Talk:MY Ocean Warrior

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MY Ocean Warrior article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ships

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

Netherlands

	Netherlands portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

It is requested that an image or photograph of MY Ocean Warrior be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.

Wikipedians in the Netherlands may be able to help!

The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Reverted move from MY (Motor Yacht) to MV (Motor Vessel)

Hi there, first of all: Wikipedia:Bold. We do not need to discuss every single edit before do it, expecially if the ship is clearly not a motor yacht or a pleasure craft. Secondly, all the soureces coming from Sea Sheperd Conservation Society reports this ship as MV [1], and this is also for other pages regarding SSCS ships. --Nicola Romani (talk) 13:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AussieLegend:, still waiting a reply... by the way you can easily find the sources you need by yourself: [2]; [3]. My edits were correct, due to that I will not ask an official move. --Nicola Romani (talk) 10:21, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I do have other things to do. I can't be here all the time. We base article titles, not on what some Facebook page says, but on how the vessel is officially registered. This vessel is registered as a pleasure craft,[4] which doesn't correspond with the "MV" prefix, as is the Steve Irwin. There are links in each of the other articles that you can check yourself. As was explained in a discussion way back in 2010, SSCS tries to register their vessels as motor yachts. To to have a vessel registered as M/V you need a captain's license, whereas a yacht doesn't. SSCS is inconsistent in the way it refers to its vessels. Previously it listed its vessels as M/Y,[5] only to change to "SSS",[6] which is a class that doesn't exist. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Me neither, but to be honest didn't know about their practice to register ships as "pleasure craft", thank you for the explanations given. Obviously before to edit, as I'm used to do, I've checked the Equasis database system implemented by the European Maritime Safety Agency and the various Countries members of the Paris MOU, and that is what I did. On that site [7] is clearly written: Type of ship : Offshore Supply Ship (since 01/09/2016), due to that, together with the original sources I found ([8]; [9]) I moved the page, I've also tried to check the Dutch Shipping Register but was unable to retrieve a site and any kind of information. Moreover I'm not so sure regarding the explanation given on Steve Irwing talk page, ok, IMO regulation requires a different captain license for pleasure craft and it is not necessary to have a full IMO Captain and Chief Engineer certificate of competence, probably because it is difficult to find people working for free on that position... and employing volunteers they do not have to satisfy the Maritime Labour Convention 2006. For sure they have to be in compliance with the Minimum Safe Manning certificate (which is compulsory also for yachts). Anyway,in my humble opinion, at the end we could apply the WP:Common names policy and move, because it is clear to everyone they are not "MY" and everyone recognize that ships as "MV". Thank you. --Nicola Romani (talk) 20:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. regarding the ship cost on the template: 12 million are in AUD (Australian Dollars) [10], should be specified. --Nicola Romani (talk) 21:52, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Using the common name is inconsistent with the article naming convention. If the ship prefix is used it should be accurate. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]