Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/MV Yulius Fuchik

< Template:Did you know nominations
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Withdrawn

MV Yulius Fuchik edit

(
)

Created/expanded by Tupsumato (talk). Self nom at 20:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Long enough and new enough. Wordnik looks like user generated content and wouldn't be suitable for a reference. Does it need to have been written about by a third party or is a reference to the book itself okay? Secretlondon (talk) 07:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
After some consideration, I have removed the reference to Wordnik. The reason why I cited it was that I was concerned about using Red Storm Rising itself as the only reference (a primary source). Also, for I couldn't link to the novel itself for obvious reasons, but Wordnik had a number of excerpts. However, if I understood WP:PASI and WP:PSTS correctly, it should be okay for describing a part of the novel's plot and the novel by Clancy and Bond is as good as any offline source. This leaves me with finding a reference that explicitly says that Yulius Fucik was featured in the novel Red Storm Rising. Tupsumato (talk) 07:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes I think so. Secretlondon (talk) 08:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I assume the novel alone is not a suitable reference? It seems that all searches with any transliteration of the ship's name together with the name of the novel or the author yield websites with user-generated content (e.g. forums). The only reference I found was from the Finnish magazine Suomen Sotilas (2/2011), which used the ship as an example of Clancy's writing style: "Clancyn viljelemistä runsaista yksityiskohdista kertoo esimerkiksi se, että maihinnousussa käytetyn proomuemälaivan kerrottiin olevan Suomen Valmetin telakan tuotantoa." (loose translation: "One example of Clancy's attention to detail is the barge carrier used in the attack, which was said to be manufactured by Valmet shipyard in Finland"). I added this to the article, but I'm not sure if it's enough as it does not mention the name of the ship. Tupsumato (talk) 09:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Other people may have a better idea (I don't write about fiction) but I think when WP:PASI says secondary sources can provide "real-world factors that have influenced the work or fictional element" then we need to find a secondary source somehow. Secretlondon (talk) 09:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I seem to have missed that — thanks for pointing it out. Unless I can cough up a Finnish review on the book (which is likely to mention that the ship in the book was a Valmet-built vessel), I don't think I can find anything useful. Tupsumato (talk) 10:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
But it says they can provide info on this subject, it doesn't say they are required. I'd like to get input from someone who writes about fiction before we give up. Secretlondon (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, it doesn't matter whether or not you find a secondary source for the vessel's name. This is not an article about fiction; the subject of this article is the real-world barge carrier Yulius Fuchik, which just happens to be featured in a Tom Clancy novel.
The Sotilas reference says "the barge carrier used in the attack, which was said to be manufactured by Valmet shipyard in Finland". I assume that the text in the novel did identify "the barge carrier used in the attack" as "the Yulius Fuchik". (This is simply fictional text taken from the plot of the novel; we're only using it to say that the novel did refer to the (possibly fictitious) Yulius Fuchik and this was the barge carrier used in the (possibly fictional) attack, regardless whether there's a Wikipedia article on Red Storm Rising.) Sotilas says the barge identified as the Yulius Fuchik in the novel was real because it was manufactured by Valmet, according to Sotilas's source (which Sotilas indicates by the phrase "which was said to be").
Since no shipyard would build two ships with the same name, the real-world barge carrier Yulius Fuchik is the vessel used in Clancy's novel, if you believe that Sotilas was reliable enough that they trusted their source. It doesn't matter whether we believe in the source; does Sotilas trust them? For example, their source could be a rumor.
If you don't accept this, how about a hook that reads "... that the 1986 novel Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy and Larry Bond featured a barge carrier that was based on the Soviet MV Yulius Fuchik? --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 16:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I think my translation from the original Finnish article was a bit off. Although the verb is in passive form, the meaning is more like "this was said in the novel by Clancy and Bond", indicating that the writer of the article quite likely read the books instead of using third-party sources for his analysis about Clancy's work. He is also merely pointing it out from the novel, not doing any in-depth analysis, and I included the reference to the article just to say "Ha! Someone else saw it too! It was not just my imagination!" Not sure if it's of any use for the article...
As for the novel itself, the ship is identified both by name (although with a different transliteration) as well as the manufacturer and a number of other quite unique details, making in my opinion a pretty solid connection with the fictional ship in the book and the actual ship that was in service at the time of the writing. The problem is that as Clancy did not include unique real-world idenfitying information such as the IMO number, for which reason some editors may consider all this original research. Too bad asking Clancy himself is also out of the question.
As for the proposed alternative hook, I unfortunately don't agree. Would you also say that every American naval ship in the book was a fictional ship based on its real-life counterpart instead of being, well, a real ship in a fictional story? Tupsumato (talk) 21:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree. Because of the incomplete translation, my entire analysis and my hook are incorrect. As you say, the only things you have are the manufacturer and "unique" details, all from a single, primary source who wasn't even attemping to be truthful. You don't know if Clancy: visited the vessel, talked to someone who served on the vessel, read some articles, reliable or not, about the vessel (as you did to construct the Wikipedia acticle) or just picked out the name and a few details from a registry somewhere, along with other details from other sources, to make up his fictional barge carrier.
In addition, in my opinion, you should also think about removing the entire In popular culture section and especially, the last paragraph/sentence in the lead. In other words, all references to Red Storm Rising. If you haven't verified your fact for DYK, why is it verified for Wikipedia? You're just begging to be tagged with {{better source}}, {{failed verification}} and/or {{Dubious}}. The article can stand alone, even if it doesn't have so appealing a hook. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 16:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

According to WP:WAF "unpublished personal observation" of fictional work is considered original research and thus is not allowed in Wikipedia. As I have been unable to find even a single reliable secondary online source for the hook, I am canceling this DYK nomination.
However, quite many people have made the connection between the ship in the book and the real-world Soviet barge carrier before I created the article. Instead of removing the information altogether or changing the wording to something idiotic like "the book featured an identical ship with the same name", I would still like to try and find a reference to support the "In popular culture" section from offline sources (add {{citation needed}} if you find it necessary). The ship and its role in the novel might have been noted e.g. in one of the Finnish maritime magazines of that time, so I'm at least checking those out at the library.
However, even if I find some references, they are likely based on the novel itself as it's quite likely the writers knew for a fact where Clancy got the information when he wrote Red Storm Rising, so I'm not sure if they can be used to support the popular culture section. We can discuss that later on. After that, we shall continue pondering if all works of fiction featuring a classic ill-fated ocean liner named RMS Titanic feature the actual ship, or are just about a ship that is based on the real RMS Titanic and suffers a similar fate... ;)
Tupsumato (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Jesus, I didn't mean to kill the DYK. How about the following ALT hooks:
Also, I was wondering if you can you have a real-world ship "featured in" a fictitious world? Consider if they had made a movie in the late 1980s based on Red Storm Rising and someone said (say, for a Wikipedia article about the movie) that "the MV Yulius Fuchik was featured in the movie". By "featured in", did they mean that the actual Yulius Fuchik was tracked down and used as an actual setting in the movie, with real actors and cameras? Or did they mean the settings were based on the Yulius Fuchik? Was the ship featured in the movie The Last Voyage the SS Andrea Doria (a ship used in advertisements for the film) or the SS Ile de France (the ship actually used and partially sunk in the film)? --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 04:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I admit that "featured" might not be the best word for describing real ships in works of fiction — me English very bad — but saying that every ship in a work of fiction is strictly fictional and only "based" on its real-world counterpart would not, in my opinion, sound good either. Of course it's different from a movie, in which the actual ship might be featured as a prop, but (again) in my opinion using the ship as a setting in a written work of fiction is more or less the same, assuming the ship is clearly identified. In case of Clancy, he is known for his emphasis on realism and using e.g. real NATO and Warsaw Pact military equipment in his books. Thus, I'd rather say the books feature real equipment instead of imaginary, fictional stuff based on real-world... stuff. However, this is the first time I'm including a "In popular culture" section in one of the articles I've written, so I'm not that familiar with the issue and how the regular writers would put it.
As for your example, I'd say that the ship featured in the movie was Andrea Doria, which was played by the Ile de France, or something along those lines. Tupsumato (talk) 04:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I am unclear as to the status of this review. Has it been withdrawn as per August 11, or are the issues not relevant? There have been no significant edits to the article in the interim. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
I have withdrawn the nomination (and have since submitted a new one for another article I finished last week). I'm sorry for not deleting the nomination, but I'm not sure what's the correct procedure. Could someone remove it from the queue as part of normal housekeeping? Tupsumato (talk) 09:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Article withdrawn by nominator. (Note to Tupsumato: you shouldn't delete the nomination; it will get closed in the next couple of days now that we're sure you withdrew it. Thanks for clarifying, and sorry we didn't notice sooner. Best of luck on the new submission!) BlueMoonset (talk) 14:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/MV_Yulius_Fuchik&oldid=829231301"