Talk:Finnish pollution control vessel Louhi

Response to possible plagiarism claims from the Lamor article

Before anyone else notices and starts yelling "plagiarism", I would like to point out that this article was mostly written before Lamor NewsReel 2/2011 was published on Lamor website in May 2011 — the dates can be checked from the article history. As an unexperienced editor, I decided not to take action even though I found out that the author of the article in the company newsletter had copied some text almost word-to-word from this Wikipedia article which was at the time largely translated by me from Finnish sources — I was more or less okay with that and was not very familiar with our policies regarding reusing content from Wikipedia. Afterwards, I added the NewsReel article to the references and fixed some factual errors that Lamor had corrected in their article, but retained the original wording. Tupsumato (talk) 11:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Article name

Greetings, This article is about a ship and not Finnish pollution control. If all the extra words are wanted they need to be as a disambiguation such as Louhi (Finnish pollution control vessel). If there is no source for such naming then Louhi (Oil recovery vessel) is referenced (what it is called), and shorter than Louhi (multi-purpose oil and chemical spill response vessel), that is also referenced as a ship designation. It may not be specific enough but;

• Louhi (ship) follows a form of naming convention (subject to change) and would match the red linked Finnish oil recovery Linja (ship) when it is created. I would say this would be the more likely alternative unless consensus wants the country added as Louhi (Finnish ship). The word Ship is a lot less ambiguous than vessel which can mean a lot of things. Otr500 (talk) 18:59, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Remember that Louhi is a commissioned naval vessel, so you have to follow WP:NC-SHIPS for military ships. FNS Louhi could work, but there isn't a single source that refers to the ship using that prefix that fulfills WP:RS, so I would rather steer clear from that. Thus, we're left with "<nationality> <type> <italicized name>". "Pollution control vessel Louhi" gives a number of hits, but that's probably also because the article is named that. Still, there's for example the designer's website that uses that term. I personally would avoid including "multipurpose" to the article name; it just means Louhi is a pollution control vessel that can deal with many types of pollution (not just oil) and has other tasks as well.

Note that in the same "ship name family" we have Finnish minelayer Louhi. There was also an icebreaker that was named Louhi in the Finnish Navy, but since it wasn't the ship's original name, that article won't be named Finnish icebreaker Louhi but Sisu (1938 icebreaker) (or whatever the naming convention mandates when I finally get around to write that article).

Tupsumato (talk) 21:05, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

I was just throwing out examples--LOL. This is a time when I guess year of launch could be good for disambiguation, and it is being pushed for change, but that may not work for Finnish ships as I see they use an IMO number. ''Louhi'' (FNS) is possible. This ship along with Finnish pollution control vessel Hylje and Finnish pollution control vessel Halli all share a common "can not be the correct name" issue. The example "Louhi (Oil recovery vessel)" is referenced. The other ship "Linja (ship)" must also be considered. The Halli has reference to that name, as well as HALLI (IMO 8515556). Might not want to forget the Finnish pollution control vessel Seili (www.tradewindsnews.com/daily/461884/slick-response) when more information is available. Should be interesting to see what comes up. Maybe you will have some prudent ideas? Otr500 (talk) 03:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Louhi (FNS) is clearly against WP:NC-SHIPS; the correct name would be FNS Louhi (999). However, as I said, I couldn't find a single reliable source that refers to the ship using the prefix, so I'm against using it. That leaves us the format I mentioned above (<nationality> <type> <name>), but we seem to disagree about the type. The same applies to Halli and Hylje. Also, they all have IMO numbers as well, but so what? Tupsumato (talk) 05:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Considering that this is not a widely-watched article and any name change will affect a number of other articles, I dropped a message on project talk page to draw attention from other editors. However, the discussion should continue here. Tupsumato (talk) 05:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks. Otr500 (talk) 22:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Louhi (ship) means a full-rigged ship named Louhi. The current title fits our naming convention for Finnish Navy ships. As the vessel is not owned by the Finnish Navy, it could be housed at MV Louhi if a different title is desired. Mjroots (talk) 06:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

...in which case we would be inventing a new way to refer to the vessel as no-one has ever used "MV Louhi". Tupsumato (talk) 10:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

As a commissioned ship in the Finnish navy (regardless of formal ownership by another arm of government), the title should follow practice for other single ship articles in the contemporary Finnish navy - but then I discovered that there aren't any, apart from the three PCVs - all the other blue links on List of active Finnish Navy ships are just circular redirects back to the Class article (personally, I dislike that practice very much as it raises false hopes of more content). Anyway, following current WP:NC-SHIPS, and the proposed updating, the current title looks just right for a country that does not normally use a national prefix: Finnish plus succinct description plus Name. Davidships (talk) 21:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I, on the other hand, dislike the practice of making articles for each individual ship even though there isn't really any additional content. That's the case with most vessels of the present-day Finnish Navy — none of them have done enough to warrant an individual "career" box. Tupsumato (talk) 05:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't disagree with that either. But as Louhi does have a comparatively substantial article a combined one for Finnish Navy PCVs might not work. Davidships (talk) 19:03, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, while all Finnish missile boats belong to either Hamina or Rauma class, the Navy-operated pollution control vessels are all different from each other. Tupsumato (talk) 04:39, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Why not just "Louhi (ship)"? It's simpler than "Finnish pollution control vessel Louhi" and avoids the no-sourcing problem User:Tupsumato mentioned above for "FNS Louhi (999)". —Lowellian (reply) 03:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

This would refer to a full-rigged ship as User:Mjroots mentioned above. Don't ask why, but that's how it is in the current naming convention. Furthermore, why would this commissioned ship of the Finnish Navy be treated differently than another commissioned ship of the Finnish navy of the same name? Tupsumato (talk) 05:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Where in WP:NC-S does it say that "(ship)" refers to a full-rigged ship? I don't see anything in the guideline that says that. —Lowellian (reply) 12:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Your guess is as good as mine... Tupsumato (talk) 12:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Then "Louhi (ship)" should be the title, since the naming convention doesn't say anything about a full-rigged ship. —Lowellian (reply) 20:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually, Louhi (ship) should be a disambiguation page as I can come up with at least three Finnish ships named "Louhi" (the minelayer, the icebreaker and this one). Tupsumato (talk) 17:33, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

For info, there is a current discussion re rewriting WP:NC-S at User:Saberwyn/Proposed ship naming and disambiguation conventions update. Editors are encouraged to participate in the discussion. Mjroots (talk) 06:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

I more than dislike "circular redirects" and needless redundancy. These are oftentimes only used to make red links show as blue. I was confused until I realized the goal was just to make many hundreds of blue links that is actually, lacking an article, a red link. I ran across a whole project based on making red links blue.

If "Finnish pollution control vessel Louhi" follows a naming convention then I submit, from an encyclopedia point of view, that the convention is flawed. If one wishes to find out about a ship named Louhi ( that would actually be the subject) they would likely search the name. This will produce hits that includes Louhi, a Finnish mythical queen, and on that page Louhi (disambiguation) that includes the ship. If we were going that route (the long way) then again, "Louhi (Finnish pollution control vessel)" would be more logical, practical, and correct from an encyclopedia point of view. I am not a fan of parenthetical disambiguation (especially unnecessary), but "Louhi (ship) sure looks better. "Louhi (year)" would certainly be ambiguous and "Louhi (vessel)" is too vague. BTW -- Louhi was issued an IMO number and is reportedly owned by the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) and manned by navy personnel. Otr500 (talk) 00:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Finnish pollution control vessel Louhi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720195314/http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?contentid=378337&lan=fi&clan=en to http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?contentid=378337&lan=fi&clan=en
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120322134845/http://www.smu.fi/viestinta/nettijutut/arkisto/nettijutut-2010/j-m-kontio/ to http://www.smu.fi/viestinta/nettijutut/arkisto/nettijutut-2010/j-m-kontio/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614050021/http://www.lamor.com/2011/04/finland%E2%80%99s-newest-oil-spill-response-vessel/ to http://www.lamor.com/2011/04/finland%E2%80%99s-newest-oil-spill-response-vessel/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC)