Template:Did you know nominations/Stadt Zürich (ship, 1855)

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 97198 (talk) 12:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Stadt Zürich (ship, 1855)

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that after colliding with another ship in Lindau Harbour, a Bavarian correspondent sarcastically commented that the Stadt Zürich should be sold to Denmark as it had sunk more German ships than the entire Danish navy?Source: Karl F. Fritz, Abenteuer Dampfschiffahrt auf dem Bodensee, Meersburg, ²1990, p. 34. ISBN 3-927484-00-8

Created by Bermicourt (talk). Self-nominated at 20:19, 6 September 2017 (UTC).

• the hook is catching and sarcastic (in a good way) but it missed the right format (xxx) I added it, but above all it misses the source (that I'm sure is in the article... but please add it here). Elisa.rolle (talk) 13:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks Elisa. I haven't done one of these in a while and the format seems to have changed slightly. Anyway I've added the reference. Bermicourt (talk) 14:39, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

• There are a few issues with the hook itself. First, at 216 characters it is 16 over the maximum allowed. Second, structurally it reads as if the Bavarian correspondent collided with another ship, not the Stadt Zurich. Propose:

ALT1: ... that after the Stadt Zürich collided with another ship in Lindau Harbour, a Bavarian correspondent sarcastically commented that it had sunk more German ships than the entire Danish navy? --Usernameunique (talk) 15:28, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Full review still needed. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:42, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Interesting ship with a fatal history, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. Not all paragraphs are sourced, which will need to change. I don't really care if the sources are also mentioned in the nomination, but in the article, yes, it's the rule. "It was given the nickname Teufelsschiff ("Devil Ship") because it was involved time and again in collisions ..." appears only in the lead. It should also be in the body, with a reference. Also: I think "Devil's ship" would be a better translation. For the references, please give us not only a "bare url", but also title, author if known, publisher, date if known, and accessdate. - I confess to be not happy with the hook. Sarcasm is a fine tool, but how are readers supposed to know to which war it refers? - Very generally: can we speak more about peace than war? How about a completely different hook? And how about an image? I suggest to mention that it's a ship, otherwise we read "town of Zurich" and wonder how that collides ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Bermicourt, can you address the issues raised by Gerda Arendt?

1. Uncited paragraphs (I've added three "citation needed" tags to the article).
2. The nickname Teufelsschiff (add to article—not just in lead—provide a citation, and should it be "Devil Ship" or "Devil's Ship"?).
3. Bare URLs.

For what it's worth, I do like the hook. And Gerda, it says "another ship," pointing out that the Stadt Zürich is itself a ship. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:13, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Bermicourt, I've fixed the bare URLs. Now just needs the missing citations, and clarification on "Devil Ship." --Usernameunique (talk) 22:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm happy with "Devil's Ship". The first "s" in Teufelsschiff could either be a linking letter (can't remember the grammatical term) or a possessive. Gerda is more likely to know which one it is than I. I've also tracked down ref for 2 of the incidents, but can't find anything online about the Buchhorn collision. It's probably in one of Fritz's books, but they're not online. So I've hidden the text for now. HTH. Bermicourt (talk) 19:29, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, both! "Des Teufels Schiff" = "The Devil's Ship" - "Teufelsschiff" = "Devil's Ship", to my understanding. Please change that, and have the nickname referenced, best in the body, Please also check that all pronouns for the ship are female, - I reviewed a FAC about a ship and was reminded that ships are all female in English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

I have addressed the pronouns and changed "Devil Ship" to "Devil's Ship." Bermicourt, can you add mention of "Devil's Ship" to the article (not just the lead), and provide a citation? --Usernameunique (talk) 21:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Done that. And thanks for your edits. I knew we referred to ships as "she", but wasn't following that consistently. Bermicourt (talk) 12:41, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you two, happy, although I still think something snappy like "... that Stadt Zürich was called Devil's Ship?" might raise more curiosity. - I saw in the mentioned FAC that the ship name is italic, - you may want to the same in the article, preventing the thought that we talk about the town of Zurich. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Aha, the -s- in Teufelsschiff is called a Fugenlaut and, yes, it would seem to hark back to a genitive construct i.e. des Teufels Schiff. What I'm wondering is whether normal practice in English is to drop the possessive e.g. Victoria Station, Queen Elizabeth School, but then we also have St Mary's Church, etc., so maybe there's no rhyme nor reason. Bermicourt (talk) 15:15, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

A reason could be that the Station is named after Victoria, but isn't hers, while the ship is not named after the devil but believed to belong to him ;) - One of my articles was in danger of being named St. James's, - the English and their church names, - I called Basilica of St. James then, look tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:27, 16 September 2017 (UTC)