Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconShips Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articlesWikiProject icon
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Main Project Page Talk
Things you can do
Information and sources

Draft:Theben[edit]

Is it possible to take a look at Draft:Theben for me? Came across it through WP:AfC but figured someone here could narrow down notability much quicker than I can. You can ping me here or on the draft page if necessary. Cheers! CNMall41 (talk) 23:20, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41 - I think that there will be some useful content from her time in the South American trade. For example, when the British Government contracted in 1880 with Kosmos to provide the first steam mail service to the Falklands, Theben was a mainstay, also carrying passengers (including the Governor). There is a useful bibliography on Kosmos in the deWP article on Kosmos, including an English book on the Falkland contract, which I can access. - Davidships (talk) 02:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidships:, Thanks. I will approve it to the mainspace and tag it with your project tags so you can access further. Thanks for the help. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:19, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CNMall41 The headline picture at wrecksite might be by John Henry Mohrmann. I have a better copy, but no provenance. There's insufficient source info to enable uploading into commons. Do you have any backup knowledge of this painting? -Broichmore (talk) 13:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've been absent. I suppose that your better copy is this or that. The first is the site of a private museum at Terschelling (it would seem most unlikely that they would possess the actual painting, but the other is a serious book, and quite likely to give credits for the image, which is used on the front cover (and may well appear inside also). It might also appear in this more recent one. Davidships (talk) 22:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The museum has confirmed to me that the painting came from the aforementioned book by Reinhart Schmelzkopf (1938–2020), a Cuxhaven shipping historian. Can anyone access this book to identify the artist, etc. -Broichmore (talk) 07:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:2024 Mozambique boat disaster#Requested move 13 April 2024[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Mozambique boat disaster#Requested move 13 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 00:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enterprise[edit]

Ship class in Vietnam war , Enterprise was its own class ,Enterprise class carrier 2600:1002:B155:C040:5C48:E5FD:6CCD:D7B9 (talk) 16:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We already record its class in USS Enterprise (CVN-65). What is the issue or problem you wanted to tell us? From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gas turbines in 1943?[edit]

Were the Japanese using gas turbines on warships in 1943? I suspect not but there's no source and I'm not sure what to do here. Please comment at Talk:Type D escort ship#Turbine engines. GA-RT-22 (talk) 07:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steam turbines, not gas.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 08:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a further problem in that Turbine engine redirects to Gas Turbine resulting in ships like Japanese cruiser Mogami (1908) linking there erroneously Lyndaship (talk) 08:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Turned out to be fewer bad links than I thought and hopefully I have resolved all of them Lyndaship (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps Turbine engine might be changed to a diambiguation page? Alansplodge (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea Murgatroyd49 (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So done. Feel free to edit. Alansplodge (talk) 10:55, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mykonos Magic[edit]

Could someone please take a look at this. An IP declines to engage on Talk - and has now deleted cited text and the ref. - Davidships (talk) 01:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial horsepower vs. metric horsepower[edit]

A moment ago, an IP editor reminded me about the difference between imperial horsepower (1 hp = 745.7 W) and metric horsepower (1 PS = 735.5 W) on my talk page, and how e.g. Finnish and Russian sources that use metric units in general would likely use the latter unit for power.

Although I was aware of this difference and had, in fact, sometimes wondered about minor discrepancies when using {{convert}}, it never occurred me that this would be the reason.

Personally I could have continued living in ignorance, but now that I am aware of this issue, I can not overlook it. Before I commit myself to going through every article where I or someone else has converted kilowatts to horsepower or vice versa using the {{convert}} template (please help), I'd like to engage the community (here; not on my talk page) to discuss how this would be best done. Below are some topics for discussion:

  • If the sources uses kW, should we convert to both hp and PS (as is done with e.g. cars) or only to imperial units as is done with lengths, areas, volumes and weights? Could this be misleading to "metric casual readers" who may be more familiar with horsepower than kilowatts when talking about engine power?
  • If the source uses horsepower without further definition, are the "adjacent units" (e.g. main dimensions) sufficient to determine whether the power is given in imperial or metric units? If we are using e.g. Finnish, Russian or German sources, can we assume that metric units are used by default? Likewise, do US and British sources always use imperial horsepower? What if we can find both "metric" and "imperial" sources citing the same rating?
  • If the source uses one horsepower, should we provide conversion to the other horsepower as well in addition to kilowatts to emphasize the unit of the "given" rating? Given the limited space in the infobox, should we agree that such power conversions should only be done in the article body? Who gets to choose which unit to use in the infobox especially in case of modern ships where "professional sources" may use kilo- or megawatts, but e.g. news articles may convert them to horsepower for the casual reader?

Tupsumato (talk) 20:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I provide conversions for all units both in the infobox and in the main body. The conversions have a very limited effect on the size of the infobox (usually on weapons since the guns often need to be characterized as AA guns, etc. See French destroyer Frondeur for an example of what I mean.
You need to be very careful about assuming that books written in metric countries use metric measurements as US editions sometimes have all measurements converted into Imperial units. Especially bloody tons!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The abbreviated dual conversion is indeed more compact than I thought: 41,480 kW (56,400 PS; 55,630 hp). However, I would still urge editors to use their best judgment: if the conversion clutters the infobox excessively, better leave it to the article body.
Your remark about the sources is noted. The fact that metric horsepower is abbreviated "hp" in "metric sources" doesn't help the issue either. However, I presume assuming metric horsepower in metric sources about metric ships is fairly safe. That is, unless the engines were purchased from imperial countries... Tupsumato (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships&oldid=1225811081"