Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships#Engine infoboxes

Per this discussion, it seems like there should be a slot in the ship infobox for its captain.Trumpetrep (talk) 23:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

: Absolutely not. Ships have many masters and only notable ones are even mentioned in the text. Lists and mentions of non-notable people are removed from articles per WP:SHIPSNOTCREWS Llammakey (talk) 14:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

::No, per the above. If the captains are relevant and notable they can be mentioned in the main text. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

: There is no slot in the infobox for Captains and there shouldn't be. If they are deemed notable they can be mentioned in the prose Lyndaship (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

::The Red Sox have had many managers. Their current one is still listed in the infobox. It's the kind of information our target audience would expect to find in an infobox.Trumpetrep (talk) 23:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

:::WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS The manager of a baseball team is a highly public figure in all cases. In most cases the captain of a ship gets no notice unless something goes horribly wrong. It is not sufficiently notable to be covered in the infobox (and, as mentioned, in most cases the captains' names shouldn't be in the article at all unless individually notable). - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Currently attempting to get a community consensus for usage of the definite article "the" on ships' pages, posting about it here in hopes of getting more opinions. It can be found at this link. Thanks! PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 12:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Yesterday, User:Altenmann [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Icebreaker&oldid=1289659743 added] the heading "Classification" followed by a classification of icebreakers in Russia to the article "icebreaker". I reverted this change as I felt it was too country-specific for the main article that should aim to answer to the question "what is an icebreaker" on a general level. Granted, the article needs rewriting to better achieve this and perhaps something about how icebreakers are defined and classified around the world could be included while other country-specific content could be trimmed down. However, before this could be agreed, the user created a new article about icebreakers of Russia where they added the same content and, more importantly, moved the Russian icebreakers from the list of icebreakers.

I feel that fragmenting the content in this way does not improve Wikipedia or help maitaining an up-to-date list, but seek wider consensus within the project before taking or requesting any action given my obsession enthusiasm with the topic. How should we proceed? Tupsumato (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• You have a valid concern; fortunately a solution for this is already known: a template that holds the list and may be included in both articles, thus preventing WP:CFORK. Implemented --Altenmann >talk 19:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:: That is not a valid solution. I have reverted your mess on the list page. Please take it to the page's talk before any more major edits to the list page. Llammakey (talk) 22:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:: Yes it is a valid solution and it was not a mess. But if you want to continue forking the content, who am I to argue with mighty page stewards. --Altenmann >talk 22:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::No it really is not. It is you who have decided to copy and paste an entire section of an article and tack on WP:OR and call it good enough. Then when you were reverted, you turned the same copy-and-paste into a template, which is not what templates are supposed to be used for. You could have discussed it first. You chose not to. Llammakey (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

While we are at this, I suggest to write individual articles or [https://www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO%20Documents/Office%20of%20Waterways%20and%20Ocean%20Policy/20170501%20major%20icebreaker%20chart.pdf%3Fver%3D2017-06-08-091723-907 major icebreaker-owning countries], similar to my initial stab at Icebreakers of Russia. Meaning Icebreakers of Canada Icebreakers of Finland Icebreakers of Sweden Icebreakers of the United States. I am absolutely sure that each of these countires has an interesting history is icebreaking that cannot be squeezed into a single "Icebreaker" page. If other ice-faring countries join the lead, all the better. Icebreakers of Kongo... Must be fun. --Altenmann >talk 19:31, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

: Please take it to talk. Furthermore, if you do decide to do this, there is already a format that does not involve monumental changes to the List of icebreakers page. Please see List of battleships of Japan and List of battleships for information. Llammakey (talk) 22:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::Yes it is right here, at the talk. The battleship lists are of different formats and are an invalid example. And I dont care anymore to fight with revert warriors. --Altenmann >talk 22:20, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:::No, the talk page of the List of icebreakers. Furthermore, the list of battleships of Japan is featured content, that is the aim here. Llammakey (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

I started this article, but I'm confused. Should it be MV De Zonnebloem or MS De Zonnebloem? Thanks! 95.98.65.177 (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Depends on what sources refer to it as. I'm not sure about how it works in Germany, but both could be correct. GGOTCC 02:57, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

: Given that there's no article named De Zonnebloem, do we even need a prefix to disambiguate? Tupsumato (talk) 05:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::The use of MV (motor vessel) or MS (motor ship) is entirely down to creator's preference. As for De Zonnebloom, there were windmills of this name at [https://www.molendatabase.nl/molens/ten-bruggencate-nr-03490-a Zaamslag] and [https://www.molendatabase.nl/molens/ten-bruggencate-nr-10156 Rotterdam]], in the Netherlands. I'd stick with a prefix. Mjroots (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

::: Good point. No need to omit it if there have been other uses for the same name. Tupsumato (talk) 08:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Are colleagues aware that Wikimedia Commons has hundreds of ship and ship-related images from the Museum aan de Stroom? Unfortunately, most seem to be uncategorised, except for "Category:MAS Museum aan de stroom", which contains more than 79,000 files. Therein I have found images with which to illustrate {{MV|Akka}}; John Bush (Royal Navy officer); and {{SS|Nick Stoner}}. I cropped and tidied the photo of Nick Stoner, but not that of Akka, as by then I was getting daunted by the sheer scale of work that the contents of "Category:MAS Museum aan de stroom" merit.

I have fully categorised maybe a couple of dozen images from Museum aan de stroom, of ships that I am able to identify. A few others I have partly categorised; and added to "Category:Unidentified ships in Belgium"; in the hope that other colleagues may find them there and be able to identify them.

"Category:MAS Museum aan de stroom" has 24 sub-categories, but only one is ship-related: "Category:Technical drawings of Cockerill Yards". Would it be helpful to create other categories: one for ships, and perhaps another for barges and boats? All of Museum aan de stroom's ship images could then be collated in them, where colleagues could more easily find and try to identify them. However, even this task feels like it would take more time than I can currently devote.

The uploader has misnamed few of the images, which need correcting. Aikaterini was misnamed A. Ikaterini, which I have had corrected. I have requested the renaming of an image of Torgny Lagman, which is mis-labelled Aden. My favourite so far is a ship called Albany, which the uploader has given the pseudo-Arabic name Al Bany!

Many of the images are uploaded by "User:Mr.Nostalgic". It seems that on most days, he uploads a few hundred more images, all with "Category:MAS Museum aan de stroom" as their only category. He has been told off for this type of uploading before. For example, in October 2024, "User:Periegetes" asked him "Please pay attention to categorizing files: Do not put files on top level categories e.g. "Old maps". You should place files in sub-categories of main category, especially when there is explicit instruction to do so on the category page as is the case with category "Maps"." "Mr.Nostalgic" did not reply to Periegetes.

Currently, I ought to be doing things outside Wikimedia projects. Therefore I bring this problem to colleagues' attention, in the hope that one of you may be able to help. Thankyou, Motacilla (talk) 09:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:Courtesy link: :c:Category:MAS Museum aan de stroom, although there are 83,167 images in :c:Category:Collections of the MAS Museum aan de stroom. Mjroots (talk) 06:25, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg

An editor has requested that {{la|Type B ship}} be split into multiple pages , which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the split discussion.

-- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 17:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)