Talk:John Byng

message: There are several good sources about John Byng and the Battle of Minorca available on the web.  (dead link, but archived here) is from The Royal Navy: a History from the earliest times to the present, published in 1897 (if I understand correctly ), so it's probably in public domain. There is also an article from the British Royal Naval Museum  (also dead, archive copy here), and a text about the painting from the National Maritime Museum . Google  returns namy more useful sources. Zocky | picture popups 12:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amended, to include archive links.  Kablammo (talk) 19:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: "The severity of the penalty and the suspicion that he was used as a scapegoat led in time to a reaction in favour of Byng. It became a commonplace to say that he was put to death for an error of judgment. The execution was also satirized by Voltaire in Candide."
We have the above then a section in aftermarth with the same statement. One or other should be removed as it feels like 'deja vu' at the momentAlci12 18:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging 

message: The notes here are fantastic and I applaud whoever added them all; perhaps, however, there is a way to shrink the font or link to a source where they're collected in the same manner?  I offer it as a purely stylistic suggestion. 142.177.124.155 23:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliographic notes 

message: The language needs tidying up.
* Despite his protests to the contrary, he was not given enough money or time to prepare the expedition properly.  
:What this actually means is that Byng protest "contrary" to the statement you have made ie: he protested that he was given enough time and money. 
:Is that what you mean? It seems hardly possible! 
* ....since he failed to pursue the superior French fleet to protect his own. 
:This reads that "pursuit" of the French fleet would "protect his own". That is the exact opposite of what is intended here. The order in which words are placed is important, and the conjunction need to define exactly what you mean. The words "in order" need to be put in there. 
:.....he, in order to protect his own fleet, failed to pursue the French. 
:etc etc.... 
Amandajm (talk) 02:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I reworded these, to "Despite his protests, he was not given enough money or time to prepare the expedition properly" and "he chose not to pursue the superior French fleet to protect his own." Better? Muad (talk) 03:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Is this ''really'' what you mean?

message: A good article. The phrasing "a well-established Admiral with a rising and stellar career" needs to adopt a single focus. Perhaps the verbatim repetitions of the material in the precis could be expanded rather than repeated. --Wetman 10:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Elaborated dates: seems he was 13. Midshipmen trained "on the job". --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: comment

message: I deleted an inline link to HMS Surprise - a frigate* simulator for Windows because it's: (a) a self-published source; (b) a computer game and (c) based on the excellently researched but fictional Aubrey–Maturin series of novels. This falls within WP:NOTRELIABLE criteria. It's now been reinstated because "The 1911 reference that replaced it was bogus". That's a startling claim so, to counter it, I propose strengthening the contested reference with the relevant passage from the cited work: Neither must it be forgotten that in the previous war in 1745 an unhappy young lieutenant, Baker Phillips by name, whose captain had brought his ship into action unprepared, and who, when his superior was killed, surrendered the ship when she could no longer be defended, was shot by sentence of a court-martial. That seems to sum up the point in the WP article quite nicely. If anyone else wants to suggest that EB1911 is "bogus" that would make an interesting topic to take to the experts at the WP:RSN. --Old Moonraker (talk) 22:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, no dissenters: the self-published source reverted in favor of EB1911. --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer game, based on fiction, used as source 

message: Half the page seems a little excessive. 201.230.79.114 (talk) 05:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Excessive or obsessive?  Looks like the result of a lot of research and hard hard effort, though, unless it's copied from the bibliography of some other work. How could we cut it back? --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:21, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The quantity is huge; the quantity as a proportion of the article is starting to turn into a joke. If someone has really read and recommends all of those works, maybe we can persuade them to flesh out the page here. This is currently more of a reading list than an article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.79.114 (talk) 14:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Now deleted, as discussed below.  Kablammo (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading section 

message: I feel unqualified to edit a Wiki article, but I should draw attention to my book, INJUSTICE, Sutton Publishing, 1996 in which I argue that the court-martial seriously misunderstood the law.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lake rudyard (talk • contribs) 16:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's good when editors with good knowledge of a topic contribute to the project, but needing to avoid WP:COI restricts you from using material from your own published works.  (I wonder how Joseph Heller would have got on!) Suggesting the book on the talk page and leaving it to another contributor, as you have done, is the right way to go about it. Is  the one you are suggesting? --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a yes, then, as they have the same ISBN.--Old Moonraker (talk) 20:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  the court-martial 

message: The article says Byng was shot by Marines Royal Marines in 1757.  My neighbor (a retired Commander on submarines) claims to have been a Marine in the Navy before they were Royal.  However, Wiki appears to contradict my neighbour: "The Royal Marines were formed as part of the Naval Service in 1755." (2 years before the execution) and "Titled "Royal Marines" in 1802
"Corps of Royal Marines" in 1923.  Ref. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Marines
Or did the navy have some Marines that were not Royal Marines?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.48.230.181 (talk) 17:22, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Tute (the cited source) does not mention Royal Marines but the source linked at footnote 19 does.  I will remove the "Royal".   Kablammo (talk) 18:28, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Royal Marines or Marines?

message: As mentioned above, the long list of contemporary pamphlets is of no great use, except to show public opinion at the time. I no longer believe that the list belongs in the article, as conclusions about the state of public opinions should come from secondary sources.  I therefore have removed the list, which can nevertheless be accessed in the history of this article here.  Kablammo (talk) 19:35, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading section, part II 

message: The "On this day" hook is blatantly false. Byng was not court martialled on the 14th of March. DuncanHill (talk) 10:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for spotting this, as you mentioned at the errors page it's been wrong for years. -- Euryalus (talk) 11:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "On this day" hook 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on John Byng. 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/20141029001336/http://www.wrothampark.com/history.htm to http://www.wrothampark.com/history.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://blogs.rmg.co.uk/memorials/m4085
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:48, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There's nothing here about his (supposed) escape attempts, which seem to have been rather notorious at the time.
See page from "A Political and Satirical History of the years 1756 […] 1760": https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=SsIUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA8#v=onepage&q&f=false
The explanation of this is given here (note that "cole" = money). The blanked-out phrase is presumably "Bung Hole" (= anus): https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=e47WAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1007#v=onepage&q&f=false
Previous entry in latter has details of supposed attempts.
—porges 07:07, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Escape attempts?