Talk:Action of 9 August 1780

Problems

This article appears to have some inconsistencies:

• The title of the article is 'Action of 9 August 1780'. The lead calls it the 'Action of 8 August 1780', and the infobox gives the title 'Action of 8 August 1780' but the dates '8-9 August'. Which is it? If the action occurred over two days, the article may need to be moved to reflect this.
• The escorting force includes three frigates which are said to have sailed from Portsmouth. By the time they fall in with the Channel Fleet there are four frigates, by the time they are taken by the Spanish, two frigates escape though none are mentioned as having been captured. How many frigates were there, and did this change over time? Sources I can find have only two frigates, the Thetis and Southampton, accompanying Ramillies as an escort, with three other ships and briefly the Channel Fleet making up part of the escort on other occasions. If so this should be made clear.
• The sentence 'This was a major intelligence failure, for the British Admiralty did not learn of the sailing of this enemy fleet until 4 August and neither Geary nor Captain John Moutray.' does not make sense. Geary and Moutray what?
• Sections like: - 'Such a prize had never before entered the harbour of Cadiz. A British fleet of nearly sixty ships, taken captive by a Spanish squadron, was extremely flattering to a people, to whom naval captures, from such an enemy, were an unusual spectacle. All their ancient losses, all the insults which their coasts, and that city and port in particular, had formerly endured, seemed now, at one stroke, to be done away.' and 'The dissatisfaction which had long prevailed among many, with respect to the conduct and government of the Royal Navy, now became general, and was loudly vented in clamour and reproach' reads as overly flowery POV language, the sort common in early nineteenth century reports and histories. If they are quotes, and they certainly read as such, they need citing and the author identifying in the text. If not they need to be toned down and clarified, and rewritten in more modern prose.
• Similar to the above, the quote from the Edinburgh Magazine confuses the old typographical use of the letter 's', writing it here as an 'f'. 'fearcly' in fact should read as 'scarcely', giving the opposite meaning, the captured sailors in fact felt scarcely the effects of their situation, rather than they felt them fiercely. I've corrected this, and the use of the HMS prefix for a merchant vessel. The spelling of the ship in the source is actually 'Ferme', though the author of the article has correctly identified this as the 'Firme'. Nevertheless the spelling used in the source should be retained in a direct quote. Benea (talk) 12:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Further to the above WP:MOSQUOTE states 'Preserve the original text, spelling, and punctuation.' and 'unless there is an overriding reason to do so, Wikipedia avoids linking from within quotes'. Please address the issues above, particularly with regard to the repeated contradictions involving the date of this action before attempting to remove valid templates. Benea (talk) 18:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)