Talk:Salcombe Cannon Wreck

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Has any one checked Moor Sands for the graves of the Moors? As it seems that the bodies probably washed up on these sands.

The wreck is dated between 1630 and 1640. The Spanish Reconquista finished well before this... Has anyone contacted Mosques in the African ports of this time to find Mosques records of missing ships?

Γνώθι Σεαυτόν 05:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Correct ISSN for References edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

References 4 and 5 on the article's page are tagged as having incorrect ISSNs. The references currently are listed like this:

Nautical Archaeology, the newsletter of the Nautical Archaeology Society, 2004.3 pp8,9, ISSN 0602-6098

Nautical Archaeology, the newsletter of the Nautical Archaeology Society, 2005.2 p3, ISSN 0602-6098

I believe the correct ISSN for the International Journal of Nautical Archaeology (IJNA) is 1057-2414. I do not have quick access to this journal myself, though, so I am not 100% certain that the source I've identified is the one referenced in the article. I will leave the article alone for a few days, and try to find someone who can confirm my findings. If I hear nothing, I'm inclined to update the reference with the ISSN I've identified. Keesiewonder 23:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Don't change it to IJNA - that is a different volume. The reference is to Nautical Archaeology - the newsletter, not the journal, and the ISSN that appears on it is as quoted. I will try to find out more Viv Hamilton 15:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Excellent. I'll leave it alone. Perhaps, then, the ISSN is correct (as you have said) and whomever tagged it as being wrong was wrong ... Hopefully you'll be able to see a copy of the newsletter yourself, which will clear everything up! Keesiewonder 16:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC) ... Of course, I now see [1] . In an instance such as this, can we then just remove the invalid tag ... since it appears that though an invalid number, it is the one the publication uses? Keesiewonder 16:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Add topic