Talk:List of shipbuilders and shipyards

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Tidying?

With regard to tidying this article, would it not make more sense to have the companies listed by their most commonly known names, then split those bits into the subsidiaries that merged into it (For instance Vosper Thornycroft should be split into Vosper and John I Thornycroft, similar to how the formation of the Carnival Corporation & plc article has been done) This may make it easier to find the information people may be looking for quicker. Which at the end of the day is the whole idea of an encyclopedia. JonEastham 13:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have made a quick idea of what it would look like and have also added a couple of US yards it can be seen here: User:JonEastham/Sandbox - JonEastham 13:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better to have the shipyards listed alphabetically and then make note in each what happened to it otherwise you have to deal with British Shipbuilders. I believe "Vosper Thorneycroft" is probably still what "VT Shipbuilding" is called by some so i would avoid "commonly known names". GraemeLeggett 14:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the United Kingdom first in the list. Shouldn't it be an alfabetical list with the UK just before the USA? Lordmarchmain 23:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I presume because the article was based on a personal project by a number of editors to list UK shipyards... Emoscopes ^Talk 23:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just corrected the list order into an alphabetical list. In my opinion this is more like an encyclopedia. Anyone care to add more to the list? Lordmarchmain 20:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see some other Bangladeshi's [BD] are came here for enrich it. Mamun2a (talk) 12:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Holy moly. I've never seen so many formats all mixed together. I don't know where to start. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there one table format that would be suitable for all? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:40, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some US Shipyard stuff

User:Dual Freq/Shipyards has some material I collected a while back. It was kind of a Naval Vessel Register cross reference to current name or wiki-article name ,but the format I used significantly differs from this list. It might be useful here. --Dual Freq 23:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list needs to be updated. Some names have either shut shop or have not yet started operations. 121.240.34.114 (talk) 09:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability tag removed

This list brings together related articles about shipbuilding and is useful for navigating, as per the discussion on when "useful" is a valid arguement.

Agreed that cleanup is needed-- but even in its present state, this page allows you to locate shipbuilding companies and shipbuilders in a way that the categories do not.Djembayz (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tidied up

I just removed all the redlinks, and info covered in the articles. I did this to make the article less of a mess, and to dissuade people from turning this list into a yellow pages with urls everywhere. I hope that it's an improvement. At least it's now consistent throughout instead of all sorts of different formats. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox

There's a navbox in this section. I've never seen on placed in the middle of an article. It seems useful, but strangely placed. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lot of information which is collected by hard work is removed. like Bangladeshi shipbuilders and other countries shipyards information's. Why? is it not possible to keep that data to some other place for reference??? Mamun2a (talk) 10:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may have a good point. Do others watching this page have a view? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking of restoring some of the content I removed during cleanup. It's been gnawing at me. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's been months, and nobody's rendered an opinion. I think I will restore some of the content from this version. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:19, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of shipbuilders and shipyards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070930185518/http://www.coltoncompany.com/shipbldg/ussbldrs/prewwii/shipyards/atlantic/bethwilmington.htm to http://www.coltoncompany.com/shipbldg/ussbldrs/prewwii/shipyards/atlantic/bethwilmington.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:19, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

stp

(...) edit, or maybe, me and who wanna have full list page , for ourselves , notable (lame bs) and a full list, ok ?! .
List of all shipbuilders and shipyards , or some s** (like that). This maybe can put an end of this nonsense (and waste of time).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.250.24.45 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should read and understand Wikipedia's Core Content Policies. Also if the concepts of Notability, Verifiability, and the idea that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information are not clear to you, you can ask about them at the Tea House. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages buy adding four tildes at the end. -- Alexf^(talk) 00:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WILLIAM ALBERT ROBINSON SHIPYARD

William Albert Robinson shipyard. Ipswich, Mass. Approximately 1937-1945

significant builder of predominantly wooden vessels during WW II 24.119.119.2 (talk) 01:25, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only for currently operating yards and shipbuilders?

AN IP user has recently removed a large part of the defunct yards and shipbuilders. Shall we keep this list only for operating ones and should we have another, separate list for historical ones? Gwafton (talk) 09:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I would have one list limited to currently active shipyards only. If such a list for historic yards is desired that would be better separate (but probably unwieldy). - Davidships (talk) 02:36, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]