Talk:Cheslakee

This article 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 articles

Canada: British Columbia Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Cheslakee appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 July 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the only loss of life recorded in the 70-year history of the Union Steamship Company of British Columbia was as a result of the sinking of the steamship Cheslakee?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/July.

Wikipedia

Title[edit]

Why isn't this article simply called "SS Cheslakee"? Gatoclass (talk) 14:03, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SS, while sometimes seen in connection with vessels on the BC coast, was so far as I can see not commonly used at this time (1910 to 1913) to designate this or other ships of this type in this region. See for example Rushton, Whistle Up the Inlet, at pages 54-55 and 67-69, which mentioning Cheslakee a number of times, as well as a number of other similar ships, does not use prefix SS at any time in reference to the vessel, although it is so used in the index. It appears to be an editorial anachronism however, adopted for the purpose of readily distinguishing steamships from motor vessels or from similarly named non-ship topics. One also sees the prefix used in modern on-line image libraries, this again seems to me an anachronism, and contrary to the general use of the times. As Rushton was an employee of the Union Steamship Company of British Columbia from 1920 to 1959, his usage seems authoritative. For other examples of this practice of generally not referring to inland ships by the prefix SS, please refer to the sources listed at User:Mtsmallwood#Bibliography (printed and Google books sources). Also, please refer to the example images (there are others, see link to commons below). Consequently Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Civilian Ships therefore seems to counsel non-use of the prefix, and I have followed this convention in numerous articles on similar ships of this time in this region.

1912 advertisement uses term "Steamer Fortuna"
1901 advertisement uses term "Steamer Sentinel"
1907 or 1908 advertisement for "Steamer Yosemite".
1900 advertisement for "Steamer State of Washington"

Media related to Puget Sound Mosquito Fleet at Wikimedia Commons. Mtsmallwood (cross-posted to project page) (talk) 16:36, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, I don't find this a persuasive case for not using the prefix, because there is nothing special about the way "inland ships" are referred to. It is very common for steamships to be referred to as "steamer X" or just "X" in contemporary sources for every kind of steamship, but we need a consistent naming standard here on Wikipedia and "SS" is a universally recognized prefix for steamships. Also, you yourself note that modern sources frequently employ "SS" to refer to these ships, so I see no compelling reason why we should do otherwise. Gatoclass (talk) 02:25, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships#Naming conventions for west coast steamships]].Mtsmallwood (talk) 02:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cheslakee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:27, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]