Talk:Type C6 ship

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 March 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Temporary Subpage Created

A temporary subpage Talk:Type_C6_ship/Temp has been created for this article in response to Copyvio as detected by duplicate phrasing.

[1] The source link contains detailed technical information regarding this class of ship. Since the design and specifications are the work of a US Government Agency the website owner can certainly use them but cannot claim copyright to that government material. (Although the same website may have other narrative descriptions and images where copyright can indeed be claimed.)

[2] The article did use source text “a traditional house engine room center vessel with 4 hatches forward and 2 aft” which has now been re-written. However the other phrases detected are generic, e.g. “bow thrusters”, “remained in service”, “transferred to”, etc.

[3] This source also contains technical information and design specifications which are the work of a US Government agency. The website owner however does have copyrighted images, and is entitled to copyright his narrative text. I have edited any close phrasing to the descriptive narrative text. Most of the duplicate phrases however are names of shipping companies and shipping lines, as well as generic text. How many different ways can it be said that a vessel “was scrapped in 1985” and “laid up at the suisun bay reserve fleet”? These are phrases that must be used regarding the history or ships regardless of the author or source. The phrase match also detected as duplication the web site titles mentioned in the references. No way that can be avoided. NightSt✷r (talk) 16:51, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I listed all of the sources I saw that contained phrases that were copied. Most detections will have simple things like "bow thrusters" and I ignored them. Do you have any reason to believe the non-statistic things on the pages are PD? The first detection here jumped out at me. I might be a little overly cautious here, I just want to make sure everything is fixed. Thanks. Ryan Vesey 18:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to the first phrase ..crane ship by dillingham ship repair portland oregon in 1986 and renamed grand canyon state t acs 3 I can see where it might cause some concern but the shipyard is what it is and where it is, and the repair was done when it was done, and the ship name and classification is what it is. In the interst of quickly resolving this matter I will change it rather than argue. (If you had told you were using Duplication Detector this would have saved a lot of time and grief. I had not been aware that it existed.) NightSt✷r (talk) 20:47, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]