Template talk:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide

Ships Template‑class

This template 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 Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

I originally posted these comments at

, but moving them here.

One disclaimer: my primary experience with the template and with the Wikiproject in general has been on commercial civilian ships - primarily cruise ships and passenger/vehicle ferries, and to a lesser degree some tankers and cargo vessels. As a result, I am not as familiar with the use of the fields in military vessels, which I admit varies from the civilian ship use in some cases.

Copied text from

:

Where it states "while civilian ships will use the civilian/merchant ensign of their nation of registry.", this wasn't the original intent for civilian ships, and for quite a while such use was actively purged when found. The logic being that for military ships, the national flag is the nation that owns the ship, while for civilian vessels (especially for cruise and similar commercial ships), the flag frequently has no relationship to the home country of the company that owns or operates the ship, or even of the crew and may not even be representative of the national language spoken by the crew - this is because the flag of registry has more to do with tax reporting than with any meaningful relationship to the ship, company, or crew. As a result, for commercial ships, this was originally left blank - although over time company flags were inserted (for example, see

RMS Titanic, where the former company flag of White Star Line

is shown).

Another item I spotted, I think it would be beneficial to clarify in the section "Ship launched" that it's not the same as the "Ship maiden voyage" ... one of the common mistakes I've seen is where people sometimes list the maiden voyage date as the launch date. It's not a huge deal, but I think mentioning it here could help towards reducing user confusion.

I also saw the question on "Ship power" and "Ship propulsion" ... my understanding is that the "Ship power" represents the power source utilized (ie: number and size of boilers, turbines, etc and the horse-power or kilowatts they generate); while the "Ship propulsion" field describes the propeller or thruster that actually makes contact with the water (ie: number of blades and material, or the number/size/type of thrusters used).

Just my two cents on the guideline. The guideline is a really good idea, and a tool that is long over-due. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "flags of convenience" and such should not necessarily be inserted to the flag field. Perhaps with civilian ships we could advise to put those little flags to the "port of registry", like here? While I think that also has been discouraged, I think it brings a little color to the infobox. I would also recommend this practice with civilian ships because they tend to change the flag every now and then, and making a new career box every time would not look good.

As for "launching vs. maiden voyage", I agree. If this manual is to be named "Infobox for Dummies", it should be as detailed as possible. While most

WP:SHIPS

contributors have some experience about ships and shipping, even the very basics should be somewhere. Why not here?

I also agree with "installed power vs. propulsion". Lately I have been using the former field to list engines, reactors and such, and put propulsion motors, shafts, propellers and thrusters to the latter. If necessary, I have used numerical values in both fields (e.g. propulsion motor rating in the latter, reactor thermal output in the former). Tupsumato (talk) 17:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is all very well and good that flags of convenience should not be depicted in the "Ship flag" parameter, but then that leaves the question: just where should such flags be indicated? The template leaves no parameter to indicate this, and I believe it is a relevant piece of encyclopedic information about a ship to convey in an article. As an example: the Sea Cloud is a German-owned vessel flying a Maltese flag of convenience. As far as I have been able to determine, the Maltese flag is the ONLY flag this ship ever flies. Why, then, should it not be shown as the ship's flag in this parameter? And if not here, then where should it be indicated? I understand that the crew has nothing to do with Malta. That is not my point. My point is, what flag does this ship fly? Maltese. That, too, is interesting if initially somewhat misleading. Where does that go? KDS4444^Talk 12:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that there about 10 entries in the infobox that give the date of various events leading up to a ship's beginning operations — the first 3 seem to mark events towards the beginning of a ship's construction, and the last 7 seem to mark events around the time construction finishes and the ship becomes operational. Even though not all fields may be used for every ship — some fields may apply to civilian ships whereas others apply to military ships — how useful are these? I'm not an expert on ships, but of the 10 fields below, I've marked in italics the 4 that seem like they could be removed from the infobox. Barryjjoyce (talk) 03:35, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

;Ship ordered

• The date that the ship was ordered from the shipbuilder.

;Ship awarded

• For United States Navy vessels, the date that the contract to build the ships was signed/approved.

Ship laid down

• The date on which the keel was laid down onto the slipway by the builder.
• For most ships, this is the point where construction of the vessel starts, and is usually accompanied by ceremony. Although modular construction techniques mean that fabrication of modern vessels can start prior to this, the first time a module is placed on the slipway or building dock is still recognised as the date a ship is laid down.

;Ship launched

• The date a ship is launched, floated out, or other circumstance where the completed hull enters the water.
• Construction is not normally completed by this date. Take care not to confuse it with dates recognising the ship's entry into service (such as commissioning or maiden voyage)

Ship christened

• The date of the ceremony in which the ship formally and/or ceremonially receives her name (see
  Ship naming and launching
  )
• Only use this field if the naming/christening happened at a separate point in time to either the launching or commissioning ceremonies.

Ship completed

• The date construction work finished.

;Ship acquired

• The date of delivery by the shipbuilder to the owner or operator. If it is the same as the completition date, this field may be left empty.
• Alternately, if the ship changes ownership and multiple, separate "Career" subtemplates are being used, the date the new owner/operator came into possession of the ship. Do not use this method if the change of ownership is being handled through multiple entries in the |Ship owner= field

Ship commissioned

• The date a warship was commissioned into naval service.
• Do not use for civilian merchant vessels.

Ship maiden voyage

• The dates and locations of the start and end of the ship's maiden voyage: the first recognised voyage in full service, usually carrying passengers or cargo.
• The transfer of a completed ship from the shipyard to its owner is not normally recognised as a maiden voyage; this is part of the sea trial or shakedown phase, which ensures the ship is working as built.
• Most commonly used for civilian passenger-carrying vessels.

Ship in service

• The date a civilian vessel began operations.
• Alternately, this may be treated as a date range indicating the start and end points of a ship's career. If being used in this manner, ignore the |Ship out of service= field.

The dates are widely considered important milestones in ship's construction and for that reason e.g. classification societies note them in their database entries (example). For nearly every ship article I have written, there has been a date when the order was signed with the shipbuilding company. Hence, |ship ordered= should not be removed in my opinion. I do not write about US Navy vessels, so I don't know about |ship awarded=. The same applies for |ship launched=, a date which does not always coincide with christening. |ship acquired= is used with multiple Career boxes to mark the date when the vessel changes hands.

Thus, I do not agree with your proposal of removing these fields. Tupsumato (talk) 03:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with Tupsumato, I've used every single one of these at one point or another.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all- In the infobox of USS Providence (1775), I removed the "×" symbol from between the number of guns and gun type. @Trappist_the_monk reverted my edit, citing this user guide in the edit summary. Though the guide does mention the "times" symbol, it does not call for it to be used in this manner. Even if the guide did call for such use, I would disagree with it as unnecessary and awkward. If we don't write 6 × officers, why would we write 6 × guns? I have noticed that other ship articles employ the "×" symbol, so I thought it best to bring up the question here rather than limiting it to the USS Providence article. Any thoughts? Eric ^talk 20:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Generally we don't write 6 × officers but we do very often write 12 × 4-pounder (1.8 kg) guns especially where the first character of the thing that we're enumerating is a digit. It then carries on to the other items in the list for consistency. In this particular case, one might write:

|Ship armament=12 × {{convert|4|pdr|adj=on}} and 14 railside swivel guns

Generally, we don't connect items in a list with 'and', but instead, we separate the list items with <br />:

|Ship armament=12 × {{convert|4|pdr|adj=on}} guns<br />14 railside swivel guns

or, more properly, enclose the list of items in a {{plainlist}} template.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:14, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have noted how the "×" is used in the infobox gun counts and I understand the motivation; the style just strikes me as a tad awkward. I don't think there would be any confusion omitting it in the case of enumerated items that commence with a digit when the term is hyphenated, e.g. 12 4-pound guns, though I might tend to write 12 four-pound guns for extra clarity. Eric ^talk 01:17, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fifteen months later, I still find the use of both the multiplication symbol × and -pounder guns instead of -pound guns to be awkward style for an encyclopedia. In conversational style, twelve 36-pound guns might be replaced by twelve 36-pounders, but not twelve 36-pounder guns. Anyone else have input? Eric ^talk 15:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to take this conversation to

WT:SHIPS

where there are 290 watchers. There are only 10 editors watching this page.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:12, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Trappist, good idea. I'll copy the section over. Eric ^talk 17:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently created several articles about cruise ships presently under construction, and have edited some other, existing, articles on such ships. In connection with this, I have uploaded a number of non-free fair use publicity images depicting the relevant ship in service. An editor has since nominated one of these images for deletion on the grounds that "the ship is finished enough now for photographs to be taken. This non-free image is unnecessary and fails both

and 8".

See Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2015_April_12#File:Carnival_Vista-680x510.jpg.

I have responded to that nomination, and my response can be read on the nomination page. However, I thought I should also mention the issue on this talk page, because there doesn't seem to be anything in Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide#Infobox ship image that can be regarded as commenting specifically about such images and their use (if at all) in the infobox of such articles.

My own view on this subject, viewed in a general sense, is that an article about a ship that happens to be presently under construction is an article about the ship, and not merely an article about the construction of the ship, nor a more general article about shipbuilding. I also consider that as an article about a ship is an article about something that is intended to enter service and be used in service, an illustration of the ship under construction is not really appropriate for the article's infobox if a non-free publicity rendering (or artist's impression) of the ship in service can be used instead. After all, the construction of the ship is not an end in itself, but only a means of achieving the end of putting the ship into service. For that reason, my view is that the infobox of an article about a ship under construction should include a non-free publicity rendering (or artist's impression) of the ship in service, even if (which is unlikely) the article also includes one or more free images of the ship under construction.

I believe that this view is consistent with the following comments in the section "Infobox ship image" on the Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide page: "Use an image of the ship that matches the article title. If the ship has been renamed to a name different from the name used as the article title, images of the renamed ship should not be used in the infobox." However, these comments say nothing specific about ships under construction. Thus, if other members of WikiProject Ships agree with my view, then that section should be amended to include a specific comment indicating that if an article is about a ship that is presently under construction, then the infobox should have an image (suitably tagged as non-free if applicable) of the ship as it will appear in service rather than an image of the ship under construction. Bahnfrend (talk) 07:19, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you and added a paragraph about the use of non-free "artist's conceptions" from the shipping company's press kit in the usage guide. However, I can't say when the ship is "finished enough" so that the rendering can be replaced with a photograph as some ships look "complete" sooner than others. Furthermore, while some shipyards have clear views to their outfitting quays, sometimes the ship is behind cranes and other obstructions. I don't mind showing pictures of scaffolding and unfinished paintjobs in the article body, but the infobox is about the ship itself, not about its construction. Tupsumato (talk) 08:10, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]