Talk:Ice Boat No. 3

A fact from Ice Boat No. 3 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 June 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the second USS Arctic (pictured) received her commission in spite of being described as slow, unwieldy and vulnerable to shellfire?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ice Boat No. 3.

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

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Description of painting[edit]

I noticed the painting from 1877 describes the ice boat towing a ship with a damaged mast. Yet in the picture I do not see a broken mast. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odin156569 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The original flickr image says nothing about a broken mast either: "This painting depicts City Ice Boat No. 3 towing a ship through the ice in the winter of 1877. 0il on canvas, 1877. American. George Emerick Essig (1838 - 1923)."

I also cannot see any broken mast, so I have removed the "broken mast" bit so it just says "towing a sailing ship.

Best --Rushton2010 (talk) 19:10, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

User:Gatoclass and I have a disagreement ([1]) regarding inclusion of File:Independence Seaport Museum 018.JPG in the article. Gatoclass points out it's a variation of File:City Ice Boat No. 3 by Essig.jpg. I agree it is a variation, but it is not the exact same picture - style and details are different. As this article has ample space to fit few more images, I think we should include it. PS. Note that the painting is scheduled to have it's perspective corrected within few days (Commons backlog for perspective corrections is not very long). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:01, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I already found this image long ago, when I was researching the article, and rejected it as basically a black-and-white version of the painting already in the article. Yes, the author of the sketch changed a few details of the surrounding landscape, but the image of the ship itself and what it is doing are virtually identical so it adds nothing of interest to the reader. If you think the article is short of images, there are others on the net which are more useful than this one, I can add an additional image if you like. Gatoclass (talk) 10:08, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added another image. Gatoclass (talk) 11:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not relevant to the third opinion

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I had to pull the image because on closer inspection the pilot house is completely different and this could be a case of mistaken identity - it might be one of the other ice boats. Gatoclass (talk) 11:39, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the image - it appears this vessel was a double-ender, with slightly different pilothouses at each end. Gatoclass (talk) 12:15, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for a third opinion. (Note: the image Gatoclass discusses in his last few comments is a different image than the one I am asking a 3O on). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, we probably have enough images of this ship on Commons to justify a category there, and the commonscat template here. Would you be so kind and create it? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Gatoclass (talk) 07:18, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Response to third opinion request:

Hey Gatoclass, Piotrus, I do think the photo is fairly redundant to the one already in the current article. I don't feel it really adds anything. In fact, I had to look back and forth twice to realize that one wasn't an exact black-and-white version of the other (I was flipping quickly, but still). I think the article itself has a fair amount of photos that make it visually appealing, though if you have a photo that's definitively varied from the others, then by all means I'd recommend getting it in there. I hope this helps! GRUcrule (talk) 20:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]