User talk:Haus/Archive 9

Avrazya
Haus, You did so much work on the Mariam, that I hope that you will help edit an article for the Avrazya, the ship that was hijacked by Islamist militants in the Black sea in 1996 Black Sea hostage crisis.AMuseo (talk) 16:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It would also make a dramatic DKY, hostages, hijacking, explosives...AMuseo (talk) 16:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I see a Czech-flagged ship with that name here: Avrasya. Some more background would be helpful in determining what is what.  Haus Talk 17:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That is not the right kind of ship.  This would be a ferry that carried aobut 200 passengers.   The Jerusalem Post calls it a "panamanian-registered ferry."   Sometime it sees to be spelled Avrasya.AMuseo (talk) 00:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Question sur un navire français
Hi, sorry, but I d'nt know anything about this ship. I'll see if I find something about her in french and i'll tell you. Regards. CaptainHaddock (talk) 17:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Merci! When I figured out where the route was, it occurred to me that it was right in your backyard. :)  Haus Talk 17:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Ship AfDs
I've trawled the archives and added all ship articles I could find. Left off a couple of MILHIST articles though. Over to you now. Mjroots (talk) 12:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I did a awb search for ship articles with oldafdfull, so mine are skewed towards keep/no consensus. Were you ordering by date?  Haus Talk 12:50, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Chrono order is my preference. Mjroots (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
For fixing the ISO-639 new image. It did originally display correctly then suddenly it didn't. Much better now. Mjroots (talk) 10:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Greetings!


Wilhelmina Will has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Wilhelmina Will (talk) 20:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for MV Mariam
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Great work, Haus--I'm just riding your coattails. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

List of navigational stars
Hello. I noticed that you removed a column with light year distances from a table in this article per WP:COATRACK. I don't see though how such a column would've been coatracking. De728631 (talk) 23:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi. It wasn't that it created a bias, but that the distance is not germane to the stars in terms of their use in navigation.  I'm attempting to nudge the list towards a second FL candidacy, and while rewriting the background section, it became clear that including distance felt forced.  Do you have a different opinion on it?  Cheers.  Haus Talk 23:10, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I don't see anything wrong with including the distances. Someone might want to look that up and our articles are supposed to appeal to a broad readership, not only to experts on the topic. That's why I have restored the distances column for the time being. De728631 (talk) 23:14, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Would you be interested in adding a paragraph to the background section which explains why this is a useful statistic to include in these tables? I'm at a loss.   Haus Talk 23:26, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not even necessary to include a rationale for it, it's statistics and it doesn't hurt. And the topic is also related to astronomy after all. De728631 (talk) 23:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll suggest deleting the column as I go through the FL process, and we'll see what other editors have to say. Cheers. Haus Talk 23:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Alright, that's a fair solution. Cheers, De728631 (talk) 19:04, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

site gCaptain.com
I would like to discuss the blacklisting of our site gCaptain.com. We are very interested in the quality of our links and have no interest in distracting the conversation here at wikipedia. We are all mariners and consider the work you have done to promote maritime issues on wikipedia important. I very much wish to talk to you both about the blacklisting and about how we can help promote your goals here on wikipedia. Thanks, John Konrad - coFounder - gCaptain.com admin@gcaptain.com - Phone +1.805.456.8644 --Gcaptain (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note. I've watched your site grow and it's a very useful source for mariners.  What I'd like to do is point you to a couple of guidelines/policies in preparation for a more in-depth conversation.  There's a naval saying that I hear once in a blue moon on merchant ships: "The book of safety is written in blood." or, less dramatically, the rules may seem silly but they are here for a reason.  The main two that apply here are WP:ELNO and WP:SPS.  Two others that may or may not become relevant are WP:NOT and WP:NOTNEWS.
 * Wikipedia could benefit greatly from a few more active mariners. Off the top of my head, I'd be surprised if 20% of active U.S.-flag civilian ships have articles, and most of them are not very useful at all.  Some, though, are a goldmine of information for the sailor joining the ship for the first time.  Additionally, improving articles on the business of shipping such as The Jones Act, Seafarers International Union, and American Maritime Officers would help mariners and Wikipedia.
 * The hard part for mariners on Wikipedia is this: it doesn't matter what you know, it matters what you can prove. I could singlehandedly put out an E/R fire, but I can't write about it here unless its covered in a WP:RS.  The essay WP:TRUE is a useful read on this subject.
 * All that said, I'd be happy to be a resource for you and your readers while I'm on the beach. Cheers. Haus Talk 21:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

We can certainly work to have our readers help populate articles, they are passionate about sharing information online which is why a few of them probably went overboard with the links... but is that reason to ban the entire site? I don't know. The guidelines on external links is an important reference, should we (gCaptain editors) be policing the use of our domain as external links? That being said I do believe we are a reputable source as our blog is continuously referenced by the large media outlets, most recently the NYTimes, LA Times and NPR (among others) and we are not entirely self-published either as I currently am writing a book based on my blog posts about the Deepwater Horizon for HarperCollins. So what is the next step for us to both get off the blacklist but also to make sure our readers don't abuse wikipedia's policy's in the future?--Gcaptain (talk) 05:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * So, I've been following the discussion at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist. I'm sorry to say the outcome was kind of predictable.  I would underscore part of Dirk Beestra's response: "...when you need the blog as a reference, you can suggest the specific link here for whitelisting.  Still, note the existence of Verifiability, Reliable Sources and External links .. all of which this site likely to fail..."  This presents a possible route to move forward, but it may, in the end, just be frustrating.
 * Wikipedia's bar for reliable sources has been steadily rising for the past couple of years. One similar example I can point to is Uboat.net.  In the past, it has been used as a source for numerous featured articles, a strong case has been made for its reliability by a prolific editor, but recently it has been questioned, and arguments for its reliability have ended in a stalemate.  The place to make an argument for reliability for the site in general is here and for a particular citation is here.  My sense is that the former would not turn out well.
 * You mention above that the site has been mentioned by "...NYTimes, LA Times and NPR (among others)...". I tried a couple of times to find links using Google news, but didn't have any luck.  If you could provide links, there's a possibility that the site itself meets the notability guidelines for web sites and could merit an article.  If the links could support an article, I'd be willing to write it.  In this scenario, the right thing to do would be to write the article and immediately submit it to articles for deletion to determine a consensus on the site's notability.
 * In the spirit of "thinking outside a box," there is a way to generate links to your site that is universally encouraged: by donating images that could be useful in articles to |Wikimedia Commons. It works like this: if a user clicks on an image, they see information about it, including its source.  I've never seen an objection to tastefully mentioning the origin of the contributing site in an image description.
 * Cheers. Haus Talk 17:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Haus, many thanks I am still trying hard to get up to speed on wikipedia's policy, and I admit it is something I should have done earlier. I appreciate your help to that end.

Links are not an issue, we have plenty of traffic to our site, and I would be content with every link posted being permanently removed from this site. The problem is that adding us to the blacklist hurts our reputation and puts us on other blacklists throughout the internet, a penalty I don't think we deserve. So I would be more than happy to include images (One of our guys was linking to a photo of the Deepwater Horizon's BOP when he found out about the blacklist) but I do not seek to do it for recognition... the truth is I truly do appreciate the work you do in getting the maritime industry visibility on this site. It was not long ago that I felt the need to expand the first Chief Mate entry here and today countless maritime topics are populated mostly through the hard work of people like you.

As requested, here are a few of the links to articles about both me and gCaptain: Popular Media: Publishers Ready Books on Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill After Another Close Call, Transocean Changed Rules Foreign flagging of offshore rigs skirts U.S. safety rules Book based off gCaptain blog posts 1 example of our syndication on WSJ posts about the BP Oil Spill NPR - Maersk Alabama Incident And our earliest mention Ship strayed from course before spill Industry Media: NOAA Mariner's Weather Log Council Of American Master Mariners Power and Motoryacht

Also, and I am not sure it will help and I certainly don't want to swat the hornets nest, but our friends at ReadWriteWeb pointed us to this post about their difficulties with the blacklsit Why Wikipedia's Policy to Blacklist Blogs is Outdated and Wrong.

Again, I appreciate the validity of your point and your continued help. gCaptain is committed to doing "the right thing" here. --Gcaptain (talk) 18:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * As I am following the different threads here, I hope you don't mind me to post here, Haus.
 * Gcaptain. The problem is NOT that a site is a blog, the problem is, that you, blatantly, abuse over and over, your site.  Sure, there are cases of articles on professional blogs, which are proper sources.  But we are NOT a linkfarm, we don't link to information just because it is relevant to the topic, we don't link to information just because it is about the same topic, whatever.  We link to information when and if it expands the topic, when it is relevant, when it is reliable, etc. etc.  You, whether or not for commercial reasons (which does NOT matter, at all) add links just everywhere.  Just like you add a reference to your book, since the subject of the page is about the publisher of your book.  You totally fail to see what is relevant here, and what we try to do here.
 * When a site is spammed, we have to make a choice: does the site contain significant, good, perfect info. Well, blogs are lower on a list than, say, articles published by one of the major publication sites with significant peer review or editorial oversight; is the abuse going to stop when we sufficiently warn (well, clearly NOT, you have been warned over and over, even the soft solution (XLinkBot) did not help, and actually you continue to promote yourself way after your site was blacklisted).  You say, I did not see the warnings, well, if you use several different IPs and an account, and you either choose to ignore the big orange banner, or you don't see the banner since you already switched account, then the blacklist may be the only way to get the message through.  Is it used only by single-purpose editors, or are other, established editors also, significantly, using the site.  Here, the independent use was minimally, and even there, some of the things could be found elsewhere as well.  So then the choice is easy, we blacklist.
 * For all these insertions, we don't link because you think that the link is appropriate, we want you to be able to convince other editors that the link is appropriate. The onus of giving that proof has to be there before the link is inserted.  Stop your blatant self promotion and promotion of your site, that is, and that never will be a reason to include your site.  It may be if independent editors consider your site a good source (in the meantime, there is still the whitelist).  But since you show that you fail to stop your self promotion here, de-blacklisting is out of the question.  I hope your friends at readwriteweb.com do consider what is the problem, as I do think that is more why we blacklist sites, then just 'simply because it is a blog'.  And if you, and your friends at readwriteweb.com, think that our policies and/or guidelines are outdated, then feel free to start discussions there.  Thanks.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Dirk, your work in keeping WP spam-free is epic and an invaluable service to the community. Would you be willing to explore two ideas here with me?
 * The first is that the gCaptain site has an active forum section with many (dozens? hundreds?) longtime users. It seems likely to me that well-intentioned users of that forum (who were unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies) may have added many of the links.  I can understand that: some of my first edits, reverted long ago, were similar in nature.
 * The second item is a technical one that perhaps you could shed some light on. I've been scratching my head over gCaptain's comment above: "The problem is that adding us to the blacklist hurts our reputation and puts us on other blacklists throughout the internet."  I don't know anything about this, however if I was going to create a spam-blacklist for a new site, it would probably occur to me to "borrow" WP's blacklist as a starting point.
 * I doubt that any editor has been more inconvenienced than me by inappropriate links to this site. In theory, if the site owner and users were to understand and comply with WP policies, and if being on the blacklist does actually cause damage to their site, I could see supporting a probationary period off the blacklist, perhaps with XLinkBot protection enabled.  Note that I am not saying that I support this action now, simply that it is an outcome that it is possible to move towards.  Best.  Haus Talk 16:11, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Haus, I made a few comments which I am not trying to hide but reverted to let Dirk discuss your thoughts. Thanks, John --Gcaptain (talk) 22:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm going to pause to let some others chime in. In the meantime, if anyone thinks moving/centralizing this discussion would be useful, I have no objection.  Haus Talk 23:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I was going to post a longer reply here, but realized that most of my comments were mostly redundant to what has already been said at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2019/01. I would suggest redirecting further posts on this to a single location, to avoid further splintering of the discussion.  The whitelist page is probably the best place for that, although if not comfortable with that page, another could be suggested.  I did post a comment at WT:SHIPS, asking members of that project to take a look at the discussion at the whitelist page, which may bring additional perspectives on the issue. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Raider Atlantis
I notice you changed some comments I made on the talk page here; why did you do that? Is it some kind of joke? Or are you trying to make it look as if I don’t know what I’m doing? Either way it’s a breach of talk page etiquette; please don’t do it again. Xyl 54 (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Curly quotes, such as you used, cause problems with some browsers and operating systems. The browser I was using at the time silently failed to correctly recognize the characters.  I apologize for not catching it in the edit preview, but it was not malicious, and a little AGF would be appreciated.  Haus Talk 17:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah! Sorry then for jumping with both feet; the discussion involved there was a bit fraught, at the time, and I accept I over-reacted. I didn't know that about quotes: I sometimes write in Word documents, then cut-and-paste over; maybe I need to watch that bit of it. Thank you for answering. Xyl 54 (talk) 13:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Main deck
Hi there; thank you for your constructive talk-stalk. I note your naval affiliation, but I believe that we have, as you surmised a transatlantic (or trans-atlantic) usage variation here. Thank you for your interest, and any help or advice you wish to offer will be much appreciated. There are a number of warship articles awaiting attention! --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 20:56, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * My pleasure. It seems no amount of Wodehouse can cure the "American eye."  As regards other articles, maybe it's low-grade PTSD, but reading warship articles tends to render me narcoleptic &mdash; I only wade into them at odd intervals when the spirit moves me.  Cheers,  Haus Talk 21:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Selected as first recipient of Portfire40 induction
Hi. I'm contacting you on behalf of about a dozen shipping bloggers and e-publishers who established a special concept called Portfire40 a couple months ago. The idea was to draw attention to 40 persons in the shipping environment who, through a unique blend of passion and determination, demonstrate a different kind of power than the rich shipowners and such. We want to find people who create influence through good ideas and commitment. After publicising the list, many nominations came in. You were nominated, and, after an open vote of all of the blogging backers, you were selected to be the first of the 40 recipients. We feel like you fit the Portfire40 profile perfectly. You can read more about the concept here. In connection to that, we aim to announce this via a blog post, and would like to put together a fuller presentation of you, your commitment to Wikipedia on behalf of shipping and so forth. How would it be possible for me or another one of the bloggers to get in contact with you? I can be reached via [mailto:rskin11@yahoo.com email]. Redwoodskin (talk) 13:56, 22 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redwoodskin (talk • contribs) 13:53, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Interesting. I replied by email. Haus Talk 16:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Oliver Hazard Perry
Thank you for the helping hand. 7&amp;6=thirteen (talk) 16:00, 26 October 2010 (UTC) Stan


 * My pleasure, just happened to know how to fix it. Haus Talk 16:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

talk page nonsense
Thanks for reverting the nonsense postings to my talk page. He's a known vandal - I generally just revert and ignore (also blocking if actively ongoing when I see it). Glad to see others are helping to revert the pointlessness of those posts. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:52, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for rescuing Tug Atlantic Salvor from the PROD. And it's always nice to see one of my stubs grow up into a full article. --J Clear (talk) 17:26, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


 * My pleasure - I take it personally when people try to delete ship articles. :) I think if the section on the JFK tow was expanded, it would be close to good-article quality.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 17:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Maritime Trades
I noticed you just moved WikiProject Maritime Trades. I would also recommend replacing the Project template on all the articles that currently have it with the new project. --Kumioko (talk) 18:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, the idea is to leave nothing remaining under WikiProject Maritime Trades, but I can't do it instantly. Cheers.  Haus Talk 18:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem actually I was going to ask you if you wanted some help converting the template over? I there are a few thousand under MTD but I could probably do it in a couple days I think and at the same time I would fix a number of other things on the talk pages as well. Let me know if your interested or I could give you my logic if you use AWB. Or both --Kumioko (talk) 22:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually there are only 963 in the template for Maritime trades so I could knock that out in less than a day. --Kumioko (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll keep your offer in mind, but I'm thinking about approaching it in the same way I did an old project long ago. Cheers.  Haus Talk 22:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem, im sure I can find something to keep me busy lol. If you interested though here is a link to the code I use to clean up the WikiProject banners. I have about 90% of the banners and I will modify it to account for your changes as well when I get home tonight. --Kumioko (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Transportation in Edmonton
Why did you make ? 117Avenue (talk) 20:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm making preparations to add the WP1.0 b-class parameter handling to the WP:TRANSPORT banner. Cheers. Haus Talk 20:32, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * What does that do? I don't see anything about it on the documentation or talk page. 117Avenue (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Say you have an article of B-class or below. In a nutshell, it shows which of the b-class criteria have been achieved in the article.  Most implementations cause an article to be put in a maintenance category if the checklist isn't filled out, so I'm going through and addressing this potentiality before changing the template.  Examples can be seen at, for example, Talk:A_class_torpedo_boat by clicking the "show" buttons in the banner template.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 20:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 21:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. Cheers.  Haus Talk 21:13, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Rot90
Template:Rot90 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Maersk Triple E class
Hi, Thanks for giving me a nudge. Article now nominated for DYK. bobrayner (talk) 11:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mike-quill.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Mike-quill.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I undid the vandalism that caused it to be orphaned. WP:DTTR is useful reading.   Haus Talk 07:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Service award level
 There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable. Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 07:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Good job on this, Less editcountitis should lead to less wikidrama and be a net positive for the project.  Haus Talk 04:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Hyphenating ship class names
Re: the October discussion you participated in on hyphenating ship names, User:SW is willing to make a mass move with a bot if there is a consensus here. — kwami (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * For the record, I don't see any consensus for change. Furthermore, I don't agree that there should be a change.  Wikipedia article titles are noun forms.  "Foobar class destroyer" is a noun form.  "Foobar-class destroyer" is an adjective form.  Hence, the former is the better choice for an article name.  I have no problem whatsoever with a redirect from the latter to the former, however, and would support that as a bot task.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 04:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

In the tank
At the suggestion of Djembayz here, can I make a request? Do you have suggestions for good sources on builders & operators of very early oilers/tankers? Any for Canadian-built or -operated ships in the '30s (in particular by White Rose/Canadian Oil Co)? I don't need a lot of detail, just names & dates that are reasonably accurate (to the year should do it). Any help you can offer in where to look would be appreciated, & (seeing you're in deep water ;p) whenever you can get to it. (This isn't anything like urgent.)  TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura 03:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Harry-bridges-july-19-1937.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Harry-bridges-july-19-1937.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 16:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Joe-curran-time.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Joe-curran-time.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Damiens .rf 16:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Want to expand Peace in Africa for a DYK?
Hi Haus, you and Mjroots seem to have good access to merchant marine sources. Want to expand Peace in Africa (ship) for DYK? Djembayz (talk) 11:53, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey DJ. I can chip in a bit, but please understand that I'm kind of slammed right now and may suddenly disappear.  Best.  Haus Talk 12:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for links/assistance. (Hope you're not out in Irene!) Quick question: Does this Wikipedia article info on Dock Express 20 collision with tug Paul P. Hastings, (renamed Terminator) count as reliable? Is it reasonable to cut and paste this info for DYK without seeing the USCG reports ourselves? Djembayz (talk) 01:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There are a few different issues here. 1) There's a DYK rule about pasting info from other articles, it doesn't count towards the expansion.  2) Some detail about the collision is available here.  3) The wikipedia article isn't a WP:RS, but I bet that the accident made the news.
 * Also, I was hoping to get a bunch of info about the ship's engineering plant from its classification society. Unfortunately, Lloyd's Register is one of the few that doesn't offer a free database, so no luck on that yet.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 01:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Tried a DYK nom on its diamond mining and cable laying. Any ideas for alternative leads, maybe about sinking the tugboat? Djembayz (talk) 01:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This is a little on the cutesy side, but it could fly:
 * ... that in 1992, Dock Express 20 destroyed the Terminator?
 * Feel free to suggest that one if you want, I'll chew on it a bit more tonight. Cheers.  Haus Talk 02:26, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Maritime transport
Merchant Marine Databases Joined up, posted sample sailing ship template on talk page. May ping (sounds like a sub!) members interested in sail for comment. Any other suggestions? And a question: Sailing ships were certainly active in transport-- would it be useful to give them the maritime transport tag? Djembayz (talk) 00:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds great. I think sailing ships are certainly within the task force's scope.  It's probably worth noting that the scope isn't set in stone either, I hope over time it becomes more refined.  I have some thoughts, but it will probably take me a day or two to get them organized.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 08:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Took a quick look at your brainstorming page-- great start! I'd enjoy working up some more DYKs with you. Don't know the resources on the modern merchant marine like you do, I'm more familiar with sail. Do you have a link to your typical list of resources and reference material for researching modern shipping? This would be a first step on both projects. Djembayz (talk) 13:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds great. Most of the ones I frequently use are shown to the right.  I'd argue that they all meet WP:RS, however they are primary sources.  Equasis is nice in that it has info on a very high percentage of ships, but it is missing a lot of the detail that the classification societies provide.  PSIX has basic information on ships that have visited the US.  The others only apply to ships that are classed with that society.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 14:18, 8 September 2011 (UTC)  Forgot to mention, PSIX often has extensive inspection histories that can unearth interesting stories.  Haus Talk 16:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Very useful ... will leave a note when I have a chance to work on one of the ships you've suggested. Tagged a number of articles for Maritime Transport; I see that Brad 101 seems to make a pretty definite distinction between the project and WP SHIPS. He'd be a good one to get involved ... Djembayz (talk) 00:45, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Peace in Africa (ship)
The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Photos look great! Taking a bit of a wikibreak to enjoy good weather this week ... will ping when I get moving on the DYKs. Djembayz (talk) 23:30, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 42958d8d5df058d9c628933ad4602f2b
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Notice to mariners
Sorry, I didn't realise my stuff-up. Thanks for fixing. Tony  (talk)  03:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries & thanks for taking the revert in the spirit of co-operation in which it was meant. I'm in a strange work-rhythm now, but hope to be able to take another swing at it mid-week.  Best.  Haus Talk 03:50, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Non-free ship image
Template:Non-free ship image has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair winds and following seas in 2012

 * Thanks DJ. I hope you're enjoying the new year too.  I'll be sure to say hi when I some time for editing opens up.  Best.  Haus Talk 09:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

recent changes to ss edmond fitzgerald article
Hello Haus - you recently edited the article SS Edmond Fitzgerald by deleting facts added by Cgclimited.

Deep Sea Systems (DSSI) was an integral partner w/ the Michigan Sea Grant Program in the initial planning and the successful deployment of the 1989 expedition. Deep Sea Systems and Chris Nicholson designed and built the Mini Rover Mk2 and the 3D stereo imaging system that were fundamental to the success of the mission. This was the first underwater use of 3D stereo imaging in the history of underwater shipwreck exploring.

These are pertinent and verifiable facts. What was your reason for editing this article by deleting these important facts?

We feel that the article is incomplete without this information and it needs to be included. Please reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geraldtjr (talk • contribs) 19:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The changes apparently have issues, as they've been made and reverted a few times. The correct place to discuss the change is at the article's talk page Talk:SS_Edmund_Fitzgerald.  A edit war, where parties continually undo each others work is not a productive use of time.  I suspect the issue can be resolved by providing citations to reliable sources which support the information, although there may have been issues with the prose.  Happy editing.  Haus Talk 19:11, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Calendar for TOC
Did you mean to strike the first sentence of your comment? Compare the compact calendar-style TOC at List of shipwrecks in January 1939 with the normal TOC at List of shipwrecks in February 1939. That large area of blank space in the latter is what I'm trying to avoid. As for tabular format, I'm working at removing such formats where I come across them. It is easier to read, easier to edit and reduces the number of references needed (i.e. 1 ref insted of five or six per entry). Mjroots (talk) 15:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I like the calendar. If I were revamping the lists, I think I'd explore a tabular format, but if you've considered and rejected the idea, then that's no problem.  Best.  Haus Talk 15:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for MV Spiegelgracht
Orlady (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Any additions to Malahat (schooner) at DYK?
Hi again! I've put in a self nom for Malahat (schooner) at DYK. Perhaps you can spruce it up a bit. Djembayz (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey DJ. Fun article & well referenced! I expect the DYK crowd will make a few tweaks as it goes through the process.  I wonder if "1,300,000 feet" should be "1,300,000 board feet"?  The wikt link can be done like this: infamous.  I bet someone's gonna raise an eyebrow at the exclamation point, but it ain't gonna be me :).  If there's anything in particular you'd like help on, let me know and I'll see what I can do.  I'm no expert on the era when ships were made of wood and sailors were made of steel. :)  Best.  Haus Talk 01:44, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Anne (1799 ship)
Mo chara dhílis - so you can do a whois to see where I am 84.236.231.17 (talk) 01:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I might add some details of the mutiny to that article. Lugnad (talk) 01:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Bulk carrier
Hi Haus. I was going through Good articles that have been tagged with templates and noticed one on Bulk Carrier. You seem to be the most prolific contributor and it looks like an easy problem to solve (unfortunately not for me). The "hull" section is tagged with technical and the reason given is ''Full hulls? Hull curvature? Why are they more efficient? "cross-section typical of most merchant ships"? More info, please, either here or in other articles with links...'' (for some reason this is not showing on the template). As it is currently a good article and the request is clearly good faith it would be nice to update the article. Regards AIR corn (talk) 01:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Students from California Maritime Academy
Hi Haus. We have a bunch of students from the California Maritime Academy coming up through the Wikipedia hawsepipe ... seems like you're the person to welcome them! Here's their class assignment page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:United_States_Education_Program/Courses/Information_Fluency Djembayz (talk) 12:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

declined prod - a question
You declined the prod at NACA Report No. 123 based on the unfinished discussion at Articles for deletion/NACA Report No. 761 but the dicsussion at Articles_for_deletion/NACA_Report_No._133 ended in consensus for deletion as not suitable for wikipedia, and I was wondering if there was some aspect that had been overlooked in discussion. GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Graeme. I think WP:BUNDLE makes more sense here than prodding some and creating separate AfDs for others.  My own opinion, shared in a few comments on the AfDs you mention, is that we should transwiki all these documents to wikisource and delete.  Cheers.  Haus Talk 13:39, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)