Talk:HMS Artful (S121)

Fair use rationale for Image:BAES Astute.JPG

Image:BAES Astute.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Almost there

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2016/february/19/160219-artful-prepares-for-official-handover

Phd8511 (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on HMS Artful (S121). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140605101803/http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk:80/the-equipment/submarines/astute-class to http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/the-equipment/submarines/astute-class

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Common Combat System,

Look the Common Combat System is secretive see http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2016-03-02.29473.h&s=Common+Combat+System#g29473.q0 so there's no need to put [[ ]] on that article unless you have an open-source information on it which if so would be violating UK national security.

So don't put [[ ]].

Cantab1985 (talk) 14:14, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

The Tory government is (a little) secretive, but WP:REDLINK is our guideline here. Whether something is secret or not matters nothing to WP, although it will affect the sources available. There are of course plenty of sources already available for it, should anyone wish to write the article. BAE Systems, Daily Mole, QinetiQ, QinetiQ Andy Dingley (talk) 14:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

It's not about one government. So why the red link? You write the article then link it.Cantab1985 (talk) 15:17, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Nothing in these articles say anything detailed about the system and all these can be found on the MOD's or Royal Navy's website. So you argument holds no ground whatsover. Cantab1985 (talk) 15:20, 1 May 2016 (UTC)