Talk:British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War

WE 177C
Although Polmar says 177C (he also calls the Coventry a frigate) I believe they were 177A Lyndaship (talk) 06:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Do you have a source? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  07:41, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, it looks like Polmar was mistaken, and these were W.117As. I've just made this correction. Nick-D (talk) 01:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Sourcing
Great work turning this around so quickly. Three suggestions/comments:
 * The article relies quite a bit on Freedman, which isn't a problem in itself, but unless I'm clicking the wrong link, the referenced 1989 RAND document only goes to 33 pages, while most of the cites are to page 60 or thereabouts.
 * The assertions in the introduction are quite firm, which feels right because we know it's contentious. The same/similar lines are repeated later with inline citations (although to Freedman page 60), but I wonder if they should be cited in the introduction too? On past experience, visiting editors from less-reliable other-language versions of Wikipedia are remarkably adept at gaming the rules on this Wikipedia, so it would be safer to deflect them at the beginning.
 * Finally, perhaps stylistic, you start with the word 'although' and so it reads like you're responding to a conspiracy theory. Would it be stronger to start with something like "There was a debate about the potential use of British nuclear weapons in the Falklands War of 1982." (And then continue with "Although the UK..."). Wiki-Ed (talk) 11:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for these comments. I've just reworked the lead and fixed that Freedman reference - the article references both a short paper he wrote in 1989 and a lengthy book he authored in the 2000s. Nick-D (talk) 11:19, 26 May 2024 (UTC)