Talk:Heritage Adventurer

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MS Hanseatic. 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/20090313135342/http://eurolloyd.com/hanseaticreview.htm to http://www.eurolloyd.com/hanseaticreview.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 21:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Erroneous data

The article3 says "...and since September 2018 RCGS Resolute...' Maybe this is a linguistic problem, but it is only June 2018 now! ExpatSalopian (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Ship's name

The ship's registered name is RCGS Resolute as per Equasis, DNV GL database, and IHS Sea-web; "RCGS" is not a prefix like "USS" or "RMS", but part of the ship's name. In theory, you could refer to it as MS or MV RCGS Resolute, but let's not do that. Thus, the whole name shall be italicized in the article. Tupsumato (talk) 06:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Official statement of Columbia Cruise Services

I have no time to edit the article, but I recommend to use the official statement of Columbia Cruise Services as a source: https://www.columbia-cs.com/statement-on-rcgs-resolute-incident/ 176.63.254.118 (talk) 08:38, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

The problem with Columbia Cruise Service's statement is that it's a primary source just those released by the Venezuelan Navy. I still think it can be used as long as it is clearly identified in the article. Later we can replace it with a third-party report (if one is ever released). Tupsumato (talk) 08:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Registered owner

While the ship's registered owner since 1993, Bunnys Adventure & Cruise Shipping Co Ltd, is marked as being a fully-owned subsidiary of Hapag-Lloyd in IHS Sea-web database, I couldn't find a public source for this connection so I removed it from the article. Tupsumato (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Although this database entry lists the company's address as being c/o'd to Hapag-Lloyd House, it's best described as "circumstantial evidence". Obviously there's nothing suspicious with the ownership arrangement — it looks like a pretty typical arrangement for a ship registered under a flag of convenience and has remained the same ever since the ship began sailing with Hanseatic Tours in 1993 — but I still wanted to include this information in the article. Tupsumato (talk) 20:19, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Neutrality of the section regarding the incident off Venezuela

We seem to be engaged in an edit war with User:Hasp Sneon regarding the incident involving RCGS Resolute and the Venezuelan patrol boat.

I have tried to write the section from a neutral point of view, using "loaded words" such as "ramming" only when describing the respective statements of RCGS Resolute's operator and the Venezuelan Navy, both of which claim that that their vessel was rammed and the other vessel is the culprit. For other sections including the summary of the Portuguese technical investigation report, I have used the more neutral term "collision".

However, as this is the first time I'm working on a topic where there are two opposing views of the incident, I'd like to invite everyone to discuss the (possible) POV issues with the article. Tupsumato (talk) 17:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tupsumato: I don't think that there has been an edit war yet. However it is good that you recognised there is a danger of one breaking out and asked for outside opinion. @Hasp Sneon: - we need to be careful of maintaing a neutral point of view here. We don't say that the ship was rammed in Wikipedia's voice. We say there was a collision and report that claims were made by those involved that their vessel was rammed as appropriate. Mjroots (talk) 05:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

"Ice class E4"?

To my knowledge there is no "Ice class E4", least of all by DNV. Ape89 (talk) 06:26, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

It's an old GL notation. I've revised the text accordingly. Tupsumato (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Update of article & review of coverage of incident off Venezuela

I plan to make a range of updates to the article to reflect the use of the vessel by the new operator Heritage Expeditions, including its refit (if I can find sufficient sources). However, in reviewing the article as it stands, I have formed a view that the content about the collision off Venezuela leading the sinking of the patrol boat Naiguatá is excessive having regard to WP:PROPORTION.

At present, the content in this article about the collision and the aftermath takes up over 30% of the content. In my view, that is too much. The consequences of the collision were catastrophic for the patrol boat Naiguatá, and clearly the incident requires full coverage in the article about Naiguatá. However, the consequences for RCGS Resolute, now Heritage Adventurer were minor by comparison. I also note that it may not be good practice to have essentially the same content in both articles, when the context differs so greatly for the two vessels concerned. I propose that the coverage of the incident in this article should be substantially reduced to probably just one paragraph, but include a Main template link to the Naiguatá article, where readers can find the fuller account.Marshelec (talk) 06:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks like the patrol ship article was substantially expanded in May 2023 to include more details about the incident. I cannot do a side-by-side comparison, but assuming no relevant information is lost, I don't have anything against trimming the section in the cruise ship article as proposed. Tupsumato (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)