Template:Did you know nominations/General Frisbie (steamship)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

General Frisbie (steamship)[edit]

(
)
General Frisbee at sail, c. 1909
General Frisbee at sail, c. 1909
  • ... that General Frisbie (pictured) sank two ships and disabled a third, was demoted to Commander and ended life as a salmon cannery? Source: Sank two ships: [1] "Steamship Sehome Rammed and Sunk in Bay by General Frisbie", [2] "Steamer General Frisbie Pokes a Hole in Bow of St. Helena". Disabled a third: [3] "Bay Steamers Collide Near Mare Island—Iroquois is Damaged; General Frisbie Continues Trip ... the Iroquois tied up at the Mare Island quay wall." Name changed to Commander is between [4] and [5] (AGF - I can't access the second). Became salmon cannery: [6]

Created by Jordanroderick (talk). Nominated by Mortee (talk) at 01:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC).

  • Comment to say that I think the hook might work better without the image and in any given set there may be more exciting pictures anyway. I include it because it's an option and because I'm genuinely impressed with Jordanroderick's work here and I would be delighted to see it in the lead spot on that basis. › Mortee talk 01:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Also, there are sources for Commander's career as a salmon cannery, and for her later being dismantled, but no source directly stating that she was still a cannery then. "Ended life as" could be changed to "was turned into" to avoid any potential for WP:OR in the hook. › Mortee talk 13:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: If you are happy to run without the image this might make an interesting Aprils Fool's Day hook. Something like: "... that despite sinking two ships General Frisbie was demoted to Commander and late in life worked in salmon processing?". There is precedent for this day to omit the italics for ship names to preserve some of the mystery - Dumelow (talk) 06:28, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Jordanroderick & Mortee, thanks for bringing this interesting article to DYK. Review of original hook follows: article moved to mainspace on 24 August; article is well written and greatly exceeds minimum length; I find the structure of the article a little disorientating with different sections for ownership history, structural history and service history rather than strict chronological order but I am happy to accept this as a stylistic choice by the author; article is generally referenced throughout to reliable sources. However there are missing references for the sentences:
  • "He and a couple of other long-time steamship captains formed an underdog competitor to the dominant Black Ball Line of the much larger Puget Sound Navigation Company. The ship was renamed Commander by its new owners."
  • "Bellingham Bay Improvement Company owned both a lumber mill and waterfront real estate in the area, so both parties may have been involved."
  • "At some point during her time in San Francisco Bay, she was modified to carry 12 cars, loading through a side door. This small capacity was not competitive with purpose-built car ferries of the day."
  • "It is not clear whether this was part of the initial Seattle refit."
  • "The large smokestack associated with the old steam engine was replaced by two much smaller funnels. A cargo crane was installed with the mast rising from the new pilot house and the boom swinging over the foredeck. A smaller crane was installed on the stem."
  • "The thick fogs in San Francisco Bay meant that groundings and collisions were frequent in the local ferry fleet. General Frisbie had its share of accidents."
  • "No one was harmed in the collision."
  • "Ironically, Fred Olsen, captain of the sunken Sehome, had been captain of the General Frisbie when it collided with the Iroquois in 1912."
  • "The ferry dock in Bremerton was (and still is) within walking distance of the naval shipyard so the workers did not need car service."
No copyright violations detected; hook is interesting and I am happy to go with the original if desired (though I would amend it to "was later a salmon cannery" or similar, per above); hook fats appear to be backed up by reliable sources, I am unable to access the newspapers to confirm this but am happy to accept them in good faith; QPQ has been done. Once the extra references are added this one should be good to go - Dumelow (talk) 06:46, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Guys. Thanks again for your comments on how to sharpen this up. I've made a few changes to respond to the comments, and I have a few questions on some others.

  1. I added a citation regarding the business activities of the Bellingham Bay Improvement Company that mentions its real estate and lumber operations.
  2. I added a citation on the Iroquois collision and changed the text to mirror the newspaper account. Instead of no one was harmed the passengers are now badly frightened.
  3. I added citations showing the Olsen was captain of both vessels.
  4. I'm not sure how to deal with the comment on the competition with the Black Ball Line. It seems to me that the history of the competition between the two companies should be in the Puget Sound Navigation article or the Kitsap County Transportation article (or both), but not in the General Frisbie article since she played a small and short part in the drama. I put this sentence in to give context to General Frisbie's role in events. I could certainly expand it to include more of the history, but this seems off topic to me. What do you think? Should I take it out?
  5. I have been unable to pin down definitives date for the modification for cars and the new boilers. I know they happened since they are referred to in the citations, but I don't know when. How would you like me to treat these? Are you saying that if I can't pin down the date I should take them out? Or is it that the citation needs to be closer to the text?
  6. The comments on the smokestack, funnels, crane, etc. were made from inspection of the photographs. I actually went to the Anacortes Museum to examine the originals. For example, I have a picture of Commander as a ferry with no crane and a picture of Commander as a cannery with a crane. A crane was clearly added. How should I handle this?
  7. As I mentioned the Bremerton shipyard is next door to the ferry terminal. Thinking back on my last visit, I'd guess it is a 100 yard walk at most. I'm not sure how to document this. The proximity clearly shows on Google maps, for example. What sort of citation should I use?

I'm a newbie to Wiki, so I'm sure some of these questions have well-settled answers. I'd appreciate it if you could give me your thoughts. Thanks!Jordanroderick (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jordanroderick. This is a great article, especially for a new editor like yourself. Keep up the good work! The missing citations I picked up on because they were at the ends of paragraphs. A single citation can cover multiple sentences but the last sentence in each paragraph should be cited as a minimum, as otherwise the source can be lost if, for example, the succeeding paragraph is moved. To address your specific questions (I edited your comment above to create a numbered list for ease of reading, hope you don't mind):
  1. No issues
  2. No issues
  3. No issues
  4. I don't mind either way. I think it might be worth keeping as it adds a bit of colour to the article. If it's kept we just need an appropriate citation for the information
  5. The information is useful to the article and not having the date doesn't matter. We just need to associate the correct citation with the sentence.
  6. Great work on finding this information. It's snippets like this that aren't available elsewhere that make Wikipedia unique. I think it would be appropriate to just include a citation note stating where the information came from, if you have a reference number for the photographs that'd be great. If not just a note stating where they are from is fine. We just need to point the reader to the right place if they want to check it out.
  7. A text based note could be used as the citation, you could even link to Google Maps. Again, the key thing is to make it obvious to the reader where they can verify the information presented.
Hope that helps. This article is looking really good, just a few finishing touches and it will be good to go. I hope you continue making articles, if you ever have any queries about editing feel free to get in touch at my talk page and I can try to help out - Dumelow (talk) 18:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, those comments are helpful, and I'll work through them. In the meantime, I do have a question. What started me off on this research was an old photograph of the ship that came into my possession. It's quite dramatic and I'd love to include it, but I don't want to violate the Wiki's copyright rules. It was taken by a professional maritime photographer named Harry Kirwin (the back of the picture has a rubber stamp with his studio address on it). The ship is pictured in dry dock, so it came from either the 1931 conversion to a Seattle ferry, or the 1937 conversion to cannery. Since it has its old smokestack and pilot house, and doesn't have cranes on the foredeck, I'd bet on the former, but the picture isn't dated so there's no way to know for sure. I have found no record of this photo being published, even though Kirwin worked for a local newspaper. Kirwin died in 1988 and my genealogist wife can't find any surviving family. Is there any way under the rules to upload this picture? Thanks!Jordanroderick (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Probably a no-go for the photograph - unpublished works are generally copyright for 70 years after the death of the author. If it was published at some point before 1990 there's a reasonable chance it could be used as a lot of the time they were issued without copyright notices or with defective notices - Dumelow (talk) 20:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dumelow, did you mean 1890, rather than 1990, in the above? Thank you for your kind and detailed review. I agree that this could work well for April Fool's Day but, as that's seven months away, I'd prefer to feature this sooner. I'm sure I can find some good April Fool's material to nominate between now and then! Of course, if Jordanroderick would like to hold on, I've no objection. › Mortee talk 20:50, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Mortee, if the publisher neglected to attach the right copyright notice then things published in the US in the 20th century can be public domain. For example: commons:Template:PD-US-no notice, commons:Template:PD-US-not renewed, commons:Template:PD-US-1978-89. Doesn't help us in this case though as there is no evidence of publication - Dumelow (talk) 21:37, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Oh, I see. I was confused because I wasn't emphasising the word "unpublished" enough when I read your earlier message. I thought "hang on, but this picture is from 1937, what does 1990 have to do with it?". Thanks for explaining. › Mortee talk 21:43, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, Thanks for the advice on the picture. It's too bad, but that's the law. As for the rest, I've added three citations and am working on some others. I'll give you a shout when I get the list completed. In the meantime, I just wanted to mention that I don't really care when you use this article for DYT. I'm just grateful for the help in learning how to edit a Wikipedia article. I'll leave it to you experienced folks to figure out how best to handle the timing. Thanks!Jordanroderick (talk) 20:59, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

A highly admirable attitude. Personally, I vote for impatience › Mortee talk 21:43, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I realise I did a half-edit earlier, and struck ALT0 (to avoid any hint of speculation) without specifying an ALT1. These two are very similar; I'm torn between having the link up front and avoiding a less-smooth un-linked section in the middle. Maybe leaning ALT2:
ALT1 ... that General Frisbie (pictured) sank two ships and disabled a third, was demoted to Commander and was turned into a salmon cannery?
ALT2 ... that after sinking two ships and disabling a third, General Frisbie (pictured) was demoted to Commander and turned into a salmon cannery?
The sources are the same as for ALT0. Naturally, '(pictured)' will go if the promoter decides not to include the image, or if we wait til April. › Mortee talk 21:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'm done. 1. I reworked the text around the Black Ball competition so that it more narrowly focuses on Commander and the actual text of the newspaper articles. 2. I have moved the references regarding the boilers and auto capacity to the text. 3. I have added a reference regarding the cannery conversion which cites the pictures as authority for the changes mentioned. 4. I added a text citation and a link to Google maps regarding the distance between the ferry terminal and the Navy yard. I hope that works. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks!Jordanroderick (talk) 00:25, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

  • Thanks Jordanroderick and Mortee. Both Alts above approved. I prefer to rephrase "turned into a salmon cannery" to something more ambiguous (eg "later worked in fish processing") to preserve the confusion between man and boat but will leave this up to the promoter - Dumelow (talk) 07:01, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Sure, I like that approach too. Thank you again for the review, and to Jordanroderick for getting the article to this point. › Mortee talk 21:04, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/General_Frisbie_(steamship)&oldid=860183829"