Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships

Main Project Page Talk
Things you can do
Assessments: Class assessment needed • Log Categorize and tag: New article feed Cleanup listing: Articles tagged for cleanup alphabetically or by category at Labs Expand stubs: Stub-class ship articles Images: Requested ship photos • Infoboxes without an image Infoboxes: Infobox needed • Infobox conversion needed Recent changes: US changes • UK changes • cruiseship changes
Information and sources
Article alerts: Updated daily Guidelines Manual of Style Infobox ship: Usage guide Naming Conventions (articles) Categorization Project Scope Past AfDs Popular Pages: Most popular ship articles Tools and Templates Ensigns {{Navy}} {{USN flag}} Outreach Resources Participants Barnstars Project subpages

Mystery lifesaving apparatus

Can anyone identify this lifesaving appartus (middle picture, bottom row) please? Mjroots (talk) 10:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminiscent, a little, of this design of a Carley Float. A forerunner of an EPIRB (Emergency position-indicating radiobeacon). _ Broichmore (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Not convinced it is a Carley Float, as that article states they were mainly used on warships. This was on a cargo liner, the Éridan. Far too early to be connected with EPIRBs. Mjroots (talk) 07:32, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Suggested article splits from "Paddle steamer"

The paddle steamer article is pretty random, in more ways than one. One obvious issue with it, however, is IMO that there is too much material tangential to the topic. The two sections of concern are "Modern paddle steamers", and "Bangladesh" in the "History" section. The "modern paddle steamers" section is basically just a list of extant paddle steamers that adds nothing to the reader's understanding of paddle steamers, and looks quite out of place and WP:UNDUE. I am therefore proposing that it be moved to a new article with a name something like "List of extant paddle steamers".

The "Bangladesh" subsection of the "History" section also adds nothing of value given that the contribution of Bangladesh to the history of development or use of the paddlewheel lies somewhere between negligible and nonexistent. I therefore propose that it be moved to a new article named "Paddle steamers of Bangladesh" or something similar.

Comments? Gatoclass (talk) 11:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan. Llammakey (talk) 12:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Concur. Alansplodge (talk) 12:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Kablammo (talk) 17:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Should I just go ahead and do it then? Gatoclass (talk) 16:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Wow, yeah, that's a bit of a rough article. I'd say to go for it and post again here if you get pushback. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 16:31, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Okay guys, thanks for your input, I have created two new articles from split content, namely List of extant paddle steamers and Director-class tugboat. I know I didn't mention the latter, but in preparing the other splits I noticed these and since they were diesel tugs rather than steam vessels, they clearly didn't belong. As paddle tugs built in the late 1950s though, they are a quite novel type which would be fun to expand if anybody has more info on them.

With regard to the aforementioned Bangladesh split, I did not go ahead with that for the time being, because I'm considering relocating the content in some way to Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Corporation. Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 09:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Bangladesh content moved to Bangladesh Inland Water Transport Corporation per the above. Gatoclass (talk) 08:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Updating the Queen Elizabeth Class Displacement

Hello,

I'd like to update the Queen Elizabeth Class Displacement in the infobox from 65,000 tonnes which is the empty displacement as confirmed here

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691861/2018-01338.pdf

To Est. 80,6000 full load which is stated in Jane's Fighting Ships 2023-2024 p. 886.

This will allow a better comparison between other aircraft carriers which use full load displacement (US Nimitz and Ford Classes and the French Charles de Gaulle as examples) SeaCeptor (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I see no problem, provided it is clearly labelled Murgatroyd49 (talk) 20:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. @SWATJester Are you happy if I revise the displacement figures for the Queen Elizabeth Class now? SeaCeptor (talk) 15:38, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Naming of a Confederate ship

Hearn's The Capture of New Orleans refers to a Confederate vessel named the R. J. Breckinridge. John D. Winters, in The Civil War in Louisiana, refers to this vessel as simply the Breckinridge. Chatelain's Defending the Arteries of Rebellion has General Breckinridge, as does Browning's Lincoln's Trident. Gaines's Encyclopedia of Civil War Shipwrecks lists both names. I can find both names in the Official Records of the Union and Confederates Navies - [1] and [2]. "General Breckinridge" would seem to be a reference to John C. Breckinridge, while "R. J. Breckinridge" would be Robert Jefferson Breckinridge Jr. or Robert Jefferson Breckinridge if I had to guess. Can anyone find something that would shed some light on what this ship was actually named? Hog Farm _Talk 03:35, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

@Hog Farm: I'd go with Confederate ship R. J. Breckinridge. It was common for names to be shortened. Mjroots (talk) 11:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Ship lists

Any objections to the List of Victory ships and the various Lists of Liberty ships (e.g. List of Liberty ships (A-F)) being rewritten into a format similar to the List of Fort ships, List of Ocean ships, List of Park ships and the various lists of Empire ships (e.g. List of Empire ships (A))? Mjroots (talk) 11:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Go for it! GGOTCC (talk) 23:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Mitchell & Sawyer's books ordered. Mjroots (talk) 11:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

MOS question

So years ago, at a content review somewhere, I had been told that it is part of the MOS not to proceed the name of an invidual ship with "the". So, for instance, "the battleship Bismarck" would be okay, but "the Bismarck" wouldn't. Is this actually a part of the MOS somewhere? I'm having trouble finding it if it is. This has come up at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/CSS General Earl Van Dorn/archive1. Hog Farm _Talk 22:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I found it Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(ships)#Using_ship_names_in_articles. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:01, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

This has been contentious. It is up to the article's author and is not part of the MOS. However, according to WP:NC-SHIPS, you should not start an article with the definite article "the" and the use of "the" before a ship's name is not preferred, but not outlawed. Llammakey (talk) 23:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Unless the ship's name starts with "The" of course. Mjroots (talk) 11:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Dry cargo ship

In 2010, User:Theoprakt changed Dry cargo ship from a stub article into a redirect to Bulk carrier. I am not convinced that this is correct, as Breakbulk cargo ships are also dry cargo ships. Last week, therefore, I changed the article from a redirect to a one-sentence statement. However, User:JalenBarks almost immediately reverted it, citing WP:NOTDICTIONARY as a reason. If "dry cargo ship" is a synonym for "bulk carrier", it is news to me. Please may we have an intelligent article on dry cargo ships, instead of a redirect that, I contend, is a misdirection? Motacilla (talk) 22:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

We have one - cargo ship! Mjroots (talk) 09:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Marlin-class submarine

The article Marlin-class submarine has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Could not find reliable sources to establish notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Esw01407 (talk) 00:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)