Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:SHIP)

Main Project Page Talk
Things you can do
Information and sources

FAR for Pre-dreadnought battleship

[edit]

I have nominated Pre-dreadnought battleship 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. Hog Farm Talk 22:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Omaha Beach#Pictures of ships involved in landings

[edit]

Would anyone like to comment on Talk:Omaha Beach#Pictures of ships involved in landings? I probably need some independent views on the matter after reading some sources with impassioned views about the British (largely naval) contribution to that part of D-Day being ignored, even denied, by some historians. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 10:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SS (?MV) Prince Baudouin

[edit]

Does anyone have the references to put together an article for SS (?MV) Prince Baudouin. Online I can find [1] which suggests an interesting story. One point not clear to me is whether this ship became "HMS" during her war service. The IWM seem to think so [2], but not the marine interviewed at [3]. Possible usable photo at [4]. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 18:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another online source[5] – I have no idea if this is an RS, but gives a date of commissioning as HMS.ThoughtIdRetired TIR 18:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A usable photo from an RS[6] ThoughtIdRetired TIR 19:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would think that HMS is probably right, but I don't have the more detailed standard RN books - she was registered under British flag 1941-46 in the name of the Ministry of War Transport, which may have been a prerequisite to commissioning in the RN. Certainly not "SS", as a diesel ship, though I would favour Prince Baudouin (ship) (can be "ship 1933" if the ealier one of 1872 ever gets an article).
There are a couple of published books that cover the Belgian Government ferries - Dover-Ostend Line (John Hendy, ISBN-13: 978-0951350652) and Railway Ships and Packet Ports (Richard Danielson, ISBN-13: 978-0906294642) - which should arrive here in a few days. I rather suspect that that Dover website, as well as the Belgian site which covers the histories of all 60 vessels during the 151-year history of the Ostend service, would be considered self-published non-RS. But they are useful in pointing the way to acceptable sources. Also, there's an existing Commons photo. - Davidships (talk) 10:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A good source: Un siècle d'évolution des paquebots, Ostende-Douvres (pp234-240), 1946. Davidships (talk) 11:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another source is P&O Heritage Factsheet - PRINCE BAUDOUIN (1934) which gives a commissioning date as 8 November 1943 as an infantry assault vessel and lists her armament. She had been previously operated as a troopship, but not commissioned. Alansplodge (talk) 16:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One frustrating reference on this particular point is Whitmarsh, Andrew (2024). D-Day Landing Craft: How 4,126 ‘Ugly and Unorthodox’ Allied Craft made the Normandy Landings Possible. Cheltenham: The History Press. ISBN 978-1-80399-445-1. which, from the index, has five mentions, plus six for the index entry, which are two HMS and four SS. From the primary source (above)[7] it is clear that HMS is correct from the time the interviewee became a crew member, as he was ex-merchant navy and commissioned into RN under some special scheme, in his case because the navy was very short of expertise in marine diesel engines. (Should have been obvious to me from the outset!) This also confirms MV rather than SS.
  • The primary source's account of the special route into the RN for him may be of interest to other related subjects.
I have read somewhere (and cannot remember where) that these fast North Sea ferries were stripped of some of their upper-works on conversion to landing ships. That makes sense if they have to remain stable with the weight of landing craft on davits. Comparison of the commons photo and the Naval Heritage and History Command photo (above) seems to confirm that (but is WP:OR).
Thanks for all the assistance so far. ThoughtIdRetired TIR 21:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SS United States Review

[edit]

Hello all,

I have been working to re-do the entire SS United States article, and with her fate now likely sealed, I thought it would be fitting to have the article reviewed for GA status. I would appreciate other people reviewing the article as well, especially for readability and flow.

Thanks!

GGOTCC (talk) 20:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "legend" of S-5's conversation before rescue

[edit]

Please see WT:MILHIST#The "legend" of S-5's conversation before rescue. It involves the potentially apocryphal story at USS S-5#Rescue. Thanks! Ed [talk] [OMT] 16:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leander 1799 query

[edit]

Can anybody help with an enquiry at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Leander ships? please? Alansplodge (talk) 12:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Blue Origin landing platform" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Blue Origin landing platform has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 8 § Blue Origin landing platform until a consensus is reached. 64.229.88.34 (talk) 10:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships&oldid=1245038894"