User talk:Rif Winfield/Archive 8

HM Sloop Fury
Hi Rif, Any information on the sloop Fury which took part in operations on the Delaware River between October and November 1777? She was present at the Battle of Red Bank apparently. I can't find anything in your 1714-1792 book. I thought she might be a fireship. Best regards--Ykraps (talk) 11:52, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but the only British naval sloop present at the Battle of Red Bank was the Merlin, which was set on fire and abandoned. The sloop Fury did not exist in 1777; there was a sloop of that name which was launched in 1779, which was the first to bear the name. It is possible that there was a non-naval vessel of that name on the Delaware in 1777, but if so she was not under Admiralty control and does not appear in the records of the British Navy. Rif Winfield (talk) 15:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't find many references to her but she is mentioned twice in an illustration on p.298 of this book,[] I considered that she might have been the galley referred to on p.295, but she is referred to as a sloop in the footnotes on p.298 and, intriguingly, there appears to be a collection of logs from 1777-1780 at the NMM here.[] Would a non-naval vessel have a RN lieutenant's log do you think?--Ykraps (talk) 08:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It is certainly possible that she was a galley, and there was rather casual usage of the word 'sloop' in contemporary (unofficial) printed matter, so the reference might be to any type of small vessel. There were scores of small vessels temporarily acquired (bought in, chartereed or simply appropriated) on the North American station during the American War, and few of them were even recorded in the data sent back to the Admiralty in London. It you can find out the name of the RN lieutenant whose log you mention, it might help to find out more. Rif Winfield (talk) 10:56, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I think finding out the lieutenant's name is going to require a trip to Greenwich so that might have to wait a while but thanks for the suggestion all the same. I'll let you know if I find anything. Regards--Ykraps (talk) 12:08, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

About Spanish ships
Dear Rif Winfield. Greetings from sunny Spain, I'm amazed to find you on here. Well, I've just registered on this website to send you this brief message. I've also bought some of your books, and they're all just excellent. Impressive work!

After having visited the TNA myself, and also the ANMarine in Paris and few military archives here in Spain, I've published a book entitled Presas de la Armada Española 1779-1828: listado de buques de guerra apresados e incorporados a la Real Armada por apresamiento. Written in Spanish, It gives an accurated description of ships taken as prizes by the Spaniards and added into the Spanish Navy as warships; some of those were privateers but there are also British ships belonging to the RN.

I'd be delighted to share the content of my book with you (privately, via email if possible), so in case you ever decide to publish a revised edition of your work British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793–1817 you can edit data regarding sloops, schooners and brigs taken by/from the Spaniards. I can provide all the references (primary sources) and so on.

Thanks for your attention. Greetings, Rubén E. Vela RE Vela (talk) 01:43, 9 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Many thanks, Rubén. Most grateful and interested in your posting. If you'd like to email me direct, you can do so on tanparcau@btopenworld.com. I have colleagues who are currently developing an equivalent book on Spanish Warships in the Age of Sail, and you might like to be in contact with them. Best wishes - Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 08:51, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Courageux-class
Hi Rif, would you mind taking a quick look at our Courageux-class ship of the line article and making sure it's titled correctly? It appears from your book, British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793–1817 (although it's entirely possible I've misunderstood) that these ships belong to the Carnatic-class (p.57) and that the Courageux-class was a John Henslow design of which only one ship was ever built, HMS Courageux (1800). I currently have French ship Courageux (1753) up for GA review and the question of which class of ships it influenced has come up. Thanks--Ykraps (talk) 15:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Cannot spare the time this week, but I will look at this as soon as I can. Regards, Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 20:04, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Not to worry, as and when. Best--Ykraps (talk) 19:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

160 Footers
Thanks for your helpful suggestion. I am trying to tease these three groups out now on my site. DulcetTone (talk) 19:31, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Spelling of comarca
In Catalan (or Valencian), comarques is the plural form, and comarca the singular. Best regards. --Jotamar (talk) 18:49, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Many sincere thanks for this. I have verified what you say and corrected accordingly. Regards. Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 16:15, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello, I'm 122.60.171.248. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Luwuk, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, 122.60.171.248 (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I have now referenced the source, which is the official Indonesian Government statistical office. Rif Winfield (talk) 10:42, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rory Clements


The article Rory Clements has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. QuiteUnusual (talk) 18:30, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm QuiteUnusual. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Rory Clements, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

QuiteUnusual (talk) 18:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Tigray Region
In this edit, you changed the area to 64722 km2 in the text, and to 84722 km2 in the infobox. I can't access your source, so I'd like to ask you to correct this inconsistency to what the source states. Thanks! Landroving Linguist (talk) 20:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. The Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia (web) makes clear that they estimate the area as 84,722 km2, so I have corrected the figure in the text. Regards, Rif, Rif Winfield (talk) 07:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

thank you
for your continued regular improvement of Indonesian articles - it is much appreciated - have a good new year!!! JarrahTree 15:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Districts of Indonesia
Hi, first of all thank you for you contribution on Indonesian articles. However refer to your edit here, whereas you only edit number of regency without editing the source itself (still refer to -> ). I am fully aware that Census Indonesia just conducted national census last year, but I am still unable to find the result of such census online or any source that mentioned the edited number. Kindly please also update the source for verifiability. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:23, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Badan Pusat Statistik (Indonesia's Central Statistics Office) have their own website, as mentioned by you. The results of the 2020 Census are all fully detailed on that website, which is why I listed it in every one of my edits concerning Indonesian statistics from the 2020 Census. If you google "BPS (full name of authority) Dalam Angka 2021" where the full name of that authority, whether provinsie, kabupaten or kota, is quoted, you will find a very detailed multi-page report (under publikasi) on the results of the 2020 Census. Rif Winfield (talk) 08:16, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, I just found statistics 2021 on this link. However, I still couldn't find statement that said number of "kecamatan" is 7,230. Instead, I found on page 47 that there is 7,252 kecamatan in 2019. Could you provide me source of your statement. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 14:25, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Source of 7,230 total is 2021 Postcodes (https://kodepos.nomor.net/_kodepos.php?_i=desa-kodepos&sby=000000) although I am quite prepared to accept that another 22 kecamatan may have been created recently which Indonesian Postal Service may have not updated yet. Rif Winfield (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, noted.. it was sourced. https://kodepos.nomor.net/_kodepos.php?_i=desa-kodepos&sby=000000 said that it's source is "KEPUTUSAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI NOMOR 146.1-4717 TAHUN 2020" (http://binapemdes.kemendagri.go.id/produkhukum/detil/keputusan-menteri-dalam-negeri-nomor-1461-4717-tahun-2020), and that minister of home affairs decree said total number of kecamatan is 7,244. Soooo.. it may have not really updated yet.Ckfasdf (talk) 02:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. While the numbers of provinsie, kabupaten or kota have been frozen since 2014, there have been a trickle of increases in the number of kecamatan every year, so it is inevitable that some sources, even some government sources, will be a little out of date. The same applies to the numbers of villages (desa and kelurahan). So it is less important to have the exact figure at any one date, but to give the number as closely as possible and note the fact that it will trend upwards. Best wishes! Rif Winfield (talk) 08:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

The Brokenwood Mysteries
Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Brokenwood Mysteries, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.- gadfium 21:55, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I took issue with the current wording of the opening section of the article, as I feel that it only talks about the Auckland region (which covers a vast area) without making it clear that the (fictional) setting is the area of the Northland peninsula (including sites in both the Northland region and in the upper (rural) part of the Auckland region, far north from the built-up area of Greater Auckland). Please reword this as you wish, as long as you make it clearer than it is at present. Rif Winfield (talk) 10:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Indonesian District Tables
Hi, thank you so much for the help on expanding Indonesia-related articles. However, I noticed my modificiations on some of the district tables have been reverted or returned back. First, my apologies as I do not mean to discourage or doing any edit war, this is simply sharing my thoughts.

While I agree mentioning "English name" of districts are sometimes helpful and adding info about which district include what island, I personally think we only need to provide the district, area, and population only. Adding english names just feels wrong and some of the translation just dont seem to be fit. Translation from "Utara" "Selatan" "Barat" to "North" "South" or "West" are fine, however once its translating district which has "Kota" on its name to "Town" or "Hulu" "Hilir" to "Upper" "Lower", it sounds weird and I think better not being translated.

Other than that, adding which districts own which island seems make the table less-tidy (although I admit it does provide more information). I think just adding the name of the district and think of them as one entity without much concern over which island belong to whom looks tidier in table format, without having too much notes. On this matter, the article look more aesthetically pleasing without mentioning the smaller islands notes.

That's all I want to say, again, I'm sorry if I sound rude. Thank you Nyanardsan (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Again, about tables
@Rif Winfield Hi, apologies but I was trying to contact you from the beginning.I am not in any way vandalizing the article, I just disagree with what should be put there and also the way you translate district names. Please see my previous message, thank you Nyanardsan (talk) 17:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Dear Nyan,
 * Sadly you are vandalising the article. It is part of the ethos of Wikipedia that correct information should not be removed unless it becomes factually incorrect or out of date, Just because you have no personal need for or interest in some of the information in articles does not mean that you should remove content. To do so is rude! I might not find what you add to a particular article as being interesting, but this does not give me the right to delete it; I would expect similar treatment from you. If you find any of my translations to be incorrect, then of course you can and should alter them; but please do not delete correct translations just because you do not see the need for them. Translations for some terms are helpful to English-speaking readers who are unfamiliar with the meanings of Indonesian geographical terms. Tables are designed to enhance the information available to our readers, not just to look "tidy". I consider that all the edits I have made have been as neat as it is possible to make them, and in many cases I have corrected wrong information, or wording which is inaccurate in English. For example, "Lower" and "Upper" make perfect sense in English when describing areas which are downstream or upstream in a river catchment area. Over the last decade I have made several thousand additions to articles on Indonesian regencies and other geographical areas, so I would expect the courtesy of having correct information left unvandalised. I do not wish to get into an edit war with you, so can you kindly consult me if you wish to remove any factually correct material that I have written. Regards, Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 18:11, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rif Winfield
 * Thank you so much, my apologies then ;;
 * However, I still disagree on translations.
 * I follow how regencies aritcle naming and applied it to the district. For example, we translate Kabupaten Barito Selatan to South Barito Regency but we do not translate Kabupaten Kapuas Hulu to Upper Kapuas Regency, but instead its still Kapuas Hulu Regency. Similiar way of translating names are applied to provinces as well, so I think its the best to only translate West, East, South, North or its derivatives and "Islands" (Kepulauan) while other names such as "Hulu", "Hilir", "Kota" are left alone. Nyanardsan (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Dear Nyan,
 * I do not agree with you. However, to make matters easier for you, I will refrain from using "upper" or "lower" as the translations for "hulu" or "hilir", and will use "town" only where it is necessary to distinguish between a district and a regency bearing the same name. Otherwise please do not vandalise or change material that I have inserted except where more up-to-date data has become available. I think that I have now updated all Indonesian articles which contain population figures to show the results from the 2010 and 2020 Censuses (which are available on-line from Badan Pusat Statistik, including the areas in km2), so I should be grateful if you would not disturb these, or alter the tabulations, until the next Census is held and the results known. Best wishes, Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 07:39, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ==Talaud Islands==
 * Once again, please do not vandalise my work. I think that it is important to know which districts are in which island, particularly in a case like this when each island comprises a particular number of districts. Otherwise we will have to produce a separate article for each island, which is a long process. As I have said, just because you are not interested in a particular set of data does not give you the right to erase it. Having been editing these articles on Indonesia for over 12 years, I had just completed the task which you are now vandalising. Don't do so or I shall have to complain formally about your vandalising. Rif Winfield (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC). Rif Winfield (talk) 20:27, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Talaud Islands
Once again, please do not vandalise my work. I think that it is important to know which districts are in which island, particularly in a case like this when each island comprises a particular number of districts. Otherwise we will have to produce a separate article for each island, which is a long process. As I have said, just because you are not interested in a particular set of data does not give you the right to erase it. Having been editing these articles on Indonesia for over 12 years, I had just completed the task which you are now vandalising. Don't do so or I shall have to complain formally about your vandalising. Rif Winfield (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC).


 * @Rif Winfield
 * Again, I said I have no intention to vandalize any article. I will concede on the islands part but please leave the translation the way i left previously. Also to make the tables tidier, I will make them collapsable soon.

Also it is my habit to delete almost entirety of articles to rewrite it again and it just so happened my particular focus are regencies and cities of Indonesia. If informations you think are important deleted in the process, feel free to restore it later. Nyanardsan (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This is unreasonable. I have over the past twelve years updated articles on every province, regency and city of Indonesia - and on a variety of lesser level entities. I cannot check all of them every day to see whether you have vandalised any of them. Your stated habit "to delete almost entirety of articles to rewrite it again" is a dangerous procedure as you are simply eliminating much of the content of Wikipedia, simply on the grounds that the material is not of particular interest to you. When you carry out an edit, you should be seeking simply to replace incorrect or out-of-date material, not simply to restrict articles to what interests you personally. Rif Winfield (talk) 08:35, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rif Winfield Please stop accusing me of bad faith. I apologize for removal of some table population data but in any way I am not restricting the article scope. I am trying to bring many articles from simply stub to B-class or GA. For example, I rewrote the entirety of Gunungsitoli because aside of some of the informations were out of date, they were badly formatted, not suited for GAN. Deleting information to rewrote it again later on the ground of formatting is a valid reason as long as no information is lost.
 * I think we also have reached the consensus on how to edit the tables as seen in Talaud Islands article, so I wont continue the dispute. Nyanardsan (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Rif Winfield (talk) 10:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

The Straits
Hi, first of all thank you for writing British Warships in the Age of Sail, and such variants of. They are incredibly useful! I wondered if you might be able to elaborate on what you mean by "the Straits" in the 1714–1792 volume? For context I'm attempting to write up Vice-Admiral Sir Charles Hardy, who you have commanding Kent in "Jenning's Fleet" in 1726. They apparently go "to the Straits 10.1726", but I'm not quite sure what this means. Thanks again for all your work, my writing would be so much more difficult without it! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry for delay in replying. I should make clear that in mentioning the "Straits", I was referencing the Straits of Gibraltar. As you will doubtless be aware, there was a period of hostility between Britain and Spain in 1726-27. Edward Hopson operated from Gibraltar over the winter, and was then succeeded by Charles Wager, who commanded a greatly enhanced force tasked with defending the Rock against the anticipated Spanish attack. Hope this helps you. FYI, the next volume in the Warships in the Age of Sail series, which will cover the Spanish Navy from 1700-1860, is currently in the hands of the publishers, Seaforth Publishing, and should be published towards the end of this year. Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 09:02, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That's excellent news! I'll be looking forward to it.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:29, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I echo Sturmvogel's words, and thank you for the clarification! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I too welcome the Spanish volume. Thanks. Acad Ronin (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * FYI, the new book, while concentrating on the 1700-1860 period (as so titled) will also look at the Habsburg 16th and 17th centuries, without going into individual vessels.Rif Winfield (talk) 05:52, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

HMS Chichester (1785)
Hi Rif, Do you know if HMS Chichester {draft) ever served as a fully-armed warship? As best I can ascertain, she spent her entire career as a troopship or storeship. She was allocated a post captain (Robert Fancourt) in 1793 but, according to your book, she was being fitted as a storeship when he was appointed. Grateful for any extra info you might have, --Ykraps (talk) 05:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Good morning,
 * The Chichester was first completed in 1785 as a regular Fifth Rate, but after her launch at the contractors (Crookenden, Taylor & Smith at Itchenor) was handed over to the Navy Board and sailed for completion to Portsmouth Dockyard, where she was fitted for Ordinary (= placed in Reserve) straight away between March and April. She was fitted as a troopship at Woolwich in October 1787, which obviously included removing her lower deck guns to make room for accommodation. She served in this role for three round trips across the Atlantic, after which she was converted to a storeship at Portsmouth between August 1793 and May 1794, established with just 20 guns and 120 men. She served throughout the French Revolutionary War in this capacity, undergoing further refits (all at Woolwich) in July 1795, January 1797 and June/August 1800. She remained en flute (i.e. with lower deck guns still removed) in the early years of the Napoleonic War, but she was paid off in August 1807 into Ordinary again, in March 1810 reported as "given up to the West India Dock Company", and was finally taken to pieces at Woolwich in July 1815. Robert Fancourt in 1793 was the first post captain to command her, but prior to this (while in Ordinary) she was commanded by three successive lieutenants - whose names are given in my book - under which she was solely used as a transport. It thus seems that she never served at a Fifth Rate with her lower deck guns reinstalled. Rif Winfield (talk) 08:01, 20 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks Rif, that's pretty much how I interpreted it. I was a bit confused by Fancourt's appointment but perhaps there were too few post-ships to go round. --Ykraps (talk) 05:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

August 2022
Hello, I'm Apaugasma. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Arsi Zone, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 17:07, 19 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Dear Apaugasma, As I references in making my alteration, the source of my material was the Ethiopian government website for Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia. I quoted this in making my alteration. You cannot have a more reliable source than the official government statistical service! This gives the official estimates of population as at July 2022 by Region, Zone and Woreda - for every part of Ethiopia. Rif Winfield (talk) 06:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, only just saw this now. I already replied at my own talk. Regards, ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 14:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from List of districts of Papua into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. --  EN  - Jungwon  11:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. As you will be aware, the province of Papua was divided into 4 at the start of July - Central Papua, Highland Papua, South Papua and a residual Papua (province), so that the existing file for List of districts of Papua, which included details of all of the districts within the pre-July area, is no longer accurate and its contents needed to be amended and split into a separate file for each of the resultant four provinces. This is what I have done, with no loss of material. Rif Winfield (talk) 13:01, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Medusa (1785)
Hi, I wonder whether you might be able to clarify some details on the early service of the 50-gun Medusa? In The 50-Gun Ship, p.56, you state that "...on her first commission in 1786, the Medusa was badly damaged and underwent a Great Repair at Plymouth until 1788 from which she emerged re-armed, with her twenty lower deck and two forecastle guns all being replaced with 32pdr carronades". This differs to your Medusa entry in British Warships in the Age of Sail which records the ship being commissioned for the first time in August 1790, and the only armament change is the forecastle carronades by AO in the same year. Assuming 50-Gun Ship is correct, are you aware of any more details as to who commanded her in the 80s, or what she was doing? And is this 86-88 Great Repair the stage at which she is turned into a 44-gunner? Thanks very much, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:53, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Don't know if you saw this? If there's no answer that's fine too! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:20, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Very tied up this week with finalising draft of Spanish Warships in the Age of Sail, but I'll get back to you early next week. Rif Rif Winfield (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem at all, the wait is clearly for a very good cause! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry to make you wait. On checking back, it seems that my original statement in The 50-gun Ship was based on inaccurate information, and that subsequently set out in British Warships in the Age of Sail 1714-1792 corrects that statement. Let me add to what I wrote therein. There is no sign that the Medusa was commissioned between 1785 and 1790. This ship had a long gestation; an Admiralty Order (AO) of 1 August 1875 ordered the building of a ship of 50 guns on the new North Slip at Plymouth, to be "of the same size as the Experiment", and the ship was named as Medusa by AO of 20 October 1785 and laid down in March 1776 under the supervision of Thomas Pollard, Master Shipwright. Clearly the Admiralty and Navy Board saw no urgency in completing her. Following her launch on 23 July 1885, she was fitted for Ordinary, a process which was completed on 10 August. The next note I have for her in Admiralty records is her being commissioned under Inglefield in August 1790, and then fitted for Channel Service between August 1790 and 15 September 1790 at a cost of £3,296. Another AO on 10 September provides for her to have 2 x 32-pounder carronades fitted on her forecastle (presumably as an addition to her existing armament). She sailed "for the African Coast" on 22 September. Following this commission, she was paid off at Chatham and in February 1793 was fitted (for £3,446) at Chatham to become a Receiving Ship. Her next commission was under Capt. James Norman, under whom she sailed in February 1795 for Jamaica. She returned in December 1795 and was paid off, although Norman was charged with failing to have paid proper attention to the homeward bound Jamaica convoy committed to his care; a court martial assembled on board the Prince George at Portsmouth sat until 1 March, when the charges were proved in part, Norman being sentenced to be reprimanded and to remain on half pay for the rest of his life. Medusa was fitted as a hospital ship (for £8,961) at Plymouth from February 1796, and recommissioned in March 1796 under Commander John Eaton in this role until January 1797. In 1797 she passed under the command of Commander Alexander Becher, under whom she was present at the Spithead Mutiny of May 1797, and later that year conveyed a regiment of troiops to Ireland. In October 1798 she sailed for the Mediterranean, but on 22 November 1798 she was driven ashore in "Rosia Bay", Gibraltar; Becher was exonerated from blame; all 118 men aboard at the time were saved, as well as all the stores (destined for Nelson's fleet) she had loaded at Gibraltar. Allegedly the Medusa was got off, and used as a sheer hulk in Gibraltar until an AO of 20 August 1799 gave instructions to dispense with her books and papers, and she was broken up. The rest of her recorded history is as given in "BWAoS 1714-1792". Hope this helps! Rif.  Rif Winfield (talk) 11:26, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

2022 population numbers
Hello, could you add a reference when you add the 2022 numbers? For verification reasons. Semsûrî (talk) 13:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I try to do so whenever I can. The 2022 figures are all from Turkstat (web), but there are many figures which need updating. The Van (city) article in particular contained so many diverse errors that need urgent correction - the population figure in the data box gave a provincial figure instead of a city population (the provincial population at 1,128,749 is more than twice the actual city population of 525,016), which necessitated a re-write of out of date discussion on population, while the article on districts missed the fact that the former Van District has been split for several years into two new districts. I put in several references for verification purposes, so please do no0t vandalise the article by reverting the important changes which I made. Rif Winfield (talk) 08:03, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The issue is that you are adding unsourced information. " " is not enough. Semsûrî (talk) 11:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Turkstat (Turkish Statistical Institute) is the Turkish government agency commissioned with producing official statistics on Turkey, its population, resources, economy, society, and culture. It was founded in 1926 and has its headquarters in Ankara. Its official annual estimates are all available on-line on its web site, from which the figures I have used originate. Rif Winfield (talk) 13:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm also interested where you found the data on the Turkstat website, for instance for Araban town in Gaziantep Province. I can't find it myself (only data for the district, not for the town proper, e.g. in the "Favorite Reports" file on this page). Could you share the url of the data you found? I would like to use that data as well for updates for other cities and towns in Turkey. Markussep Talk 10:55, 3 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I found the same number for Araban town here at citypopulation.de. Did you take this number from there? They cite TÜIK as their source, and they state "Since 2013, the population figures of cities in metropolitan provinces are calculated by using the population of selected neighborhoods.", but I can't find which neighbourhoods are considered. Do you know if there are official lists of "central" neighbourhoods? Markussep Talk 09:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, there,
 * While I took most of the data on Turkish provinces and cities direct from Turkstat (website), I think that for the Araban town I took the figure indirectly, i.e. via the citypopulation.de website. Rif Winfield (talk) 13:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

2022 population numbers (again)
Since you've already been warned about this above, let me be more clear: making these kinds of changes without providing a clear source is extremely frowned upon. It can be considered disruptive editing, as it wastes the time of others who must clean up after you. It is not difficult to add a source - even a bare URL will do. If you persist in making these statistical changes without providing a reliable source, I will block you to prevent further disruption. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:50, 10 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Dear colleague,
 * I always add details of the source from which I take the data; in terms of the Indonesian (official government) statistical service, I deliberately explained that this was "Badan Pusat Statistik", the online service from that website. If you need the full URL, in the case of the entry this would be https://situbondokab.bps.go.id/publication/download.html?nrbvfeve=YWRhOGJkMTMyZDMzYzEzNmI5NTQ0MDEx&xzmn=aHR0cHM6Ly9zaXR1Ym9uZG9rYWIuYnBzLmdvLmlkL3B1YmxpY2F0aW9uLzIwMjMvMDIvMjgvYWRhOGJkMTMyZDMzYzEzNmI5NTQ0MDExL2thYnVwYXRlbi1zaXR1Ym9uZG8tZGFsYW0tYW5na2EtMjAyMy5odG1s&twoadfnoarfeauf=MjAyMy0wNy0xMCAxNDoxMjowMw%3D%3D. It is also published in print (this February) as Katalog/Catalog: 1102001.3512 as "Kabupaten Situbondo Dalam Angka 2023". However, this enormous reference is pointless for readers, for whom the information that the data is taken from the official state sources is certainly sufficient. Kindly do not vandalise the text when you do not comprehend the nature of the source. Rif Winfield (talk) 07:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You made this edit, which does not include any reference to any sources whatsoever. Reverting this edit was not vandalism, it is challenging an unsourced change to statistical information, per WP:V. Thank you for including the reference in your second edit - it is important for you to continue to do this when you make these edits. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

2023 population numbers
Hello, Rif Winfield, can you do Indonesian places by population in 2023? 2001:448A:11A2:103E:8B6:B0CE:BC07:171A (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
 * There are no official figures for 2023 as yet. Badan Pusat Statistik (the Indonesian state Census body) produced annual estimates for mid-year populations in the late February of the following year. Thus the latest official (mid-2022) figures were published on 28 February 2023. The 2023 figures will therefore be published in late February 2024. At that time I will certainly update the population estimates to mid-2023. Any so-called "2023 estimates" currently given by non-official sources in the meanwhile are not from official sources and should not be used. I have accordingly removed such erroneous figures where I come across them, and re-instated the official mid-2022 figures. Rif Winfield (talk) 14:04, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, that's so far enough. So I could see 2023 estimates five months later? 2001:448A:11A2:103E:8B6:B0CE:BC07:171A (talk) 14:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, absolutely! I will start adding in all mid-2023 estimates as soon as they are published on the BPS website from end February 2024 onwards (it might take me a few weeks to update all the figures for every single province, regency, city and district in Indonesia). Rif Winfield (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, I listening to my ears, Rif Winfield. Thanks for your support on my information regarding mid 2023 estimates of Indonesian places. 2001:448A:11A2:103E:996F:1227:686B:E521 (talk) 06:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Good! I suggest you also keep track of the BPS website, so you can see for yourself when the mid-2023 estimates are published on it. Rif Winfield (talk) 06:58, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will soon if I see your edits relating to the mid 2023 estimates. Five months later I can see mid 2023 estimates of Indonesian places. 2001:448A:11A2:103E:F437:5ECF:62F2:F4FD (talk) 13:50, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I draw your attention to what I said about needing several weeks to insert all the details for every Wikipedia article on Indonesia. There are 38 provinces, 418 regencies and 98 cities, each of them with an individual article in Wikipedia and with a separate multi-page 'book' published on the BPS website, as well as a large number of separate pages for individual kecamatan (districts). Each of these will have to be edited separately, and that is going to take me time to do (you will accept the fact that I'm not working 24 hours per day on Wikipedia editing). I should also point out that since BPS publishing is done not only by the main officers in Jakarta, but also by their subsidiary officers in each province, regency and city, so that the comprehensiveness of their publications varies in quality, and a few of the publications have failed to produce any population estimates at all for regencies and for districts since 2020 (as an example, look at Ogan Komering Ulu Selatan). We are thus dependent upon what they are able to publish. Rif Winfield (talk) 15:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, fine. I will see what looks like the 2023 estimates. I live in South Aceh Regency and the population in mid 2022 is 237,376 and I don't know what the number of mid 2023 estimates? 2001:448A:11A3:1307:944C:E87:591:DBB6 (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. BPS have of course not yet finalised their estimate for mid 2023 for South Aceh (or for any other regency) and are scheduled to publish this at the end of February. South Aceh's population has been growing in recent years at the rate of about 1 percent per year, so I would anticipate that the mid-2023 figure will emerge finally at close to 240,000, but we should not use any figure until BPS publishes their official estimates. Rif Winfield (talk) 08:29, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * What if I would do all regencies and cities and some districts and of course, provinces in the mid 2023 estimates. That is not finished yet. 2001:448A:11A3:1307:944C:E87:591:DBB6 (talk) 08:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * None of the mid-2023 estimates are yet published, and will not be done until late in February. (talk) 14:00, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

2022 population numbers for districts in South Jakarta
Hello, Rif Winfield, can you do districts in South Jakarta by population in 2022? 2001:448A:11A2:116D:91A2:326:2A8C:7CC7 (talk) 03:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I have just done so, but I draw your attention to the note I have inserted at the foot of the table. The recently-published estimated totals of district population are unreliable, even though they are published by BPS. The ten district figures add up to 2,404,866, whereas the published City total was 2,244,623. The city figure is probably far more accurate, and although I have inserted the district totals above it, I do not trust them and I think they are considerably erroneous (they obviously ought to sum up to the city population). Rif Winfield (talk) 08:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for your help, Rif Winfield. 2001:448A:11A4:1821:8C9:FAF4:1C87:79D0 (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)