Talk:San Juan 21

Rewrite

Nice article but reads a bit like a brochure. It'd be nice for someone (with expertise on the subject) to make this a bit more neutral in language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.100.164 (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 00:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm an active member in the SJ21 class and have reached out to fellow owners to see if I can get some class updates\edits from other owners. Cklamp75 (talk) 00:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I had to revert your additions as they made claims that were not properly sourced or that contradicted the cited refs. You will note we cannot use personal self-published websites as refs on Wikipedia, see WP:SPS, and we do not promote type clubs and other external links here, see WP:PROMOTIONAL and WP:SPAM. All text added has to be verifiable and sourced to reliable sources. - Ahunt (talk) 01:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I am not using personal self published websites... they are official class sources.

I have been involved in this class for multiple decades, have you? Cklamp75 (talk) 01:06, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

You don't seem to know what you're talking about and seem to be just throwing things out there that are made up in whole... there is no self promotion or spam involved, I am not promoting any personal website or otherwise. It's clear that links to external websites, especially class associations is permitted, as the original article even with all of it's inaccuracies mentioned the class association. So you don't seem to make any sense or have any data backing up your claims. Cklamp75 (talk) 01:11, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay now you are edit warring to try to force your own way here and you may be blocked from further editing. Your edits are not properly sourced, contradict the cited refs and are sourced to personal websites. Being a subject matter expert is useful on Wikipedia as it means you should know where to find acceptable reliable sources, but it does not give you special privileges on Wikipedia, as we do not go on personal experience but on reliable sources. For more information see WP:EXPERT and also WP:COI. I will tag the additions you made for proper sourcing required, but you need to find proper refs, see WP:BURDEN or they will be removed. - Ahunt (talk) 01:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

You're the one who seems to be edit warring since you keep throwing out accusations that are completely untrue and reverting changes where you simply could have asked for sources or more information as to my credentials.

I've already stated this, but i'll repeat it again since you keep making the same inaccurate claim.. but... There is not one single source I cited that is a personal website. You need to stop saying that, as it's not at all accurate. Cklamp75 (talk) 01:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Edited warring is explained here: WP:EW. I made two reverts, whereas you exceeded WP:3RR. The site I removed: https://sites.google.com/site/sanjuan21fleet1/boats-of-fleet-1/pgs-juan is a self-published personal website and is not an acceptable source for Wikipedia, even if it had supported the text you added. The original article text was all 100% sourced to the footnoted references and was totally verifiable. I have tagged where you need to provide references for your text added. As noted your credentials are not important here on Wikipedia, as we go by what reliable sources say, not what anyone "knows". Unsourced text will be tagged and if not supported by refs over time will get removed. - Ahunt (talk) 01:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Credentials are always important, even on wikipedia. The fact you think otherwise is problematic to say the least, and lays bare as to why there are so many inaccuracies on this page.

You removed multiple sites, so now you're not being honest either and that is proven with your edit history, so not sure why the lies? That is not a self published personal website, despite your claims to the contrary. It is an official fleet run website, and you also removed the link to the official class association website, despite that being an official class website of which similar links are all over wikipedia, shrug

So, again, it's clear you seem to be completely making stuff up. I'm not sure why you're taking it so personal this page was getting updated with proper data an information, but... not my thing to deal with.

I've reached out to wikipedia. Cklamp75 (talk) 01:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay now you are into personal attacks here, so you need to read WP:NPA which explains why that is not permitted on Wikipedia. I am just going to review any further additions you make and ensure they comply with Wikipedia policies regarding referencing and tag them where they don't. As I noted, unsourced claims will eventually get removed over time as part of the normal article review and editing process. - Ahunt (talk) 01:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I have made no personal attacks and really not sure what you're going on about now. I'm simply stating your claim that credentials don't matter is simply not accurate. You're also the one making claims that are easily proven wrong by simply looking at the post\edit history here, if you think that's a personal attack, so be it.

You can review anything you want. I'm not sure why you want to keep the page full of in accuracies when it's been proven as such with official sources, that are in the exact same category of sources as on many other OD class boats listed here on Wikipedia itself, used as references and citations.

You keep making stuff up that goes completely against the precedent already spread across wikipedia and trying to hold this page to some made up standard that doesn't apply to other pages on similar classes of boats. I'm not sure why that is, or why you think the standards need to be different for this one. Cklamp75 (talk) 03:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for providing the refs I requested. I have checked them all and made some links and adjustments. In general the refs you added cover the text claims, with two exceptions as I have tagged. The first is the claim having been raced in the Washington state area as part of Seattle based Fleet 1 for multiple decades. The ref you cited gives no date for the fleet's establishment nor that it has organized races over any particular period of time. The second is about the port transom being balsa-cored. The cited ref indicates the cabin and deck are balsa-cored but says nothing about the transom or indeed the hull at all. - Ahunt (talk) 11:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Just a note I had to revert your recent additions. The claim that somehow a sail number equals an indication of the number of boats built is not correct. We have two refs, including one you provided, that specifically state that 2600 boats were completed. A sail number is just that, a number on a sail, it is not proof of the number of boats built. Even serial numbers are not proof that that many boats have been completed. We have seen many cases where boat serial number sequences do not start at 1 (some start at 101 or higher, because no one wants to be buying the prototype) and also cases where blocks of serial numbers were not used for various reasons. One example was where a club intended to order ten boats, the manufacturer set aside the serial numbers for them, but no deposits were made or orders completed and the serial numbers were never used.

As for why we don't advertise class clubs' websites on Wikipedia, see WP:ELNO Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to: ... 4. Links mainly intended to promote a website ... 19 Websites of organizations mentioned in an article. If there are sailboat articles that have them please let me know and I will remove them. - Ahunt (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• SanJuan21s.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)