Talk:Expeditionary Transfer Dock

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/mobile-landing-platform-mlp-ship/

  Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 13:00, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 22:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

title

While the title of this article is about the type of ship ("Mobile Landing Platform"), it is written almost entirely about a class of this type, the "Montford Point-class mobile landing platform". As the class doesn't have it's own main page, (the class is redirected to the lead ship), wouldn't it be appropriate to rename this article to that specific class?. Another article could then be written about the type, with the option to add info about other classes, as they come along. - ^theWOLFchild 09:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Seems like the best idea, yes. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (Message me) 19:35, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

third AFSB

http://news.usni.org/2015/05/19/house-appropriators-trim-shipbuilding-programs-fund-7-growlers

Is the limited Congressional action on this notable yet? Hcobb (talk) 15:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

"a type of amphibious assault ship"

Not true. This ship is not designed to be a combatant. Careful parsing of the supposed citation will show it will be used to free up actual amphibs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.31.204.196 (talk) 22:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Expeditionary Transfer Dock. 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://archive.is/20131004220151/http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2013/10/8761/ to http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2013/10/8761/

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) 08:03, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

USS Robert Simanek

Here's a link, if someone would be so kind as to add it: https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/2474454/secnav-names-future-vessels-while-aboard-historic-navy-ship/fbclid/IwAR1DNTh0icqeyjIRbjj8_ThkCIOH3vXSO0xTe3AW8TinKgMyr9zcL6T-kc4/ 67.231.66.125 (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Looks like it's already there. - wolf 01:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Expeditionary Mobile Base vs Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB)

In the article, the term: "Expeditionary Mobile Base" is used for the ESB acronym when it appears that Expeditionary Sea Base is the correct definition for the ESB acronym according to the Navy. Any reason why this article uses Expeditionary Mobile Base? If so, it could use some clarification. Otherwise I suggest we update to Expeditionary Sea Base. Mekirkpa (talk) 17:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Possibly because the team of high school students who wrote this article doesn't understand the concept of acronyms...Just attended commissioning of USS John L. Canley (ESB 6) and can assure you that ESB stands for Expeditionary Sea Base.

dated information T-ESB

From the article USS Puller, I get the impression that the "civilian mariners" mentioned cannot be used because of the mission types, and that "T-ESB" is an outdated designation (now "ESB"). 90.186.10.91 (talk) 08:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)