Talk:PS Lotta Bernard

PS Lotta Bernard has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 18, 2022. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the PS Lotta Bernard article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from PS Lotta Bernard appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 February 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the paddle steamer Lotta Bernard was described as "altogether unfit for the traffic she was employed in" after she sank?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/PS Lotta Bernard.

Wikipedia

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

Shipwrecks Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Minnesota Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tonnage

Four references were given for tonnage, one a diving site (rather than a site devoted to ships); it gives grt at 190. The others support the conclusion that the vessel's tonnage was 147 grt and 190 OM (burthen), which are consistent, as those are separate methods of measurement. I have modified the article accordingly and omitted the diving reference which is the only one to give grt at 190. Kablammo (talk) 23:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:PS Lotta Bernard/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 12:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like an interesting topic, will start soon. AryKun (talk) 12:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"PS Lotta Bernard" → "The PS Lotta Bernard"
Perhaps link for PS?
Link sidewheel and barge.
If this is the Northern Transportation Company referenced, link it.
Use "the" before all uses of "Lotta Bernard".

See Kablammo's note below.

"she began to encounter a storm" → "she encountered a storm"
Link wreck.
Link for Official number?
Link piston, bore, and stroke.
Link stern and forward deck.
"S.W. Dorsey" → "S. W. Dorsey"
"daughter, and his own" → comma unnecessary
Flour and kegs don't need links.
Link bow anchor.
"shore, and one of the group died of exposure" → "and" seems like an inappropriate conjunction here, maybe "although" or something else might be better.
"had, passed" → "had passed,"
"As of 2020 the" → "As of 2020, the"
"The Great Lakes Shipwreck Preservation Society planned to search for her on June 27–28, 2020, and if not found, they planned to search for her on September 12–13." → "The Great Lakes Shipwreck Preservation Society planned to search for her from June 27–28, 2020, and if she was not found, again from September 12–13."
Not necessary, but alt text for both images would be nice.

@AryKun: Done. GreatLakesShips (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, will be passing. AryKun (talk) 03:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the definite article before a ship's name

See this discussion. The definite article is not required, but is accepted, unless the ship has an HM prefix. Kablammo (talk) 15:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

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 Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Lotta Bernard

... that the paddle steamer Lotta Bernard (pictured) was described as "altogether unfit for the traffic she was employed in" after she sank? Source: Detroit Free Press
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Daisy Bannard Cogley

Improved to Good Article status by GreatLakesShips (talk). Self-nominated at 16:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: - To-do
Overall: Source spot checks look good and the hook is apt. The image is fine in general but you could consider cropping it for front-page display so it becomes clearer for people with larger screens; not a failure criterion, though. Only a QPQ is left to get the nom ready for promotion. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 19:17, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@IceWelder: Sorry for doing the QPQ so late. I have been relatively busy in real life, and have been unable to do many wiki-related things. GreatLakesShips (talk) 20:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely no need to apologize! Everyone does stuff on their own time. With the QPQ now done, the nom is ready to go. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 22:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting the main hook (ALT0) to Prep 4, without the image. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]