Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Water sports/RNLI task force

Substitution templates
As I'm rapidly wearing out my keyboard, I've created three templates to help when writing articles. Two are for linking to lifeboat class articles and one for linking to lifeboat station articles. You just need to add a short parameter to avoid three-quarters of your typing. Enjoy! Geof Sheppard (talk) 14:47, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Lbb – Lifeboat, for example Severn will be read as Severn and so display as Severn.
 * Lbc – Lifeboat Class, for example E will be read as E Class and so display as E-class.
 * Lbs – Lifeboat Station, for example Fowey will be read as Fowey and so display as Fowey.

Huh?
Why is this part of WPWATERSPORTS? Lifeboat service is not a watersport, and rescuing fishermen is not concerned with watersports. Wouldn't it be better to be part of WP:TRANSPORT or a new WPEMERGENCY project; or WP:UK? (or WP:MED/EMS) -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Former RNLI stations
There are quite a few former RNLI lifeboat stations that were closed. Some reopened as independents but some did not and may not be mentioned at all on WP. If interested editors think there many be a significant number of these, is it worth starting an article on this topic, do you think? If so, I would be happy to take it on if I was notified of any applicable stations. Tony Holkham (talk) 12:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Help with RNLI information
Hi, I'm Luke from the social media team at the RNLI - if there is any information you'd like from our archives, please do get in touch and I'll do my best to source it from our heritage team - social@rnli.org.uk, here or on my talk page.

Where I've spotted amends to our pages (ie incorrect boat names) I've worked with HappySailor to get these updated, inline with wikipedia principles - I'm also working to get a webpage added to our site to act as a verifiable source for such information.

Alukeonlife (talk) 10:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Luke, good to know you're keen on RNLI input, as am I. There's still a lot to be done, and some lifeboat stations, each with their own fascinating history, still don't have pages on their own. I've been working on some Welsh ones, as well as the main RNLI article. There's a rich vein of information about former RNLI stations (see above), too, which should be tapped sometime. Best wishes,  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  11:04, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Should WikiProject Water Sports/RNLI Task Force become it's own WikiProject?
I was reading some articles under the scope of the RNLI Task Force, and noticed that they are not really related to WikiProject Water Sports. As there is a growing community of people who are supporting RNLI and creating and maintaining RNLI pages, we should create our own WikiProject.

Please comment with suggestions to make this possible.

Porthysek (talk) 08:15, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Linking it with watersports isn't intuitive. The RNLI was set up to help commercial shipping, it is only in recent years that leisure users have come to the fore. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:45, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, too. Agreeing is easy, though; someone would have to establish and run it - no mean task. This is not something I would currently be able to commit to, though I would be happy to help as much as I can when I get back to editing more.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  15:33, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree to move to it's own WP as not specifically linked to Water Sports. Franko2nd (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Someone tagged the task force as inactive recently but I have changed that back to semi-active as there's still activity and a need for coordination and consensus. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Boats with no name
Martin (Ojsyork) has been doing some good work recently, creating more articles, but is making heavy weather of their reception by other editors. I'm pinging other veterans of this task force to see if some discussion might help clear the air and help get us all pulling together.

One specific issue seems to be the treatment of boats with no name. This task force already has some guidance about article titles for these and there's a huge page, WP:SHIPNAME, which has a similar section.

Andrew🐉(talk) 08:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up, but I'm not editing very much at the moment, and not willing to partake in these discussions, having read Martin's user page.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  09:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)


 * The Ships project seems to be concerned with article titles. I think what we need to consider for RNLI lifeboats is how they appear in all the tables that we use on lifeboat and station articles.
 * I'm leaning towards (no name) as when it is read in conjunction with the column header it can be taken as 'Name - (no name)'. This feels slightly less clunky than 'Name - unnamed'.
 * Leaving a blank cell could be ambiguous (did we miss the name?)
 * What is definitely incorrect is unnamed or no name as the italics would suggest it is a name.
 * Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
 * When I started out updating Lifeboat pages, I did so very carefully, trying to match what had gone before. In some cases, things I'd changed were jumped on, that lifeboat pages were very precise, and I immediately reverted what I had done. For example, I didn't understand the need to leave Silloth for example, which would appear in Red as the link didn't go anywhere.
 * I'm now doing my best to create these station pages, have done 12 so far.
 * There are hundreds of pages where the boat is referred to as Unnamed, capitalized, or italicised, and sometimes Unnamed, but all with this exact text, as it is what has gone before.
 * I'm sure I may be guilty of some of the variations, but if it is agreed that some form of Unnamed, or Unnamed (or without capitals) be the convention, I'm happy to make the amendments.
 * I see no value at this time changing EVERY entry to (No Name). Ojsyork (talk) 09:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear All
 * I have tried a few different styles for the Unnamed entries, and started by revising all the D-class tables.
 * IMHO, I think that Unnamed (Small, & Unnamed with a capital U) presents well.
 * Its not italicised, and being smaller sets it apart from normal names.
 * I don't suppose Geof will alter his view, but maybe some of the rest of you will agree.
 * MartinOjsyork (talk) 21:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have no particular preference as all of the options work well enough for me.   What does the Lifeboat Enthusiasts Handbook do? Andrew🐉(talk) 10:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Unnamed Ojsyork (talk) 11:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Table format in station articles
I see absolutely no reason for this format of table. Surely the Name of the boat should come first, but in the RNLI world, this is prefixed by an Official Number, and/or an Operational number. MartinOjsyork (talk) 14:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)


 * A well-designed table uses the first column to show the way that the rows are ordered. Every station article that I have looked at has the table ordered by date. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Geof
 * "Every station article that I have looked at has the table ordered by date."
 * You are fully aware that is Not Correct.
 * All Station fleet tables were amended earlier this year to be of the same format as Lifeboat Fleet, with the ON and Op numbers first, followed by the name, service dates and class, in order to make some order of the mish-mash that existed previously.
 * The only tables that are different are the ones you have amended since my updates. Exmouth, Looe, Fowey, Teignmouth, Dart, Torbay, Plymouth, Salcombe.
 * MartinOjsyork (talk) 18:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry Martin, I think you misunderstood what I meant by the way the rows are ordered. The tables have each row in successive date order. For example:

Putting the rows into order for ON, Op No, name or class would put the rows in a different order. Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC)


 * In that case, yes, you are correct, all the station fleet tables are ordered in Service Date order, and have always been arranged in Service date order, even those showing ON and OP numbers first. Ojsyork (talk) 16:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

When I started updates, I primarily worked on Fleet tables, which have ON numbers first. Moving onto Station pages, I found a complete mish-mash of styles, and unaware of any directive on WikiProject Water sports/RNLI task force, if they needed work, they were all made the same.

I do not really have a problem with the style of table you have produced above, and if that is what the majority prefer, then we make them all the same. In Service, ON, Op, Name, Class, Comments

(I still think In Service, as it is consistent, and works better than At XXXX. At XXXX works fine for Bude, but not for Porthdinllaen, which creates a very wide column with no data. However, We discussed On Station as an alternative?) Martin Ojsyork (talk) 16:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

List of former RNLI stations
In a moment of madness, I decided I would create a List of former RNLI stations. Primarily because I know some pages already exist, Teesmouth, Robin Hood's Bay etc, which maybe aren't being seen enough. And I have some information to create more pages.

However, it needs more work, the list is incomplete, all collaboration welcomed.

MartinOjsyork (talk) 07:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

List of RNLB lifeboats
I have come across a rather curious List of RNLB lifeboats. Its introduction states that 'this is a list of notable RNLB coastal rescue lifeboats'. It has a list of about 40 links to Wikipedia articles about individual RNLI lifeboats. There is no context to why they have been deemed 'notable', nor are they in any order that I can see.

My instinct is that the page isn't needed. There have been no substantial edits since it was created in 2017 (although it is getting half a dozen readers every day). All the pages are included in Category:Royal National Lifeboat Institution lifeboats by number and Category:Royal National Lifeboat Institution lifeboats by name which have the benefit of being in a logical order. My instinct is to nominate the page for deletion, but I'm open to other editor's thoughts before I do that. Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep
 * Someone's hard work, maybe needs improving, but useful.
 * Seems a little contrived to say that all the info is included in Category:Royal National Lifeboat Institution lifeboats by number and Category:Royal National Lifeboat Institution lifeboats by name, when you have only just created those in the last week?
 * MartinOjsyork (talk) 19:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)