User:Comrade John/sandbox

The Hull Numbers of Canceled Balao-class submarine and Tench-class submarine
Hello RobDuch ,

I'm from other language Wikipedia and I'm willing to make the template of Balao-class submarine and Tench-class submarine in my home language Wikipedia. But there's one problem that confuse me: The Hull Numbers of canceled Balao-class submarine and Tench-class submarine.

I know, there's 70 of Balao , 55 of Tench canceled from The "Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy, 1775-1990: Major Combatants" reference but there's no specific Hull Number of cancel submarine , which are Balao-class , which are Tench-class in Wikipedia article itself.

Since you mix those canceled numbers up in Balao-class submarine and Tench-class submarine article, I can't find those number , just by watching the article itself.

I try to look at the template, the " List of submarines of the United States Navy " article and website related , try to get the hull numbers of canceled submarine , but still can't do it , neither of them fulfill the numbers of 70 and 55 at total.

Since you studied The "Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy, 1775-1990: Major Combatants" reference or you may even got the book, can you specific to list The Hull Numbers of Canceled Balao-class submarine and The Hull Numbers of Canceled Tench-class submarine ?

Off topic: It's strange that Gato, Balao and Tench class submarine didn't have " Ships in class " list in their article. -- Comrade John (talk) 16:54, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your interest. I'm on vacation but will get back to you more fully next week. Basically, I and apparently everybody else have been too lazy to put complete lists of the three wartime classes on Wikipedia.  The difficulty of sorting out Balao's from Tenches is a factor.  As implied in my articles, the Tench class begins with SS-417, however two boats after this were completed as Balaos, SS-425 and SS-426. I see that I do need to put in additional info from the Register to clarify the situation. RobDuch (talk) 00:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Good to hear, brother. I can help to make and put those list up , but i need information , to help me to make and put a list like " List of Fletcher-class destroyers " , Internet can't do much and my place don't have that kind of information , which is bad and shame. Take care of template first i guess. -- Comrade John (talk) 01:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Two things come to mind: before making any lists, put notes on the class articles' talk pages to let interested users know that you're planning this list. If someone is already working on one, they should let you know. Also, I've noticed that some lists of ships, including the Fletchers, do not include the launch dates. I haven't researched the reason for this, but I personally think the launch date is as important as the other dates. RobDuch (talk) 05:42, 19 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok, as for the launch dates thing , i can put them when i have time. But if they have no launch date , i may need you or someone provide information too because you know , i don't have that kind of information in my place. -- Comrade John (talk) 09:33, 19 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Also, Within those canceled Balao-class submarine and Tench-class submarine , there's some with hull number and name , some only have hull number , can you list them in details , please ? -- Comrade John (talk) 09:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I know about the hull number situation. There's always a redirect page with the hull number, also you can link to the page with just the name but display both name and hull number. I think we'll want separate name and hull number columns, with the ship article linked to the name, to allow sorting by either. See the list I worked on at Benson-class destroyer for the format I think we want. For an example of what others consider to be a good ship list article, a featured list article by other authors is at List of battlecruisers of Germany. However, my personal preference is to use the list only to put the "dates and fates" table in a separate article, to avoid clogging the class article with a huge table. RobDuch (talk) 02:25, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your recommendation, brother. As for those " redirect page with the hull number " , I knew some of them , tried to searched some of them and saw some of them , but still can't find all 70 (Balao) and 55 (Tench) canceled submarines' hull number , not to mention to find whether some with hull number and name , some only have hull number. Since some of canceled hull number be transferred to some new completed submarine classes ship , makes me even more confuse. So i really need someone to provide some information to clearly the situation. I know you might take some time , i can wait , there have some template making or editing I'm working on before those two. -- Comrade John (talk) 09:03, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * A few things have come up, but they have settled down and I have more free time. I plan to research the cancelled submarines in more detail in the next few days.  The situation is not as complex as you fear.  None of the cancelled hull numbers in WWII were re-used for later submarines. Only five cancelled submarines were ever laid down (of which the two Balaos were launched incomplete and were test hulks postwar); maybe we can deal with the ones that never existed in a couple of footnotes.  There is one duplicate name; Wahoo is listed for both SS-516 and SS-518 of which the former was laid down and not cancelled until 7 January 1946, SS-518 was named first but the name was transferred to SS-516 when SS-518 was cancelled (see USS Wahoo (SS-518)). My entries on cancelled submarines were a bit vague due to the range of possibilities in different references, and I only mentioned the two extremes of cancellations in terms of the number of Balao-class cancelled (minimum 10 Balao/115 Tench, maximum 70 Balao/43 Tench plus 12 future class).  I think the latter figures are more accurate, as that's what the Register gives and it goes into more detail on this than other sources. The cancelled Balaos in the Register are SS-427-434, 438-474, and 530-536. The hull numbers of all Tenches in the Register are SS-417-424, 435-437, 475-529, and 537-550; 29 of these were built and the remaining 43 were cancelled.  The future class were SS-551-562, all cancelled.  BTW, the otherwise authoritative Friedman books list all commissioned US submarines, but do not state what class they were.  Although it's a bit expensive at $87 on Amazon, I recommend you get the Register by Bauer and Roberts because it's the only single source I've found that lists every ship that was ever in the US Navy through 1990.  RobDuch (talk) 04:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you again, brother. Three things in my mind after I make the draft list with your information provided and this site: http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Stats/WW2_US_Cancellations.htm

First thing first, here's my draft list of canceled hull numbers Balao and Tench class submarine:


 * Cancelled Balao class submarine (70)
 * SS-353 – 360 (8)
 * SS-379 – 380 (2)
 * SS-427 – 434 (8)
 * SS-438 – 474 (37)
 * SS-530 – 536 (7)


 * Total: 62, where's other 8 ?


 * Cancelled Tench class submarine (55, 43 of Tench and 12 of SS-551 class)
 * SS-436 – 437 (2)
 * SS-491 – 521 (31)
 * SS-526 – 529 (4)
 * SS-537 – 550 (14)
 * SS-551 – 562 (12)


 * If excluded SS-551 class, Total: 51 , where's other 8 come from ?
 * If included SS-551 class, Total: 63 , where's other 8 come from ?

This list lead to second thing: Was Us navy really canceled 70 of Balao, 55 of Tench ? Or Us navy in fact canceled 62 of Balao, 51 or 63 of Tench ?

As the canceled Balao class hull numbers, if 70 is a true canceled number , then what's other 8 canceled Balao class submarine hull number ? Seems like you didn't provide those other 8 hull numbers of cancel Balao ?

Third thing: Still didn't know which are those hull numbers with name, which are unnamed , most of the canceled hull numbers with name I acknowledged are come from that link I provided and Template:Balao class submarine , Template:Tench class submarine itself , but still not sure.

So in conclude, You might need to get the true number of Balao , Tench class that Us navy canceled and identify which are those hull numbers with names , which are not. Again, I know you are still researching more , so I'll wait until we get the clear information. -- Comrade John (talk) 10:59, 28 October 2017 (UTC)


 * As a quick reply, turning back a couple of pages in the Register shows ten other cancelled Balao-class, SS-353-360 and SS-379-380, all of which were named but apparently none of which were laid down. RobDuch (talk) 20:17, 28 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yep, those are i had listed , which in the template and that site i provide to you , but where's other 8 ? Keep studying brother , I can wait. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry I'm taking so long to reply, things keep coming up, should get to it in the next few days. RobDuch (talk) 02:30, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * No problem, brother. Like I said before , I have many template to make or edit before those two so I can wait. -- Comrade John (talk) 08:24, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I have finally got round to running the numbers and you are right. It adds up to 62 Balao, 51 Tench, and 12 future class for a total of 125.  I'll edit the Balao and Tench articles to reflect this. RobDuch (talk) 20:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you brother. Which means that I can finally make a template for my language Wikipedia, Good. There's one more thing , I found some of the canceled submarine hull number of Balao class submarine got put it wrong to the Template: Tench-class submarine. I can edit it right away , But i need the result after I edit , I don't want delay or have to refresh or white edit every page of that template has been put in to show the new edit , do you know a way to solve it ? -- Comrade John (talk) 14:36, 4 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I actually have that same problem with template display, where updates take some time or a white edit to take effect. I don't have an answer, unfortunately. You should also be aware that SS-361 thru SS-364, although in the Balao series, were completed as Gato-class. I have noted that in Gato-class submarine, however I have not updated the individual ship articles or the templates. I hope to do that soon. RobDuch (talk) 01:59, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * " You should also be aware that SS-361 thru SS-364, although in the Balao series, were completed as Gato-class. " Man i don't know that, thanks for letting me know , brother. Bloody hell , which means that even the completed submarine number of Gato and Balao class is wrong as well , should be 73 completed of Gato , 124 completed of Balao i guess , you might need to look through the Gato and Balao class section of the register now. Man , it seems I kicked the hornet's nest , so much mess in the article and template. Guess i have to wait some time again. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:29, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm not looking for an edit war, either. My concern isn't the change, it's the sourcing: the original number was cited; your changed number was attached to the same source, which, fairly obviously, doesn't use the number you changed it to. I'm just wanting your new source attached as a cite. As for the SS-551s, I know, they never got off paper, but I wouldn't add them as Tenches, since they were (AIUI) assigned to a new class (however notional it turned out to be); AFAIK, those particular hull numbers weren't used for any ships actually built, either, FWIW. On launch dates, IMO they're essential to knowing which boats completed as which design, since so many orders "bleed over" in later hull numbers, Gatos into Balaos & Balaos into Tenches. If you can find it, I'd recommend Lenton's American Submarines (my copy I can no longer find, after moving... :( :; he's got launch dates for all (completion dates, too, IIRC), ordered by class & hull number, chronological by launch date. (He does break out the classes differently than WP is doing, putting the Salmons & Sargos, & Tambors & Gars, together.) He also lists #ordered, #built, & #cancelled of each. And so you know, it wasn't 124 Balaos completed, either, IIRC; the total built, all classes, is 218. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  14:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I am changing the number because I'm the one that put the wrong number there in the first place, and I have determined (with help as above) that my initial count from that source was wrong. And it looks like I need to recount the Balaos completed as well; I probably let that number stand from a previous editor when I redid the page, or took 124 and subtracted 4 when I found out about SS-316-SS-364. I may have to get Lenton, but if he differs from Bauer & Roberts it will be another source of confusion. I'm sure you've noticed that several references, including Friedman, lump Gato-Balao or Gato-Balao-Tench into one list due to the complexity of the situation. And although many have lists, few (none that I've seen) actually roll up the numbers.  RobDuch (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * @Comrade_John, I have ordered Lenton's book (it's at www.abebooks.com for less than $10 including shipping) and will hope that it agrees with Bauer and Roberts' Register (which, by the way, is not an official document despite the name). RobDuch (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok, brother. Once you got that book , you need to look forward the number of Gato , Balao and Tench class built and number of Balao and Tench class canceled , compare with Bauer and Roberts' Register's information or like you said agrees with Bauer and Roberts' Register. Also , this is optional but , can you look forward which of those Balao and Tench class canceled with name , which are not ? I'm afraid there's some difference between Lenton's and Bauer and Roberts' , just like the complete and cancel number. -- Comrade John (talk) 06:22, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * 20 days passed, how's it going ? Did you got the book ? Make any progress ? -- Comrade John (talk) 15:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I got the Lenton book and have looked at it. It has several discrepancies vs. Bauer & Roberts, although it has the advantage of including a table that lists how many of each class were built by each yard. The main problem is that it assumes all submarines numbered SS-417 and later were or would have been Tench-class. Another is that SS-361-364 are listed as Balaos (to be honest, they were initially ordered with this class), although there is a note about their test depth being 300 feet, the same as the Gatos. Among commissioned boats, the Tench-class issue affects only SS-425 and SS-426, but also applies to the incomplete SS-427 and SS-428, which were used as test hulks for years. I am strongly inclined to restructure the Wikipedia information to reflect Bauer & Roberts, as their information appears to be better researched. The SS-361-364 situation is detailed in Friedman, so I have a solid reference for putting them with the Gatos. The only problem is that readers who have only Lenton may assume there's a problem with the information, so extra cites are a must. RobDuch (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * As for names (using Bauer and Roberts), all ten cancelled Balaos numbered before SS-417 were named, as were SS-427-434 and SS-464 (note that this includes the two hulks), for a total of 19 named Balaos cancelled. Ten additional cancelled Tench-class were also named; this includes both cancelled Wahoos. These were SS-491-494, 516, 518, and 526-529. RobDuch (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * For the tables, there's an issue of how much information to include in the "Fate" column. I'm inclined to include postwar conversions/redesignations, as well as transfers to other navies and current existence as memorials. RobDuch (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Which means that, still follow our past discuss result , using Bauer and Roberts' information ? -- Comrade John (talk) 07:23, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Also, the template of Gato / Balao / Tench might need to edit too. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, we'll follow what we discussed using Bauer and Roberts. And I'm aware the templates will need some adjustment. RobDuch (talk) 19:46, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok brother, you may need to explain it to Trekphiler again otherwise he will undo your edit again. And template itself , you know , English Wikipedia take a ages to refresh the edit of template , do you know any bot to refresh the pages edit ? Cause if we do zero edit , just for refresh the edit , it takes forever to finish them. -- Comrade John (talk) 20:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Trekphiler left me a little note saying "do what the hell you want" when he edited his page. Yes, I'm aware of the template refresh issue and haven't heard of a workaround. I'll just have to be careful. I plan to start with the SS-361-364 issue and the overall numbers built/cancelled. RobDuch (talk) 02:58, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ♠"Trekphiler left me a little note" I must have been having a really bad day. Or got you crossed up with somebody else. As for rv, as said, if your source agrees with the new number & you attach the cite, I'm happy.
 * ♠Lenton is a bit idiosyncratic when it comes to class breakouts (notice the Tambors, Gars, Salmons, & Sargos), & it looked to me like he didn't care about the post-Tenches, because they were only contracts, not completed ships; you'll notice, most of them are cancelled incomplete as the war ends.  TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura  04:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok brother, once you done the investigation and counting , please let me know here. -- Comrade John (talk) 08:28, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

I've completed my first batch of edits. SS-361-364 were already in the Gato-class template and categories, just needed to change the article bodies. All of the named cancelled subs have stub articles. For the Balao-class template, my only change was to add the cancelled USS Chicolar (SS-464), which was placed with the Tench class. I transferred this boat to the Balao class in the article. USS Trumpetfish (SS-425) and USS Tusk (SS-426) were already correctly placed with the Balao class. The Tench-class template needed a little work, but this was just deletion of cancelled boats that were Balao-class in the Register. And I corrected the numbers of cancelled boats in the Tench-class article. Later I took a look and realized I needed to adjust the unnamed cancelled hull numbers in the Balao and Tench templates, which I did. RobDuch (talk) 20:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you brother, so will it have second batch of edits ? -- Comrade John (talk) 07:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm hoping not to need more edits to existing articles. I plan to give the foreign service listed in the templates a look for accuracy, and then I'll start on "List of Gato-class submarines". RobDuch (talk) 20:43, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok brother, As for the "List of Gato-class submarines" , I guess there will be the "List of Balao-class submarines" and the "List of Tench-class submarines" right ? You gonna do this all by yourself or you need my assistance ? Also adding the launch section "List of Fletcher-class destroyers" section , you want me to do it or do it yourself ? Whatever the case , I only can put the information on it , as the reference , it's your turn. -- Comrade John (talk) 06:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I reviewed the foreign service information in all three class templates. The only changes I made were to the Balao-class template, where the Chilean Thomson was given as Silverstein due to misreading the list, along with a couple of spelling corrections. I'm planning to do lists for Gato, Balao, and Tench classes. I'm not planning anything with "List of Fletcher-class destroyers"; do what seems appropriate with it. I will be doing the submarine lists in my sandbox at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RobDuch/sandbox . I'll let you know when I get something going, and you can review it, not sure if you can edit it though, as sandboxes may be locked. I am not sure how much information besides the list I'll put in the list article, but a few sentences outlining the classes' service, references, and links to related articles are in order I think. I'm also planning an informative "Fate" entry for each boat, including foreign service, changes of hull classification symbol (the letter portion of the hull number) for converted boats, and current preservation where applicable. For lost submarines, I'll mostly use information from List of lost United States submarines, which I previously worked on. RobDuch (talk) 20:23, 4 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I looked at the Fletcher-class list and added a couple of appropriate categories, but plan no further work on it. I have made a start on the Gato-class list in my sandbox at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RobDuch/sandbox, let me know what you think. I used the structure of the Fletcher-class list, which is a little tricky but allows for multiple decomm/recomm activity. I added launch dates as you can see. RobDuch (talk) 00:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, let's wait some more time , till you put more information , I may say some more information. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm continuing to add boats of the Gato class. I've changed my main source to Norman Friedman's "U. S. Submarines through 1945", as it has much more information than Bauer & Roberts, such as detailing multiple decomm/recomm events and postwar conversions. I've also gone back in the Balao and Tench class articles and broken out which cancelled hull numbers were which class. If you're thinking of getting Friedman, be aware that his "through 1945" volume is just that. For details of GUPPY and other postwar conversions, you'll also need the "since 1945" volume. RobDuch (talk) 02:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, it won't change the canceled Balao and Tench class number that we discussed earlier right ? -- Comrade John (talk) 06:11, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Right, it's the same as we discussed. RobDuch (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok, You gonna added those canceled submarine in the list as well right ? Since what I saw in List of Fletcher-class destroyer and List of Clemson-class destroyer , it just added those completed , without any canceled added. Also , like I said , if you are not willing to added the information of launched of Fletcher-class , I will added them , but as the reference , it's your turn. --Comrade John (talk) 07:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Cancellation information will be on the lists of Balao-class and Tench class according to Bauer & Roberts. Of course, it will be a couple of weeks at the rate things are going before I even start the Balao-class list. For the Fletcher-class list, you can look up the launch dates on the individual ship articles or at Navsource.org (probably the easiest). RobDuch (talk) 20:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok brother, two things. First , Some completed submarine that had foreign navy service and got a new hull number , you gonna added them in "Fate" section or set up a new "Note" or "Other Hull No." section to add them ? Second , some submarine's information got empty , suggested to added "n/a" to make it tidy , just like "List of Fletcher-class destroyers" shown. -- Comrade John (talk) 09:06, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm putting foreign service in the "Fate" section. I'm only putting in the names for foreign service unless I can readily find the hull number, then I'll just put it in with the name, such as "ARA Santa Fe (S-21)". This is mostly where two different boats had the same name at different times. In most cases foreign service is included in the US article. There are a few boats in foreign service (I think three) where that service is documented in a separate article. I'll add the "N/A" to blank spaces. RobDuch (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2017 (UTC)


 * As for some completed submarine that had foreign navy service, their new hull number can be found in template itself , you have to click "edit" to look through the code to find them or check other language Wikipedia of it's article to find them. You can find most of their hull number. Maybe your book reference can find them too , even better. -- Comrade John (talk) 08:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


 * List of Gato-class submarines is live, and I've added "Ships in class" to the class article. The only source that I found for foreign hull numbers was the brief articles at www.Navsource.org, such as http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08363.htm for USS Guitarro (SS-363). And I'm not sure if Navsource has this level of information for all boats. In this case, Guitarro had three different hull numbers while in Turkish service. If you want to add that to the list article, it's OK with me. I will start on the Balao-class list, but I can't guarantee when I'll be done; it'll be at least three weeks. I'll be out of town for five days starting late this week, and will be unable to work on it while I'm gone. RobDuch (talk) 20:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the making of Gato-class list, brother. It's ok that you don't add those new hull number in the list , I'll do that by myself on the making of the template to my language Wikipedia. As the Balao-class list , like I said , I got plenty of time to wait , I'm not on rush for making those template. -- Comrade John (talk) 06:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Today I "discovered" another lost Balao-class submarine. I've added it to the list in the main article, and adjusted the numbers lost and retired.  On 4 April 1953 TCG Dumlupinar (D-6) (ex-USS Blower (SS-325)) was lost due to a collision with a Swedish merchant vessel, MV Naboland.  Navsource.org has a description at http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08325.htm ; there's more detail in the Wiki article on Blower. Note that there was another TCG Dumlupinar (S339), ex-USS Caiman (SS-323). One problem with Friedman and Bauer/Roberts is that Friedman has very little info on foreign service and Bauer/Roberts has none. Friedman also makes occasional mistakes as to whether a vessel was returned to the US or sold to the foreign country.  Most transfers were loans, with the vessel to be returned to the US when no longer needed; vessels remained on the Naval Vessel Register while in foreign service. However, in a number of cases the foreign country eventually purchased the vessel; in this case it was struck from the Naval Vessel Register at that time. I don't know where Navsource.org's info in this area comes from, but it's got some good detail. RobDuch (talk) 05:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for finding out, brother. One thing makes me wonder: If USS Tang (SS-306) is a Balao-class submarine , then why it still shown in "Medal of Honor awards" section of Gato-class article ? -- Comrade John (talk) 07:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Because somebody put it there and nobody's taken it out. The Gato-class article is the only one with an attempt at a summary of WWII submarine operations. Whoever decided to put in the skippers that received the CMH wanted to be complete, or didn't realize Tang was Balao-class. As you've probably seen, eventually somebody put a paragraph about Tang in the Balao-class article. RobDuch (talk) 18:34, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Based on input from Parsecboy at WP:SHIPS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships#Cancelled_USN_submarine_names), once I'm finished with the Balao-class list I'm thinking of changing the stub articles for cancelled subs that were never laid down to redirects to the class article. These apparently were given stub articles because they have small DANFS articles, such as this one. I plan to retain the stub articles for those subs that were laid down, and of course for the two that served as test hulks postwar. Also putting this on the Balao-class talk page. RobDuch (talk) 19:06, 24 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Your call, It's your freedom to do so. As long as it doesn't effect the hull numbers and name of canceled Balao-class and Tench-class submarine , everything is fine by me. You will do that with "List of Tench-class submarine" at the same period right ? -- Comrade John (talk) 21:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I may wait until the Tench-class list is done to do this. Thanks to the miracle of redirects, whether it's an article or a redirect doesn't affect the class page. RobDuch (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

While you are making these three lists of submarine class, I look through all the US navy's submarine class , most of them have a list or list alike section such as United States B-class submarine but there's only one don't have either of them , which is United States S-class submarine , you may aware that already. So have you got a thought that you will be making the list of S-class submarine in the future ? -- Comrade John (talk) 08:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * After the huge amount of work with the Gato-Balao-Tench classes, I'm not inclined to do another any time soon. The S-boat article (which I worked on a few years ago) has a list of fates and notes which boats were which type. I plan to move on to other projects (US coast defense, my other favorite genre) for a while. RobDuch (talk) 19:17, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok, brother. -- Comrade John (talk) 21:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I've just discovered another Balao-class loss that I was unaware of. BAP Pacocha (SS-48) (ex-USS Atule (SS-403)) was lost 26 August 1988 in collision with the Japanese fishing trawler Kiowa Maru. The wreck was raised 23 July 1989, cannibalized for spare parts, and presumably scrapped. I am adding this to the class article as well as the list. RobDuch (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Good job, brother. As the lost section of ship info box of Balao-class submarine , would it be good , if it edit as "Lost: 11(During US navy service) , 3(During foreign navy service)" , to make it detail for some reader , who don't like to read a long passage. Or keep it simple or tidy , just "Lost: 14" ? Also , Is Gato-class submarine had the foreign navy service lost situation too ? At last , you may need to look careful on Tench-class lost as well , there might having foreign navy service lost , just like Balao-class , which might didn't record in some books. -- Comrade John (talk) 08:23, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'll put the numbers lost in USN service and foreign service in the infobox. The Gatos had no foreign service losses. The Tench-class is easy, only one loss ever, in Pakistan's navy, and it's already in the class article. RobDuch (talk) 21:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Balao-class list is live and class article updated to refer to it List of Balao-class submarines. RobDuch (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you, brother. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to disturb your US coast defense working, brother. I'm now starting to make those three submarine classes' template, I looked through all three submarine classes list that you recently made while you were offline , found out that in Balao class list , you missed out "SS-327 USS Boarfish"'s information , can you fill it up please ? Only you can fill it with your writing style, just like other submarine's information , especially "Fate" section , I can't , Thank you. -- Comrade John (talk) 09:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Might've been an accidental erasure while I was writing it. RobDuch (talk) 21:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you, brother. -- Comrade John (talk) 08:07, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , mind if I move this and the Fletcher-class discussion to my archive? RobDuch (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Sure, you can move it , the Fletcher-class destroyers's discussion also. If I got something related to ask , I will open a new discussion. Hope we got a chance to cooperate each other again , brother. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If you're doing pages on the contracts, maybe you've come across the original names of renamed boats; if so, can you append something to the cases where it applies? I can also say there's already a Chicolar stub page, not least because the name was used by Beach in Dust on the Sea.  TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura  21:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Fletcher-class destroyers
Just let you know brother, I am now putting the launched date of ships of Fletcher-class destroyers , progress is making very slowly.

Because I am putting the code very slowly and there's some information mistake I need to make it right, not even the list , the ship article itself as well and you know , there's 175 of Fletcher-class destroyers have been built , so yeah. -- Comrade John (talk) 09:52, 23 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I feel for you. I've run into a situation with stub articles and redirects for the cancelled submarines. Waiting to hear back from WP:SHIPS and may have to ask elsewhere also. RobDuch (talk) 18:29, 23 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I can now put the launched date very fast now, progress is 88 of 175 launched date has been put. Now the real problem is , I have to recheck the 175 ships information of the list via ship article itself and navsource and make some edit for them cause there may have some difference or mistake within the list or the ship article , which means that the total progress is still very slowly. May need your register of US navy to help , but not in rush , will tell you about those "Problems" once I'm done putting launched date and rechecked all the ships information of the list -- Comrade John (talk) 19:31, 23 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I can review the article using the Register once you've got most of the work done. RobDuch (talk) 21:52, 23 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok and thank you brother. -- Comrade John (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok, Brother. I'm done on putting those launch date information of Fletcher-class destroyers onto the list itself. Just like the maintenance template said "This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations" it astonishes me, 62 ships information of this class have some issues. I'll list these issues by the table below:

There are the issues that you need to look at "Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy, 1775-1990: Major Combatants", you might need to edit them into the list and articles that got issue on the list by yourself , cause reference might need to quote the page number.

Also, got a question. About DD799 - 804 builder, it said Seattle-Tacoma Shipbuilding Corporation, Seattle, Washington in the list. But when I look at their article, except DD-799 USS Jarvis (it said Seattle-Tacoma in passage , nothing on infobox) , all their builder is said to be "Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington in infobox and passage". In "Seattle-Tacoma Shipbuilding CorporationIn" article, said something like this "In 1942 Todd bought out Kaiser's holding and some time thereafter the company was reabsorbed into Todd Dry Dock & Construction, which eventually became Todd Pacific Shipyards. Todd sold the Tacoma shipyard to the Navy after the war ended, which in turn sold the site to the Port of Tacoma in 1959." . Does it mean Seattle-Tacoma no longer exist during the war, if that so , DD554-568 and DD799 - 804 builder need to be change to "Todd Pacific Shipyards, Seattle, Washington". So please clarify this statement via your register.

At last, except DD-482 USS watson , other canceled ship in the class DD-452 Percival , DD-503 Stevenson , DD-504 Stockton , DD-505 Thorn , DD-506 Turner , DD-523 - 525 Unnamed , DD-542 Unnamed , DD-543 Unnamed , DD-548 Unnamed and DD-549 Unnamed didn't added to list , can you please look at their information of them via your register as well ?

Thank you. -- Comrade John (talk) 21:14, 9 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Wow, a lot of issues. I have Friedman's destroyer book, which has dates for all US destroyers, so that's another source. I've found that no source is perfect. I'll get to this some time in the next week. RobDuch (talk) 06:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I know it's hard for you but, can you please provide those information via Register and Friedman's destroyer book so to compare ? Sigh , I don't why the ship date's information can be different from different books , it's not counting the casualties of war , should be only have one date. -- Comrade John (talk) 07:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I have put what I could find into your table above. About Seattle-Tacoma, later Todd Pacific, the Register lists the yard as "Sea-Tac, Seattle" for all Fletcher class built there, but switches to "Todd, Seattle" for the subsequent Allen M. Sumner and Gearing classes. Friedman does basically the same thing, "Sea-Tac" for Fletchers and "Todd" for the later classes. BTW, I have finally started putting in dates for the Tench class, and for some reason Friedman differs more from the Register with this class than with the other two. It's been annoying. Another source for ship dates, but sometimes inaccurate as with all sources, is the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (DANFS) at https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs.html . This was published in several volumes from the 1950s through 1978. The biggest problem is that basically none of its info has been updated since the original publication; for example if it's an entry written in the 1950s it will state the ship is in service, when it was eventually scrapped in the 1970s. If you want to include when and how foreign service ended, as I did for the subs, Navsource was the only source I found for that. However, I don't know if they researched the surface ship foreign service like they did for the subs. Page numbers for Fletcher-class in Friedman: DD-445-498, p. 503; DD-499-544, p. 504; DD-545-583, p. 505; DD-584-663, p. 506; DD-664-800, p. 507; DD-801-804, p. 508. Page numbers for Fletcher-class in Register: DD-445-507, p. 192; DD-508-546, p. 193; DD-547-580, p. 194; DD-581-664; p. 195; DD-665-804, p. 196. Also cancelled DD-452, 482, 503-506 pp. 198-199. Also, the Register has no decomm/recomm dates, while Friedman does not have "sold for scrap" dates.


 * As "Todd, Seattle" for the subsequent Allen M. Sumner and Gearing classes, it's fine , cause they are all built after 1942. But "Sea-Tac, Seattle" for all Fletcher class built in there , i don't think it's good idea because in 1942 , it became part of "Todd" So my idea is: Put a short sentence after "Sea-Tac" in Builder section: (Become Todd Pacific Shipyards in 1942) , Their article's infobox do the same. Also a question , As the reference in list , all should be set in "Fate" section right ? Cause when I check the Balao-class list , i don't see any reference button in any section , except "Fate". -- Comrade John (talk) 08:07, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * In almost all cases I put all references in "Fate". There are, of course, other approaches; some articles by other authors have a separate "Reference" column. I've seen one where somebody put a reference for every single date, and of course most of them were the same reference. I personally would stick with Friedman and Bauer about Sea-Tac vs. Todd, remember most of the Fletcher-class were ordered in 1942 or earlier, even if not laid down until 1943. You might put the note about their name change in a section above or below the table, such as where I put my "Abbreviations" section. For Percival (DD-452) the only date I have is "Cancelled 7 January 1946". For DD-503 through DD-506, it's "Cancelled 10 February 1941". DD-523 through DD-525, DD-542-543 and DD-548-549 were all "Cancelled 16 December 1940". RobDuch (talk) 01:36, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * About those cancel ships, Are they all never laid down ? -- Comrade John (talk) 06:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Correct, none were laid down. RobDuch (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * What's their builders ? -- Comrade John (talk) 07:17, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

DD-452, 482, 503 thru 506, Kearny, 523-525, Staten Island, 542-543, Bethlehem San Fran, and 548-549, San Pedro RobDuch (talk) 20:22, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Off-topic question, there's 70 planned ships of Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer , 58 built , which means there's 12 ships canceled , what i want to ask is , Are these canceled ships have hull numbers or any other number or call sign ? Are these canceled ships unnamed ? -- Comrade John (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * These were completed as destroyer minelayers (DM), the Robert H. Smith-class destroyers, the article has their DD hull numbers and new DM hull numbers. RobDuch (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you brother. -- Comrade John (talk) 08:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * , mind if I move this and the Gato-Balao-Tench class discussion to my archive? RobDuch (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Commencement Bay class
Rob, need your help via your reference books again.

In current Commencement Bay class article's version, The total number of this class in infobox said:
 * Planned: 	33
 * Completed: 	21
 * Cancelled: 	12

But when I go through the "ships in the class" in the article provide, it didn't fulfill this kind of numbers , so I look through the google and this URL:http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Stats/WW2_US_Cancellations.htm that helped me built many template and found something interesting.

In Norman Polmar's "Aircraft Carriers: A History of Carrier Aviation and Its Influence on World Events, Volume 1: 1909-1945", Commencement Bay class's number in Spring 1945 is:


 * In Commission: 3
 * Under Construction: 9
 * Ordered: 23

In that URL, Commencement Bay class's cancellations:
 * CVE-124 Bastogne (Commencement Bay) Laid down 2 April 1945
 * CVE-125 Eniwetok (Commencement Bay) Laid down 20 April 1945
 * CVE-126 Lingayen (Commencement Bay) Laid down 1 May 1945
 * CVE-127 Okinawa (Commencement Bay) Laid down 22 May 1945
 * CVE-128 Unnamed (Commencement Bay) Laid down 17 July 1945
 * CVE-129 Unnamed (Commencement Bay) Laid down 9 August 1945
 * CVE-130 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-131 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-132 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-133 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-134 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-135 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-136 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-137 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-138 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)
 * CVE-139 Unnamed (Commencement Bay)

There are total 16 Commencement Bay-class got canceled on 12 August 1945.

So my question is:

1. Is current Commencement Bay class article's version, The total number of this class in infobox is not correct ? The correct total number should be like this: ?


 * Planned: 	35
 * Completed: 	19
 * Cancelled: 	16

2. If first question's number prediction is right. I need to confirm these cancelled ship with information:


 * CVE-128 through CVE-139, are these really unnamed ?
 * CVE-124 through CVE-139, are these have their shipbuilder , laid down date ?
 * CVE-124 through CVE-139, are these all "Cancelled before launching, 12 August 1945" ?

So, please respond. Should have needed to make some edit in Commencement Bay-class escort carrier's article and "List of United States Navy escort aircraft carriers" -- Comrade John (talk) 11:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

One more addition request. Can you provide all CVE-105 through CVE-139's shipbuilder name via your books because I suspect there may have some issues to those complete ships as well, thank you. -- Comrade John (talk) 11:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Looking in both Friedman's aircraft carrier book and the Register, CVE-128 thru 139 are all unnamed, and CVE-124 thru 139 are all cancelled 12 August 1945. Builder for all completed and cancelled CVE-105 thru 131 is Todd, Tacoma. Builder scheduled for CVE-132 thru 139 is "Vancouver", which built the entire Casablanca class (CVE-55 thru 104). See above for laid down dates from the Register; CVE-124 thru 129 were laid down but never got to launching. RobDuch (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you brother. Two things to confirm:


 * Vancouver, is it Kaiser Shipyards ?
 * Just like the Fletcher-class destroyer we discussed before, There are two kinds of Todd, Tacoma in "Ships in the class" list of the Commencement-Bay class's article :First is the Todd Pacific Shipyards ; second is the Seattle-Tacoma Shipbuilding Corporation , which are lead to different article page. Since CVE-105 thru CVE-131 are all built by Todd, Tacoma , there must have one page of Todd is wrong so which article page of Todd is correct ? -- Comrade John (talk) 09:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Vancouver is Kaiser. I see the class article is confused as to what to call Todd/Tacoma as well. I also see that the two shipyard articles are not really informative, especially as to whether more than one physical site is involved. Some info is at ShipbuildingHistory.com . In fact, it's all in this list. Maybe some day I'll put a sentence in each article to straighten out the location question. RobDuch (talk) 18:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I added Sea-Tac to the Vigor Shipyards article; I suspect one or two more shipyards were part of Todd Pacific but I only have the ShipbuildingHistory.com reference. I also put that link in the Sea-Tac article.RobDuch (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Register of Ships
Question, Are there any UK , France , Russia , Germany , Japan , Italy and Austria-Hungary's register of Ships book selling outside ? Please recommend, thank you. -- Comrade John (talk) 17:17, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The Ian Allan series (such as "French Warships of World War I" (or WWII)) is good for one navy and war at a time. If you want the whole world for a given period, Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships is on abebooks.com for around $50 US per volume. Each volume contains information for ships built during its period only. For example, in the WWII volume information on ships built in WWI will only cover modernizations in the WWII period. The volumes are 1860-1905, 1906-1921, 1922-1946, and 1947-1995. The last volume was originally 1947-1982 in two volumes, but the 1947-1995 update consolidated them. RobDuch (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The UK's national shipping register was published annually as the Mercantile Navy List, from the early 1850s until the 1960s. Copies of originals and of more recent reprints can be found on internet booksellers Amazon, AbeBooks etc.  Also many volumes 1858-1940 are available and searchable online at CLIP, and a few in Google Books. Davidships (talk) 22:08, 15 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I should add that Ian Allan includes only launch dates and fates, plus their books have never been updated to include final fates since original publication, which for the US was the 1960s. Also, Conway's does not include auxiliaries, and for destroyers and smaller includes only launch dates and fates. RobDuch (talk) 00:33, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * For my understanding, The ship have 5 main information: Laid down , Launched , Commissioned , Decommissioned and Fate , if it got recommissioned and second decommissioned date included , it would be fantastic , does outside world got a register of Ships book that list those information above or it scattered all over the different kind of ships book ? -- Comrade John (talk) 10:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * See WP:SHIPS/R - plenty of registers online linked from there. Also the Plimsoll Ship Data website has all Lloyd's Registers for 1930-45 inclusive. Mjroots (talk) 12:15, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you brother but still need more book resources. -- Comrade John (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * They are book sources, digitized for internet viewing. Take a look. Mjroots (talk) 14:19, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Ship has two dates
When I checking those warships date, I always came across two versions of date with difference reference such as USS O-1 (SS-62) , it's launched date have two versions:

1. 9 July 1918, Come from DANFS.

2. 9 October 1918, Come from NavSource.

Don't know which one is the correct date so can I put them both into the infobox and text with providing both references ? -- Comrade John (talk) 14:24, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * DANFS isn't perfect, but I'd say that it's better than Navsource.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:53, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You might find the answer in contemporary American newspapers. Mjroots (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Friedman has 9 July 1918, Register also has 9 July. RobDuch (talk) 20:59, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Silverstone also has 9 July Lyndaship (talk) 21:16, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

So, when it comes to two dates like this , either put both dates or put a date that have many reference support ? -- Comrade John (talk) 22:24, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I'd say go with the date that's in 3 out of 4 refs. RobDuch (talk) 01:36, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * If you look at the photos on the Navsource page two of them are captioned "just before christening the submarine, at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, Kittery, Maine, on 9 July 1918" and "being prepared for launching at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, Kittery, Maine, 8 July 1918. She was launched on the following day." I reckon the 9 October date is more likely a completed date Lyndaship (talk) 07:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Attacker-class and Ruler-class escort carrier
Most of you know this fact: US had built 45 Bogue-class escort carriers during World War 2, 34 of them were sent to UK for Temporary service as Attacker-class and Ruler-class escort carrier.

But their classes total number really confuse me when I look at their article, List of escort carriers of the Royal Navy and template.

Even their total numbers are not correct in two articles combined, 25+8=33 , 1 missing. Of course I can put one back easily but I don’t know which class need to put one more.

In fact, it is not as easy as I thought , after I checked three articles and Bogue-class template , some of the vessels might be put in the wrong class. Which means that the original total numbers of two classes might be wrong as well.

Here the total numbers of Attacker-class and Ruler-class escort carrier in serval pages:
 * Bogue-class escort carriers: Attacker 11, Ruler 23 = 34
 * Attacker-class escort carrier: 9, the infobox saids 8
 * Ruler-class escort carrier: 25, infobox saids 25 also.
 * List of escort carriers of the Royal Navy: Attacker 11, Ruler 23 = 34
 * Template: Bogue-class escort carrier: Attack 8, Ruler 26 =34

As the vessels that is not in right class order: Put in Attacker class in Bogue-class escort carriers and List of escort carriers of the Royal Navy ; Put in Ruler-class in Ruler-class escort carrier and template
 * HMS Searcher:

Put in Attacker class in Bogue-class escort carriers and List of escort carriers of the Royal Navy ; Put in Ruler-class in Ruler-class escort carrier and template
 * HMS Ravager

Put in Attacker class in Attacker-class escort carrier, Bogue-class escort carriers and List of escort carriers of the Royal Navy ; Put in ruler-class in template.
 * HMS Tracker

Since I don’t have information so need you folks to clarify two things:

1. Which one is the correct total number of Attacker-class escort carrier and Ruler-class escort carrier ?
 * Attacker-class 8, Ruler-class 26
 * Attacker-class 9, Ruler-class 25
 * Attacker-class 11, Ruler-class 23

2. Clarify the following ships. Which one is Attacker-class escort carriers, which one is Ruler-class escort carrier:
 * HMS Searcher
 * HMS Ravager
 * HMS Tracker

Thank you.--Comrade John (talk) 17:53, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Conway's 1922-1946 pp. 25-26 lists 11 Attacker-class and 23 Ameer-class (same as Ruler-class), total 34. HMS Searcher, HMS Ravager, and HMS Tracker are all listed with the Attacker-class. The "Register" by Bauer & Roberts pp. 126-129 lists the 34 British loans, but does not break out the classes. It does note that eight of these CVEs had an extra name change (total 2 British names) before commissioning in the RN, with one of these (HMS Trailer/HMS Hunter) during RN service. Four of the loaned vessels did not have a US name; just to mix things up, one of these (Tracker) has the same name listed with USN and RN; a note says it was the sole Lend-Lease vessel. To further confuse things, Tracker's hull number was BAVG-6, conflicting with CVE-6, HMS Battler ex-USS Altamaha. RobDuch (talk) 19:50, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Ottoman Empire's Mushir Rank
Hello everyone. This is somewhat related the one that I ask previously.

Four questions:


 * 1. Except German Empire, does any other foreign country leaders or generals got this rank ?


 * 2. Colmar Freiherr von der Goltz, Erich von Falkenhayn and Otto Liman von Sanders. Are these all German general got the Mushir rank ?


 * 3. I also found Guido von Usedom in the unfinished list of "List of field marshals of the Ottoman Empire", This people is the Admiral , but coludn't found he had Mushir Rank , is it true that he got Mushir rank ?


 * 4. To above the question, Based on their carrier , they somewhat got the power to command Ottoman forces in WWI. Is it mean that their Mushir rank is the real one , not honorary ?

Thank you. --Comrade John (talk) 11:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * As far as I understand it Mushir is the equivalent of both Field Marshal and Fleet/Grand Admiral and loads of countries had that (some still have). Yes, all three of them were Mushirs and Admiral von Usedom as well (though several books name him field marshal instead of fleet admiral but as said it was the same title). I´d say those promotions were indeed substantial and confered command authority but they already had that as they were either seconded to, or commanded combined forces including, the Ottoman forces and were promoted after having commanded them. Of course the promotions also had an honorary character as they were no regular Ottoman officers and would return to serve within the German forces (in which they still were commissioned) after their assignments there ended. ...GELongstreet (talk) 16:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks to reply, maybe I didn't say the second question clearly. The meaning of the second question should be this:


 * Is it true that only Colmar Freiherr von der Goltz, Erich von Falkenhayn , Otto Liman von Sanders and Guido von Usedom are the German officers got the Mushir rank , no others ?


 * First question left unanswered, Can anybody solve this one ? -- Comrade John (talk) 20:08, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * There also is, and even included in the apparently incomplete List of field marshals of the Ottoman Empire, British Major-General Charles George Gordon. Most likely there are more, maybe some around the Crimean War. ...GELongstreet (talk) 21:08, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

List

 * 1. wikitable sortable
 * 2. Yard number
 * 3. patrols
 * 4. Part of
 * 5. Commanders
 * 6. tons and GRT
 * 7. ship type
 * 8. Victories number and tonnage or No ships sunk or damaged
 * 9. Fate: Captured as prize
 * 10. Sunk > Damaged > Taken as prize
 * 11. Merchant ship > warship > auxiliary warship


 * Naval trawler and Naval drifter are consider as auxiliary warship.
 * Armed merchant cruiser is auxiliary warship.
 * Motor boat and Motor launch which owned by navies are consider warship.
 * Transport ship (owned by navies) and Hospital ship are consider as auxiliary warship.
 * Cargo ship (owned by navies) is still consider as merchant ship.
 * Warship convert to Q-ship is still consider as warship ; merchant ship convert to Q-ship is consider as auxiliary warship.
 * Sloop and Schooner are warships.
 * Any coast guard vessel are consider as warship.
 * Fleet messenger is a auxiliary warship.
 * Navy tug is consider as auxiliary warship.


 * merchant ships sunk
 * warships sunk (tons)
 * auxiliary warships sunk
 * merchant ships damaged
 * warships damaged (tons)
 * auxiliary warships damaged
 * merchant ships taken as prize
 * + Unknown GRT or tons


 * Leutnant zur See = Ltn. = Lt.z.S.
 * Oberleutnant zur See = Oblt. = Oblt.z.S.
 * Kapitänleutnant = Kptlt. = Kptlt.
 * Korvettenkapitän = KrvKpt. = K.Kapt.
 * Fregattenkapitän = FrgKpt. = F.Kapt.
 * Kapitän zur See = Kpt. = Kapt.z.S.
 * Linienschiffsleutnant = LSL. (Austro-Hungarian Navy) = Kptlt. (German Navy)
 * As der Reserve = Oblt.z.S.d.R

|label=Service record (Kriegsmarine)