Talk:Moth (dinghy)

Fair use rationale for Image:MothLogo.jpg

Image:MothLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Spelling of Brett Burvill's name

Someone changed "Burvill" to "Burville" consistently throughout this document; this spelling is inconsistent with ALL previously published spellings of Brett Burvill's name in the media and mothing internet literature. If "Burville" is indeed the correct spelling, please provide evidence.

Massive reversion

I have reverted some recent major edits due to policy violations:

• Violation of WP:NOR - huge sections of original research, completely unsourced, including a section on gossip
• Violation of WP:NPOV - sentences revealing personal opinions and conjecture
• Nonconformance with WP:MOS

Please, this is a serious project, it isn't a blog. =Axlq 05:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't seem serious at all, frankly. There is no information on this page reflecting the current state of the International Moth class, apart from mentioning that it exists. When content is added which does not conform to style, it is capriciously deleted in its entirety, rather than discussed or commented upon so that the author can bring it into conformity. This hardly encourages people who actually know about the class to contribute. Wikipedia may claim to be serious, but simply deleting entire sections looks like egotism and arrogance masquerading as genuine concern for standards. You may be accustomed to roaming around deleting things, but you should perhaps consider that the page would be a lot better if people who actually knew something about the topic were encouraged to contribute, rather than written off as not being "serious". Anyone serious about improving this "serious" project would be more constructive than you appear to be. And anyone who has at least sailed a Moth is far more serious about the topic than you. So lighten up, and let's make this page better, as I have done for your sailing hydrofoil page in the past. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atypicalguy (talk • contribs) 15:09, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There is nothing capricious about enforcing the policies here.

Perhaps a review of the Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy is in order, too.

There is no such thing as "my" sailing hydrofoil page. Nobody owns articles here. I merely started that article.

As for the rest, see below. =Axlq 04:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion was moved here from User talk:Axlq:

Sorry, just learning the ropes around here. I have reviewed the relevant policies.

OK, sure the stuff you deleted on foiler Moths was unsourced. But that doesn't mean there aren't sources for many of the assertions made. So what I wrote could be reinforced a lot and thereby brought into compliance. Not all, but most of it probably.

Nonetheless, a lot of what is going on in Mothing has not been written about - anywhere. That does not make it less true. It may make it inappropriate for Wikipedia, which is fine, we have about a zillion class websites where we can put up a wiki. What I wrote was mainly a test to see if I could entice other Moth sailors (and yes I do sail one) into putting their views down, and thereby arrive at some sort of consensus as to the current state of the art. Wikipedia actually seemed the best place to do that, as the class websites are generally done by country, so sailors from Australia are loathe to put down technical details on a British site, for example. In any event, I was prepared to be corrected by a lot of people who know a lot more about Mothing than you appear to, but I was not prepared to simply have the whole article deleted at a keystroke - that is capricious and if it is constructive is remains a gratuitously destructive sort of constructivism.

So before I just put it back with a few references (of which there are a precious few), perhaps you could opine upon whether you feel the technical discussion appropriate for Wikipedia at all. I certainly am not going to try to tease out the best information from an already tight-lipped crowd only to have someone come along and delete it all because they don't like the fact that in this instance, the boats are on the leading edge, and no one has done what we are doing before, and therefore there aren't any references that will tell you that setting the angle of attack of your mainfoil is critical to getting the boat to work properly. Notwithstanding this fact, there remain many current and would-be Moth sailors who depend upon more experienced people in the class sharing information. That was where this article was meant to lead.

It occurs to me that much of what is written about the history of the Moth is completely unsourced also, and by your standard should also be deleted, despite being accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atypicalguy (talk • contribs) 06:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

To answer your points:

• If you can find sources for the assertions made, then by all means find them and re-add the content.
• If a subject has "not been written about anywhere", as you put it, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia.
• "Wikipedia actually seemed the best place to do that...." See the policy Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. In particular, see the sections:
  • Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought.
  • Wikipedia is not a blog or webspace provider.
  • Wikipeida is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
• The content you are describing, not having been published, essentially amounts to "tribal lore". Wikipedia can publish only what is verifiable in reliable 3rd-party sources, per the policies WP:RS and WP:V. Much as I enjoyed your technical discussion of the evolution of the Moth, if such technical discussion you added isn't verifiable according to the verifiability and reliable sources policies, then this isn't the place for it.
• You are correct that much of what is written about the history of the Moth is also completely unsourced. I left that in because historical information is generally verifiable, so I put a "needs citations" tag at the top of the article. The content I deleted was what basically seemed to be unwritten lore.

You are welcome to add any material back in that can be sourced. I think that in this situation where the evolution of the Moth is way ahead of the verifiable sources, it's OK to judiciously add a fact here and there that is common knowledge in the community, but whole swaths of such text will get deleted again, and not just by me. =Axlq 04:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Page is too narrowly focused & written

The entire page talks very little about the actual boat. How fast does it go? What's it like to sail one? Many sailors love fast boats but have no interest in racing against another human being. All the page talks about is (yawn) racing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.64.54.180 (talk) 07:17, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I would like to know more about how it actually sails. What does the keel look like? How does it help point the boat? Does it have a weather helm like other sail boats?. How do you steer it? But, most importantly, how does it lift up out of the water?. What are its stages of sailing? Surely it starts with the hull in the water and surely it ends with the hull in the water (else how could people get on and off). What is "liftoff" speed? What winds can it be sailed in? How hard is it to learn to sail one? 66.30.12.76 (talk) 17:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC) Gene 7/31/2014

I will try to answer most of your questions. Very specific information you asked for cannot be put in on the wikipedia page. Firstly it depends what sort of moth you are talking about -I presume the foiling moths judging by the thrust of your questions. The foils are an inverted T with the blade very slender(about 150 mm wide) and hydrodynamic. The horizontal part of the foil lifts the boat like a plane wing lifts a airplane-it all about unequal pressure. Both the foils are about 1m deep and 650mm wide. All made of carbon fibre. The foils make the moth lift from the water at about 8 knots but this depends on the point of sailing,water current speed, the total weight of the boat and crew and the skill of the helmsman. A heavy boat and sailor means the wind needs to be stronger to get "lift off".The stages are A. Displacement sailing at low wind speed(under 4 knots).B Planning(5-10 knots).C Foiling(over 7 to 10 knots). Once the boat is foiling it goes much faster than planning,15-20 knots is normal. A normal planning boat is stern down, bow up but a foiling boat is level.The skill comes in maintaining foiling when the wind is variable or marginal for foiling. This can lead to the moth rising and sinking on its foils. This "stuttering" mode of sailing is made worse by choppy or confused wave pattern. Once mastered the speed is terrific but dont expect to get it right the first time. The up/dowm mode is partly controlled with a device called a wand that activates flaps of the main foil. It takes along time to set up a foiling moth -you need plenty of space on the beach. Then you need to bodily lift the entire boat(on its side) into water about 1.1m deep. It can take months of practice and a lot of time and energy plus a lot of capsizing to get it right. It is lot easier to learn if you are youngish, agile and fit(ie work out in a gym). Most of the top foil moth sailors are about 30 and have been sailing for 20 years.You will foil much faster if you are light ie 60kg rather than heavy 90kg and your sailing venue is sheltered like a lake or bay.You need to sail in warm waters(summer) only and wear a wet suit as you spend a lot of time in the water when beginning. When tacking try not to allow the hull to sink back in the water-move across the deck smoothly and fast. Steering the moth is like nothing else -the boat feels very twitchy and changes direction in an instant. Once you get experienced this helps you maintain speed on the foils. Foiling moths are sailed like wind surfers - often angled to windward. A complete new boat cost about $22,000-very expensive for an 3.4m boat. If you crash at high speed expect to break expensive stuff and get lots of bumps and bruises. Foiling is not relaxing sailing you have to pay close attention second by second. You have to constantly adjust the sheet to stay on the foils. Fast,expensive fun but very tiring if you are not very fit.

British Moth

Is BM a "one-design" class? Surely not cos all the hulls and sails are different. Then you have Skinner and Howlett Moths. No consistency of rigging; some have centre main and others aft. Most modern sails are heavily roached terylene rather than the 1930s canvas. The hull key points have to be in a range; most of the region of 1-2" movement. Take a old 300 series hull against an 800 series: much lighter and with a quicker shape.

Whereas, say an Enterprise, is one design in that the hull, plate and rudder shapes are fixed within manufacturinging (homebuild) tolernances. And a Laser won't measure unless it has been made in the molds in Banbury. Frontmech (talk) 17:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Images needed

It would be quite helpful for readers of this article to have an picture of each class, as well as a cross section of each class' hull. Lentower (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Writing is too technical

The writing style of this article (as of [1]) is clear to people involved with competitive sailing. But this is an encyclopedia for all who read English.

So, this article needs to be edited so it can be understood by everybody. For example:

• Hull shape is mentioned in several places but why it's important, and what is unique or different for each kind of boat is not explained.
• Terms like "class" & "restriction" need to be explained. Where articles or {{Anchor}}s exist, wikilinks might be sufficient.

-- Lentower (talk) 14:39, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

A "class" means a design of yachts built to the same rules. Each class has its own sail insignia(apart from the moths which are about 4 classes that are pretty similar apart from foiling moths which are very different. Restriction means that the that apart from some basic dimensions like length ,beam, sail area, minimum weight or materials designers are free to design what they like. The tightest design class is the "one design" where all hulls, equipment, sails etc must be identical. Hull shape is important because some shapes eg very rounded,narrow hulls are fast in very light airs whereas flatter hulls that plane are faster in moderate to heavy airs. Yachting is an incredibly technical subject at the most competitive level using advanced science, maths and physics together with the latest hi tech materials and computers. On the other hand you can buy an "old timer " and just potter around enjoying yourself in the sun. Older classes tend to be of wood,heavy, pretty to looks at,small sail area and rather slow. Good for a beginner or just puddling about. Over time classes have generally got lighter and faster and more specialized with fancy hi tech sails that cost the earth. There are literally hundreds of different classes. Most International classes are Olympic class racing boats but there are many local or regional designs that are probably better(less extreme) for the average sailor. Racing yachts tend to have lots of rope controls which are very confusing for the beginner-you just see what looks like a mess of ropes. Older or cruising yachts don't need as many controls. The more sails you have, the more ropes you need. Avoid a class with a spinnaker if you are a total beginner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.62.226.243 (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I've started wikilinking to the technical terms. Is there a better reference for "wing mast" than Wingsail ? Somej (talk) 05:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)