Draft talk:NMS Rechinul

Deep confusion of sources
I found myself needed to move this article to the draft space due to the confusion of book references. To put it simply, I found two reliable English-language books that give specifications for Marsuinul in much more detail than for Rechinul. In Conway's 1922-1946, Rechinul is described as a minelaying submarine with 40 mines and only 1 gun, a 20 mm. Which startled me, since Romanian sources point to Marsuinul as the initially-planned minelaying submarine, converted eventually to attack submarine. The English source that does get the armament of Rechinul right, 1 x 88 mm and 1 x 20 mm, also mentions the same armament for Marsuinul, but that goes against the other two sources (one of them being, again, Conway's), which puts Marsuinul's armament to 1 x 105 mm and 1 x 37 mm. In English sources, also their length and beam measurements seem to be switched, as are their launching dates. In conclusion, I have to let only the Marsuinul article stay, due to the much greater abundance of reliable sources, which give much more credible specifications. Regards. Brown Water Admiral (talk) 11:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

UPDATE I added Rechinul as a section to Marsuinul's article. I did mention some of her specifications stated in the English sources (powerplant, top speed, armament, displacement) but not those that are confusing, such as the length (In Conway's, Rechinul is 8 meters/25 feet longer despite being 35 tons lighter). It is the best that can be done at the moment. Brown Water Admiral (talk) 16:46, 1 September 2017 (UTC)