 (talk • contribs) 

That is simply not the case.  The reference supports the fact.  Worldtraveller 15:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Here's the entire text of the article linked in the footnote.  Show me where it refers to the island being bombed... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.180.136.7 (talk • contribs) 
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article217779.ece
The Island that Time Remembered 
Once, it was a cause cÃ©lÃ¿bre: a strategically important volcanic island in the Mediterranean that Britain, France, Spain and Sicily all claimed as their own. Then, in 1831, it sank beneath the sea. Now, inch by inch, Graham Island is rising to the surface again. And already the territorial squabbling has resumed by Rose George 
Published: 26 September 2001 
It began with the boiling of waters, 22 miles from the island of fire. It was July 1861, and off the coast of southern Sicily – the fiery island of volcanoes – in the Sicilian Channel between Europe and Africa, strange things were happening. There was a terrible smell of sulphur in the air, and jets of hot water and cinders were spat from the ocean. Dead fish floated on the surface. Commander Charles Henry Swinburne, standing on the British naval frigate HMS Rapid, watched as for only the second time since 10BC, one of Sicily's lesser-known volcanoes rose up from the sea, setting off an international dispute between Britain and Italy that is still, theoretically, unresolved.

That's not the complete article.  If you look just beyond what you've quoted, you'll see it says "Article Length: 1663 words (approx.)".  Please do not just steam in and remove an article's GA tag, when the problem is simply that you have not read the whole reference.  Best to raise issues on talk pages first.  Also, sign comments, please, by typing four tildes like this: ~~~~.  Worldtraveller 16:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
That is the complete text provided by that URL.  If there is more to the article then it needs to be provided.  The text as provided does not support the story.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.180.136.7 (talk • contribs) 

You can buy access to the rest of the text.  If you're not willing to do that, it's your problem, not the article's.  There is no requirement for references to be available online.  Again, please sign comments on talk pages.  Worldtraveller 16:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Article is now (June 2017) available at 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-island-that-time-remembered-5364331.html with the single sentence description of alleged event "In 1987, an American pilot on the way to bomb Libya thought the rock a submarine, and dropped depth charges on it." Pete Kirkham (talk) 13:46, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Heavily reworked, sent to WP:GAN. ResMar 19:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Three different discovery dates are mentioned:

«Discovery date: First eruption 10 B.C.», says the infobox
«reported during the First Punic War» (264 to 241 BC), says the History section
«newly discovered underwater volcano», says the intro.
Anyone knowledgeable fix this, please? Thanks - Nabla (talk) 00:24, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

The larger volcano Empedocles is newly discovered (2006). I clarified this and fixed some of the references, but still don't know what was recorded in 10 B.C. As for the eruption during the First Punic War, I suspect this is identified as an eruption somewhere on Empedocles, but not necessarily at Ferdinandea. Goustien (talk) 19:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Better, thanks - Nabla (talk) 11:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Please, please stop with this ridiculous story.  The "source" may be an article in a newspaper, but that doesn't change the fact that it is made up nonsense.  The article even gets the year of the Libya attacks wrong.  And I'd love for someone to explain to me how F-111s, which were not capable of carrying depth charges or any sort of submarine detection equipment, would have taken it upon themselves to attack an alleged submarine.  I know it's funny to promote stories of U.S. military incompetence but this is ridiculous on its face.  Phaid (talk) 13:41, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

So with four countries making a claim, the (Sicily) disambiguator obviously favoured the Italian side. The title, "Graham Island (Sicily)", seems akin to having the Falkland Islands at "Falkland Islands (Tierra del Fuego)", the province which Argentina claims it as part of. So I've moved this to Mediterranean Sea, which arguably seems like the most neutral disambiguator. Spellcast (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Right - the title is incorrect, it should be Ferdinandea. --Maxl (talk) 16:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Graham Island (Mediterranean Sea). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060501002151/http://decobed.club.fr/Julia.html to http://decobed.club.fr/Julia.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

In 2013 the article was moved to "Graham Island" and a claim that the British first discovered and claimed the island was added with no documentation or explanation.  I have now moved it back with an appropriate cite.  If this island ever does reappear for any long period of time, under current maritime law it would almost certainly become Italian and not British. Silly-boy-three (talk) 05:31, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I've restored Graham Island as the most common name in English. Subjective legal arguments, especially unsettled disputes, cannot form the basis of article titles. Spellcast (talk) 17:32, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
That would be a good argument but I think it's not correct in this case. When I google the island, most media (including BBC) refer first to Ferdinandea and then to Graham island. Furthermore, there is another island called Graham island. And thirdly, in case of doubt, it is better to use the name locals use (Ferdinandea). Therefore, I propose to restore Ferdinandea island.ElSenador (talk) 10:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
The BBC articles I've come across use both. In English language sources, they'll use either Graham Island exclusively, or it'll use both Graham Island and Ferdinandea. But seldomly will they use only Ferdinandea, which is what would be needed to support the claim that it's the most common name in English. Spellcast (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Ferdinandea is the only name I've heard it referred to in English, I would support a move back. I T B F 📢 15:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

The reference about a Sicilian almanac is void. There is nothing about British strategy in the Almanacco Siciliano website page http://www.grifasi-sicilia.com/isolaferdinandea.htm
--Wisdood (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

It currently says "as of 2016 it remains 6 m (20 ft) under sea level.". I haven't been to check, but presumably it would've been big news if the island had re-emerged, so should this be updated to say "as of 2023"? And updated every year, or how do we deal with that? -- Harry Wood (talk) 21:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)