Talk:Japanese destroyer Hinoki (1944)

On the reliability of "combinedfleet.com"
Two days ago, I removed the source combinedfleet.com, finding it to be a WP:FANSITE, including Japanese phrases like "Rapid net deployment warship!" (急設網艦！) and "Warship seized!" (捕獲網艇！) which seem … overly jubilant for a reliable source. The home page also features a forum and an advertisement for the book Shattered Sword. Sturmvogel just reverted me, commenting that I would do well to look up who the site owners are. I have done so, and am not sure what I'm supposed to find to convince me that CombinedFleet.com is not a WP:Self-published source unsuitable for WP:V on Wikipedia. I'd like to request more direction from Sturmvogel. I loop in Jaguar as they GA-passed this article, so may have some insights. While I write Japanese to a perhaps “high-intermediate” degree, I am not an expert in its WWII-era Navy. However, I think my concern with this website's reliability is serious and shouldn't have been brushed off so easily. Neither Gilbert Casse, Berend van der Wal nor Peter Cundall have articles, so I don't understand why this was so obvious to Sturmvogel that my concern could be reverted w/so little explanation. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 02:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Jon Parshall and Anthony Tully are responsible for all content on Combinedfleet.com; both are published experts on the WWII-era IJN. You should have dived deeper into the site and visited which would have alleviated your concerns about WP:SPS.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I see. Just to make sure I fully understand what you're saying: because Parshall and Tully exert editorial control over CombinedFleet.com, they fall under WP:RSSELF, which says Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. ? It wasn't clear to me whether the owners of the site had anything to do with this page as they aren't mentioned on it, but I see now that on the about page you linked they have titles containing "Editor", which seems to satisfy the requirement that reliable sources have editorial oversight in my mind. Thanks for your explantion. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 09:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)