Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships#Suamico class templates

:Template:DANFS is looking very dated now, with an embedded link to Hazegray. More importantly, shouldn't it include a current link and archived link instead? It's not as if the Naval History and Heritage Command doesn't sometimes change its links. It broke every DANFS link on Wikipedia some years ago (many of which have still not been repaired) and there is nothing to stop them from doing it again. Gatoclass (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

:Umm, there is no {{tq|embedded link to Hazegray}} in the {{tlx|DANFS}} template. I suspect that the Hazegray mention in the documentation is used as an example to show that {{tld|DANFS}} can accept two 'unrelated' urls.

:—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

:: Sorry, misstatement. But the documentation does say users may use the parameters to link to the more recent DANFS article and the original DANFS article listed at Hazegray, which suggests that Hazegray is some sort of official site with the "original" documentation. Hazegray is a private site that evidently hasn't been updated for years, and there is no reason I can see why it should be used as a source for DANFS articles.

:: That is something of a quibble however, as it would only be a matter of updating the template documentation to remedy that. The real issue, as I have tried to point out, is that the DANFS template lacks an "archived" link and the kind of inbuilt output for it that other source templates have, ie, the output that goes something like "archived from the original on [date]". If the DANFS template was formatted that way, it would encourage or could perhaps even require an archived link, which would prevent future breakages if the NHHC moves all their content again. Gatoclass (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:::{{tlx|DANFS}} is an attribution template. If you want it to support {{para|archive-url}}, you could, perhaps, change it to emit the attribution statement followed by {{tlx|cite DANFS}} which does support {{para|archive-url}}:

::::File:PD-icon.svg This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships. {{cite DANFS |title=Enterprise VII (CV-6) |url=https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/e/enterprise-cv-6-vii.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141102163307/http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/c13/constellation-i.htm |archive-date=2014-11-02 |link=off |accessdate=2016-09-15}}

:::Use {{tlx|DNB}} as an example of how you might implement this suggestion.

:::

:::But, for cases where {{tld|DANFS}} links to two legitimately different urls, the above suggestion will not work. Are there any instances of {{tld|DANFS}} where the second url isn't a backup of the first url?

:::—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:::: Apologies for not getting back to this sooner, {{u|Trappist the monk|Trappist}}. Your response left me a little nonplussed as I had not been expecting a proposal as to how it could be done and am not really qualified to comment on that. Rather, I was simply trying to gauge whether or not there would be support for making such a change.

:::: With regard to your query about whether or not the second url has ever been used for anything other than a backup, I have a vague memory that I might have used it once or twice for a second DANFS article, but I think that kind of usage would be very rare. But regardless, I would like to see the template massaged in such a way as to make it clear the second url is for an archived link.

:::: This is clearly not an urgent issue and I currently have many higher priorities to deal with, both on and off the wiki. But I would be interested to know if you would support the suggested change and if others would also do so, or if there is any opposition to the idea? Gatoclass (talk) 01:20, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::No opposition from me. If there is a rare edge case where two links are needed, the template documentation could instruct people to just write it out manually and log it on a template subpage (in case we need to update all the links again someday). Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 04:30, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

:I made some crude searches in article namespace to assess {{tlx|DANFS}} usage:

:*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22DANFS%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7B+*DANFS%2F&ns0=1 ~8255] articles use {{tld|DANFS}} in one form or another

:*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22DANFS%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7B+*DANFS+*%5C%7D%5C%7D%2F&ns0=1 ~1300] articles us {{tld|DANFS}} without a url

:*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22DANFS%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7B+*DANFS+*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7C%5C%7D%5D%2B%5C%7D%2F&ns0=1 ~6620] articles use {{tld|DANFS}} with one url

:*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22DANFS%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7BDANFS+*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C%2F&ns0=1 ~325] articles use {{tld|DANFS}} with two urls

:**[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22DANFS%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7BDANFS+*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*hazegray%2F&ns0=1 ~200] articles use {{tld|DANFS}} with two urls; second url is hazegray

:**[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22DANFS%22+insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7BDANFS+*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C%2F+-insource%3A%2F%5C%7B%5C%7BDANFS+*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*%5C%7C%5B%5E%5C%7D%5D*hazegray%2F&ns0=1 ~125] articles use {{tld|DANFS}} with two urls; second url is not hazegray

:—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:14, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg There is currently a discussion at Template talk:Infobox ship begin regarding how to standardize infoboxes. The thread is Ampersand standardization. The discussion is about the topic :MOS:&. Mbdfar (talk) 23:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

I've motioned for Ioshima-class cruiser to be merged into Ning Hai-class cruiser as the articles cover the same ships, and poorly at that. The only diffrence is their operator and termanology. The two articles rely upon one another for either the ship's design, innitital history, or fate, which is pointless. The two cruisers of the class have articles which combine each service history into one page, so a seperate class article is pointless. I wanted to get consensus before I take this step. I'll make sure to rewrite the resulting article (GA, perhaps?) The main discussion is here, thanks! GGOTCC 06:15, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I have nominated Baltimore Steam Packet Company for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

There is a RfC about proper names at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Request_for_Comments_on_what_is_a_proper_name MOS/Caps/RfC: What is a proper name]. This seems simple but is often a very contentious subject and really could use "outside eyes" from uninvolved editors. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 21:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

A user (Special:Contributions/Manojsinhar8r) has "updated" naval ensigns in infoboxes of a lot of Indian ships to the current Indian naval ensign, even when the ships in question have been long out of service. I've reverted a couple to "flag when the ship was in service" but would appreciate help in fixing the rest. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:22, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

:I've reverted them all, but an eye should be kept on this in case they come back to try and "fix" them again. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

German submarine U-37 (1938) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

FYI, people on Reddit are reporting that [https://www.reddit.com/r/Warships/comments/1le3psa/psa_navsource_url_change/ Navsource changed its URL from .org to .net] after [https://www.reddit.com/r/ww2/comments/1lez1um/comment/myk6oh2/ the owner passed away]... neither URL is working for me at the moment. If/when it comes back up, does anyone have a bot that they'd like to use to clean up all our links? Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 03:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

:The .net TLD is working for me so I have switched the TLD used by {{tlx|navsource}}. There are [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.navsource.org%2F%22&ns0=1 ~6200 articles] that use the .org TLD. I can write a simple awb script to pick away at those.

:—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:06, 20 June 2025 (UTC)