File talk:Willem van de Velde (the Younger) - The Captured HMS Royal Prince brought into Dutch waters after the Four Days battle, 4 June 1666.jpg

Prince Royal

I understand your position. The problem is however, that the source is patently wrong. That is already obvious from the fact that the Prince Royal was burnt during the battle and thus never could have been "brought into Dutch waters". Also the ship depicted is not the giant three-decker but a modest two-decker. As the source is known to be incorrect, it can no longer count as reputable.--MWAK (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

You should take it up with the source, otherwise in a 100 years from now people will still be changing it. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 14:01, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I might :o), but in the meantime we can avoid giving misleading suggestions to the reader. The least we can do is to remove the incorrect category. Also a caveat that it is in any case not the Prince Royal would be very helpful.--MWAK (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

We could, if you would come up with a reputable source which identifies this ship as the Swiftsure. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 17:31, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll try to find a treatise covering this painting. I've already discovered that it shows the same scene as a much earlier painting by Van de Velde junior, now in the Rijksmuseum, depicting the entering of the Goereese Gat of the captured ships Swiftsure, Seven Oaks, Loyal George and Convertine, but from a different angle. Also, I get the strong impression the picture we discuss is not by the hand of Van de Velde jr. himself but must be one of the many low-quality works produced by assistants in his workshop during the time he resided in England. It might even be a Cornelis van de Velde, if that sky has been made with Prussian Blue. The caveat would however, not have to mention the Swiftsure, but merely contain the warning that it is not the Prince Royal. The fate of the latter ship is easy enough to source, of course.--MWAK (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Good, document everything you find on the appropriate talkpage, please. Painting is not photography, what you see is not a documentation of the truth. If someone wanted a painting of his event on his wall, he could order it with any painter, no matter what the truth really is. If an art historian documents this as the Swiftsure, it is reason to note it here with his name. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 11:32, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

But now you seem to suppose that the title given by the source was the original one of the painting. The vast majority of such paintings have names that were assigned to them at a much later date. Van de Velde, famous for his accurateness, never painted a scene with the Prince Royal at the Goereese Gat and it is very unlikely his assistants would have done so; it is obviously a later misidentification. I'll put a warning on the talk page.--MWAK (talk) 19:45, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Incorrect identification

Users should be warned that the title is misleading: the painting does not depict the Prince Royal, which ship had been burnt during the battle, but the entering of the Goereese Gat by the captured Swiftsure, Seven Oaks, Loyal George and Convertine.--MWAK (talk) 19:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)