Mansell123

Thanks for your advice you left on my page. I have made amendments according to your suggestions. Mansell123 (talk) 14:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene Platon

Thanks for help. Cheers.

Platon 10:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sabot

I added a Sabot (dinghy) article. I really don't know much about it other than that it is a well-liked dinghy similar to the Optimist and El Toro, and, I think, pre-dates those, and, indeed, one version of it was the inspiration for the El Toro. Since the Dinghy template had Optimist and El Toro, I thought it should have the Sabot.

I have been sort of thinking about the sailing class templates. There are lots more that are left out. I will try to add the ones that are most deserving. Last fall I saw a list of world championship raggatas ordered by the number of boats that participated, and I will try to go back and find that and then add any of those boats that are not included.

Tayleur

The book by Ed Bourke Bound for Australia - The loss of the emigrant ship Tayleur, A detailed look at the loss of the full rigged clipper "Tayleur" off Lambay Island. ISBN: 095230273X, does say that that Tayleur was a clipper. I hope that you don't object. I restored the word 'clipper' to the article --ClemMcGann 12:59, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mayflower trip

Within wikipedia worldwide I found different dates concerning the trip of the Pilgrim Fathers in 1620:

September 06 till November 11, Old Style or the Julian Calendar

and

September 16 till November 21, New Style or the Gregorian Calendar.

TDK

Sub-Categories

Thanks for your work fixing some of the categories in the boating articles (Francis Joyon, Philippe Jeantot). Just one little thing — because Category:French sailboat racers is a sub-category of Category:French sailors, anyone in French sailboat racers is automatically in French sailors. It's therefore redundant to leave both categories in an article; you should just put the most specific category — Category:French sailboat racers in this case. That's why you don't have to mention categories like "people", "French people", "Sportspeople", "sailors", etc.; because Category:French sailboat racers is part of all of them, so they're included automatically. Cheers, Johantheghost 12:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thames sailing barge

Hi there, could I ask you you to cast a critical eye over this article? And perhaps solve some of the Qs on its Talk page? It's an article you've contributed to before, but I've recently given it a big copy-edit to introduce headings and make it more Wiki-like, so feedback from a Knowledgeable Person would be wonderful. Very many thanks, JackyR 22:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - that's great. I'll make sure that lot gets into the article (pls feel free to do it yourself...). Any thought on the two minor Qs at the bottom? Is a "champagne glass section transom" a known boat-building term, or just a poetic comparison? Cheers again for all your help! JackyR 20:34, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday Times Golden Globe Race

Hi, Sunday Times Golden Globe Race is up for peer review, with a view to deciding whether it is ready for the FAC process. I would welcome your comments on it. Cheers, — Johan the Ghost _seance 14:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I thought you might be interested to know that the Sunday Times Golden Globe Race article is now up for FAC. If you like, I'd welcome your comments on the FAC review page. — Johan the Ghost _seance 16:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sailing Table

I have noticed that you have done some edits on sailboats. I am working on putting a table with the boat ensignia and specifications on every page. If you do any more edits on sailboat pages, I would love it if you added this table (edit it how you like). Thanks Minnesota1 03:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Minnesota1 03:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Specifications Under Current Rules

Image:420SailingFlag.jpg

Number of crew	2 (Single Trapeze)
LOA	4200mm 13ft 9in
Beam	1651mm 5ft 5in
Draft	965mm 3ft 2in
Hull weight (with fittings) Int./Club	100/104kg 220/230lbs
Sail Area of total of Main and Jib Int./Club	13.05/?? ??/110sq.ft
Sail Area Spinnaker Int./Club	9/?? sq.m. ??/95sq.ft

OK Boatman 12:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interest in ships and history

I can see you are interested in sailing, ships, boats and related history. You may find interesting information in the articles Framnæs shipyard and List of ships built at Framnæs shipyard. Contributions in the area are also most welcome. Nordby73 09:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will take a look. Boatman 15:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International Catamaran Challenge Trophy

Good to see you taking this on. I got as far as I could and ran out of sources of material rather too early. Will you also be able to have a go at its sister article at International C-Class Catamaran Championship? I hope so. Fiddle Faddle 23:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will see what I can come up with but it will take time as sources of information are fairly limited. I well remeber reading about these races at the time so many of the boat names are familiar Boatman 07:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- That was precisely the challenge (pun intended?) that I ran up against. The records are sparse. I became interested in C Class primarily because I sailed Tornados and knew Reg White and his son Robert because of the comradeship of weekend open meetings. They, of course, never knew me! I can't find my copy of "Catamaran Sailing to Win" which has some of the details, but I will keep looking. Fiddle Faddle 08:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redhouse Yacht Club

The Redhouse Yacht Club article to which you have contributed has been nominated for deletion due to lack of independent references and a concern that the Club may not be notable enough for inclusion at Wikipedia. I do not agree and am contesting the deletion. As a prior editor of this article, I am asking you to help in the process of clarifying these issues.

Sincerely,

--Kevin Murray 23:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Knud Olson

Thanks for your support on Knud Olson. I spent two hours cleaning up an article like this from the clean-up backlog because I recognized Olson's name and knew of the importance of the OK dinghy (I sailed one as a boy) and the Folkboat movement. Then some pisher like Virek, whose obviously never gotten the seat of his pants wet, comes along and wants to delete the article. How is a guy like Virek different to a vandal? I wish there was a way to restrict the power to make deletion recommendations to those who actually do something useful (like writing something) or know the first thing about the subject at hand. Frankly, I grow weary of the tyrrany of the unqualified opinion. There's a whole band of these ignoranti prowling through the stacks. Your thoughts? (Out of a sense of fairness, I will post this on Virus's page as well.) PeterHuntington 17:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is very frustrating. Nominations for deletion seem to range from articles which are one sentence long through to fully detailed articles. A nomination for deletion needs to have some sensible reasons stated for the nomination. I cannot see an easy way around this problem. Boatman 09:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ellen MacArthur

Hi there. I've made a reply to the points you raised re the MacArthur criticism section. Cheers, Labcoat 16:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I've responded to your recent discussion posting. Cheers. Labcoat (talk) 11:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Boatman. Thanks very much for the feedback on my User page. Although I disagree quite firmly with the edits that have been made to the Criticism section, I'm not sure whether we can go any further with that particular discussion (in any valuable way) since I have no further comments to add. I privately suspect that MacArthur will become an increasingly controversial figure in coming years. Cheers, Labcoat (talk) 09:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

America's Cup

Louis Vuitton Cup

Structure

Can we discuss about the new structure of the article ? Actually I think that the previous one was more clear for someone who doesn't know anything about the LV cup. What is your mind about that ? Talk:Louis Vuitton Cup 2007

Anyway I haven't changed anything yet. :)

Thank you for your help, particularly for this article. :)

--Mrpouetpouet 14:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are very right, the previous one was clearer so I have changed the structure back again. Thanks for your input Boatman 20:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Honor is mine ;) --Mrpouetpouet 22:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delta or Margin?

Final and Semi-final have Delta, Rounds robin 1 and 2 Margin. Which one? --Mrpouetpouet 17:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

* Not sure which is correct?  Possibly 'delta'?  Any ideas?  Boatman 21:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- According to the official site, it's Delta. So why don't we write "Delta" in the results' tables but with a note which explains the reader what means Delta (=Margin) ? --Mrpouetpouet 16:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where the LVC results should be, honestly, as the results come from the AC website. I do agree that as it is a separate competition the results should be on the LVC page. I was just continuing the existing effort on the AC2007 page. mpbx 08:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created a new page and moved the info to Louis Vuitton Cup 2007, I left the introductory paragraph on the LVC, with a link to the main article, and added a heading for the America's Cup Results proper. I also changed the link in the table on the LVC main page for 2007 to the LVC 2007 page. mpbx 08:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dhou boat construction on ESPN 3

Boatman, I really do not understand why you deleted a source of interesting details regarding the construction and racing of Dubai's dhows during the Louis Vuitton Trophy series; but if you feel that your deletion is an improvement to a Talk page, then perhaps you and I would disagree on a great number of things. I think that you should reconsider your deletion which you labeled "chat". Moreover, I think that you should read the guidelines surrounding Talk page material, rudeness, and good faith, and lastly I think that you should view the ESPN 3 segment to see for yourself what a disservice you have done to others looking for details on dhows. Don't bother answering me; I'm not interested in anything you might have to add to this discourse. 24.49.38.184 (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Anonymous, A Talk page is primarily for talking about the article content with the objective of improving the article. Many readers read the article and never look at the talk page. So I recommend you include your material in the article Dhow. If you believe it is relevant to the Louis Vuitton Trophy series then include in that article also. Thanks, Boatman (talk) 07:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A note of thanks

MarnetteD has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I wanted to send this on to you for all the hard work that you have been doing on the America's Cup and Louis Vuitton Cup pages. I thought that today's race was a thriller.MarnetteD | Talk 18:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A question about the America's Cup defender series

Well I was in the middle of writing a long winded question about the fact that I thought that I remembered that the defenders regatta cup had received a brand name in the same way that the challengers cup had become the Louis Vuitton Cup when I was able to answer by going to the page for the LV Cup and seeing that it had. So now my note alters a bit in that I want to point out that the LV Cup is mentioned in the main America's cup article but the Citizen's Cup isn't. I could take a stab at adding it but I would prefer to defer to your knowledge of all things to do with this situation. I know that you may be too busy to work on it at present but I will look forward to anything that you can add when you have time. I hope that you are enjoying the races so far. As this is the first time that the regatta is being held in Europe I am having fun getting up early (coverage starts at 6:30 am here in Denver) to watch the drama unfold. Cheers and thanks again for all you are doing here at wikiP.MarnetteD | Talk 18:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thanks! The selection series for the defender indeed used to be sponsored by Citizen watches. I will add some clarification later. (We are away on vacation for the next 10 days so I will be away from a wiki). Although I am a Brit, we live in France so the hours to watch the racing are more sociable than in Denver! I agree the racing is excellent particularly because the boat speed of the top syndicates is very even which makes the crew element of wind prediction, tactics, boat handling etc absolutely critical. Boatman 20:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome and let me just add that I hope that you have a wonderful time on your vacation. MarnetteD | Talk 21:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Boatman. From the moment some bright spark entered that New Zealand had won the Cup on the page for this years regatta after race three all of the luck seemed to turn against them. That ripped spinnaker and the ensuing mess in race five was painful to watch. But to have the final leg of the final race unfold the way that it did was about as heart pounding as it gets. Please don't think that I was being impatient or forcing your hand, but I found a spot to get the Citizen Cup mentioned on the main AC page until you have a chance to expand on it. I put it in the "see also" section. I also tried to put some wording with it to try to explain why it is there but I am not entirely happy with it. If you can think of something better please feel free to alter it. Are the really only going to wait two years before the next regatta? If so that will be a pleasant change from the long waits that we have had recently. Thanks again for you time. MarnetteD | Talk 12:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Fantastic AC 2007 and if the next AC is in two years particularly with the new design then the event has really has come alive. Good job on your Citizen's Cup updates Boatman 20:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for your kind words but it looks like Mrpouetpouet removed the notes. Now I can understand this with the LV Cup as it is mentioned in the article but the C Cup is not and I feel that without the note there won't be any reason for anyone to click on that link to learn more as they have no idea why it is in the see also section. Well we will have to see what he thinks. Cheers and have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 21:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question about this years America'a Cup

Hi Boatman. I hope that your vacation was a good one and that you are enjoying the regatta so far. I gotta tell ya I don't think that I have ever seen a race quite like yesterdays. I thought that it was as thrilling as it gets. I have one question. I have noticed that there are two bouys at the leeward mark. I think our announcers said that this was the first time that this had been used in the AC (I was was messing around the house at the time so I could have misheard). Is this the case? If so do you know why and should we note it on either the reg AC page or the page for this years cup. My thanks for any info that you can share. MarnetteD | Talk 00:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great vacation thanks and also great close racing! I was dreading a 5-0 series. Good question re 2 buoys at leeward mark to which I don't know the definitive answer but I have a feeling that this is the first time in the AC. It introduces an added dimension to the tactics and should be included/explained in the 2007 America's Cup article if true. I will try and get confirmation Boatman 15:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:America's Cup

Oh, I deleted it because it was written for 2007 but not for the editions before with same boats name. I thought it was an error. Do not hesitate to modify my edits if you think they are wrong no problem. (In this case we'll have to put each name of winner's and runner-up's boats since the number 1. I think it'll be better in small characters but i didn't test it.)

Thx again for the great job on 2007 louis vuitton cup, 2007 america's cup etc....

see you mate

--Mrpouetpouet 21:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mrpouetpouet. rgds, Boatman 12:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barker

Cheers. I hadn't even realised that I'd started the article. Although I guess that explains why it is on my watchlist. Cheers for the good work, and certainly worth keeping pov edits under wraps. Ooh, which reminds me, there is a good need for me to write probably the only other nautically-related article I ever will. --Limegreen 23:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Knud Olsen

Knud Olsen, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Knud Olsen satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knud Olsen and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Knud Olsen during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have intervened in the Afd to save the article by reducing it to a stub to remove the copyright violation. It can now be rebuilt with care, avoiding any copyright issue. Copyright was the issue here, however due to the nature of the GNU Free Documentation License under which Wikipedia content is released, it is not sufficient to obtain permission to use copyrighted text, the article needs to be written using your own words. Is that OK? --Malcolmxl5 08:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification Boatman 06:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Knud Olsen

Greetings, Boatman. I have revisited the Knud Olsen article and added a short biography. I expect that the article will be stable now with no more attempts to delete it though I have watchlisted it just in case! Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 16:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits and support Boatman 14:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Burgee_of_nyyc.svg‎

Thanks !--Banderas (talk) 12:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boat infobox

Hello,

I'm going to create an infobox for similar articles relating to dinghies and skiffs, as mentioned here. I have started the template here.

I can see from your edits that you are highly knowledgeable in this area. Can you add any pointers or direction to this project?

Thank you. Timneu22 (talk) 13:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I found an existing template. Timneu22 (talk) 14:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Challenger of Record (America's Cup 2000)

I've created the page for italian wikipedia of it:America's Cup 1992, it:America's Cup 1995, it:America's Cup 2000. I need your help because I don't know the Challenger of Record of this edition. --Noname-en (talk) 10:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After lots of Google searches I discovered that the Challenger of Record for the 2000 America's Cup was the New York Yacht Club represented by Young America Boatman (talk) 17:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits?

I couldn't help but notice that all your edits are tagged as minor. I assume this is an oversight on your part? Pjbflynn (talk) 05:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! Thanks for pointing me to the definition of minor. I had made a minor assumption which turns out to be a major one! Boatman (talk) 18:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cox & Stevens

Cox & Stevens was a yacht design firm, which employed Philip Rhodes, until he took over the business post WWII, under his name. Stevens was from a serious yachting family including one of the originators of the America and the cup series. One of the Cox brothers went on to form Gibb & Cox. An interesting story with scant information. Can you help? --Kevin Murray (talk) 18:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kevin, I doubt if I have any source material of my own but I will do some research and try to assist. Boatman (talk) 10:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gretel II (yacht)

A tag has been placed on Gretel II (yacht) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. MuffledThud (talk) 10:59, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Gretel II (yacht), a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. MuffledThud (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

I would appreciate your comments on Talk:Sailing_faster_than_the_wind#Prillen.27s_edit_of_23_February_2010.--Gautier lebon (talk) 15:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic sailing pictogram

Hi Boatman,

Besides the 1900 and 1908 Olympics all Olympic Sailing pages had a pictogram of a windsurfer on it. I replaced this with the Olympic 2008 sailing pictogram. This one has much more relevance than just a windsurfer. Furthermore it is a little more indifferent so that it can symbolize boats as well as surfers therefore I think it is more in place for the Olympic sport of sailing. Ideally it could be replaced by the pictogram of a specific Olympic year. Only this started (as far as I know) in 1972.

I hope this clarifies the matter.

Regards NED33 (talk) 10:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cunningham (sailing)

I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look at my comment at Talk:Cunningham (sailing). Thanks, . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 21:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

Dear Boatman, I would appreciate your comments on the dispute at Talk:Sailing_faster_than_the_wind#factual_Dispute.--Gautier lebon (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eden Kane

had four top-10 hits 1961-2. Rothorpe (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Tiptoety ^talk 15:12, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drascombe

I've added a new section on the Drascombe talk page explaining why I added a link to the Webb Chiles website. Could you explain there why, in your opinion, the link isn't appropriate for adding in the External Links section of an encyclopedia article please? ← ZScarpia 23:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted in Drascombe talk page. Boatman (talk) 20:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mean Machine

OK, I'll work on that, but I think the title should also be changed to just "Mean Machine", because that's the name of their boats too. Best regards.--Banderas (talk) 12:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Boatman (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

America's Cup venues

Hi Boatman. I am not sure if you are aware of the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_December_23#Category:America.27s_Cup_venues.

Would you agree that it would be better to have a section at America's_Cup about the venues and courses instead of a category of venues?

Today, the category contains six venues: Auckland; Cowes; Fremantle, Western Australia; Newport, Rhode Island; San Diego; & Valencia, Spain. As a reader, I'd be interested in reading about the venues, and even the competitions courses. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks SmokeyJoe. You make a very good point. I have left a more detailed reply on the discussion page (which you referenced above) Boatman (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Yachts by name

Please don't depopulate categories whilst they're still at CfD. This can be seen as an attempt to bias the discussion, by making categories appear to be less used than they were. If you read the category template (on the category page), it's even quite specific on this. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I understand. (However c50% were mis-caegorised irrespective if the category keeps the same name or is changed). Thanks for the mesg, I will stop 'till the decision is made. Boatman (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Remove the cat (or more likely the supercat) if it's inappropriate (which is probably because both are being used at once). Much of the call for CfD though seems to be because they're being mis-used, not because the cat itself is wrong. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2013 America's Cup venue

I saw that you changed the intro of the article on the 2013 Cup to indicate that it would take place in San Francisco Bay. Is that certain? Isn't it possible that the races would take place off-shore?Gautier lebon (talk) 08:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am reasonably sure that the races are in the bay because emphasis was placed during the venue selection process that the city of San Francis provides a 'natural amphitheatre' to view the races in the bay. I changed the 2013 Cup intro to the bay because I thought it best to link straight to the racing location and the bay article has a link to the city of SF. Whereas a link to the city probably means most readers will not see the (excellent) article on the bay which provides a lot of relevant info for sailing novices and experts alike. I thought that I would test the water on this (excuse the pun!) before also changing in the main America's Cup article. Appreciate your comments. Thanks, Boatman (talk) 11:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the extensive reply, which makes perfect sense to me. But some purists might object if there is no citation, so I would suggest that you add a citation which shows that indeed all the emphasis during the selection process was on San Francisco Bay for the reasons you mention and also, presumably, because the thermal winds in the bay are more predictable than the off-shore winds.--Gautier lebon (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good suggestion. Boatman (talk) 09:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011

Before removing a category to an article, as you did to Chris-Craft, please make sure that the subject of the article really doesn't belong in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. Srobak (talk) 02:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Srobak, ref above. Exactly, my edit does conform. Why? Boats is a high level category with subcategories. Chris-Craft belongs in an appropriate sub-category/sub-categories. Wikipedia has hundreds of articles on 'boat-builders' and 'boats'. As an example there are 209 articles in the Category:Dinghies, should they also appear under Category:Boats?? No as it contravenes Wiki guidelines. I recommend that you reinstate my edit and check if there are some other sub-cats which could be added to Chris-Craft to make the article visible from the appropriate places. As always I stand to be corrected if I have missed your point. Thanks, Boatman (talk) 08:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Sail Spars

Template:Sail Spars has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 21:43, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic triangle categorisation

Hi Boatman, thanks for your message. There doesn't seem to be any sub-category for sailboat racing or dinghy racing or other sub category into which an article on a popular sailing course configuration or sailing course would sensibly fit and be browsed intuitively by someone, including a dinghy sailor looking for an article. You will seen that On course side is a page under the main category, yet you believe a page regarding a course is not an appropriate page in the category. I would welcome your suggestion as to how to categorise Olympic triangle so that it is within the Sailing master category. I note that the wiki Sailing project seems to have little about sailboat racing (other than that much of the general sailing topics also relate to racing. Having been very active in sailing the Heron dinghy and being President of the NSW Heron Sailing Association, a club treasurer, a club training officer, a PRO for an Australian Heron Nationals and a member of two YA NSW committees (Youth and Training) as well as competing in inshore races as a crew member on yachts of 30 and 40 ft I am quite interested to see further development of the Sailing category as a whole. I welcome your suggestions, but don't think yacht races is intuitive for dinghy sailors to find information on sailing course and other dinghy racing information. dinghy (talk) 04:32, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Phanley, I 100% agree but with a few caveats. Although it has settled down a little there are many opinions re sailing versus yachting, yacht versus day boat versus keel boat. Is a catamaran a yacht? When does a dinghy become a yacht? What is the definition of a sailboat? Do we go sailing or do we go yachting? This makes categorisation for intuative browsing tricky. What I am trying to say in a very poor way is that there is no strict definitions or types and categories of our sport. On course side, Olympic triangle relate to racing irrespective of the size or type of boat. Hence dinghy sailors, catamaran sailors, America's Cup sailors etc etc should all go to the same place.....but where? I suggest that both are temporarily categorised in Category:Sailing rules & handicapping pending a more obvious category. The top level sailing category should only be populated with sub categories and have zero articles and I think that we are probably only left with articles that do not have an obvious category. I have a strong interest in categorisation. I am also interested in making the wiki Sailing project more active but I have not as yet spent any time understanding the wiki structure and approach to this. Boatman (talk) 21:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to consider and reply. I couldn't see any obvious solution. cheers dinghy (talk) 10:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Boatman. You have new messages at Rothorpe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OpenSeaMap

Hello, may be you can update the page using the German version? Thanks, Markus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.8.142.23 (talk) 08:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Markus, I think you may have the wrong person here as I do not speak German and I am not knowledgeable re OpenSeaMap. Thanks, Boatman (talk) 08:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of America's Cup host cities and venues

The article America's Cup host cities and venues has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

incomplete, not notable?

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mattlore (talk) 02:46, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

City of Adelaide (1864)

As you are a previous editor of City of Adelaide (1864), you may be interested in the Style Proposal on Talk:City of Adelaide (1864)
ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 22:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Forces on sails

I invite you to look at the discussion at Talk:Forces on sails#Expert attention and elsewhere in the Talk page, which I have just tied to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Sailing. There are two parallel efforts, one in the main article and one in the sandbox. It appears that the two editors are unlikely to reach a consensus as to which approach is more appropriate to WP:MOS. It would help, if other editors would look at both efforts and comment at the Reorganization? section. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 17:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Boatman. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of USA 87

The article USA 87 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable yacht.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:34, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]