Talk:SS Kronprinz Wilhelm

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Other crew members[edit]

(Lux)[edit]

Heard about this anecdotally, adding the info here in case a solid reference can be found to include it in the article later:
Hans Fredrick Wilhelm Lux also served on the Kronprinz Wilhelm during the 251-day journey. He was born as a Dane, just north of Flensburg, Germany. At 14 he joined the Merchant Marines to avoid being pulled into military service, but when he was 16 he snuck ashore to visit his mother and was caught trying to get back aboard his ship and was consequently forced into naval service. He had a knack for determining distances over water, a useful skill in the days before radar! Elonka 05:04, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

   Is being born as a Dane anything like being reincarnated as a Frog?
--Jerzy•t 07:37, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred von Niezychowski[edit]

   Her executive officer was a count, one presumes by descent from the Polish nobility that had run that country prior to one of the partitions of Poland (which IIRC benefitted the second Reich), and held (i assume by inheritance) a title from the Second Reich. He wrote a memoir, The Cruise of the Kronprinz Wilhelm, settled in Detroit after the ship was surrendered due to IIRC lack of fuel or provisions, ran for the state legislature, and told war stories c. 1959 and perhaps later yet. His memoir was published (at least in the US) by then.
--Jerzy•t 07:24, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes[edit]

I'm concerned why someone keeps putting a "no footnotes" tag at the top of this article. It seems to me that there are plenty of sources already, in a "General Reference" style. See WP:CITE#How to present a reference, which shows that there are many valid ways of sourcing an article. Now, if there's information that anyone wishes to challenge, then by all means, add a {{cn}} tag. --Elonka 23:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The correct tag is {{inline}}. It is usual to place it at the top of the article/ Mjroots (talk) 04:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just because a tag exists, doesn't mean it's always appropriate to use. Per WP:FOOTNOTE and WP:CITE, footnotes are not required in an article. Footnoting is just one of several alternative ways to present citations. The key is whether the information in an article is "challenged or likely to be challenged". Now, if someone wants to add inline citations, I have no objection. But let's not tag an article for "missing" citations that it doesn't need in the first place. --Elonka 05:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Citations are not required for every statement in an article, but it's generally regarded as appropriate to have at least one cite per paragraph, otherwise it becomes difficult if not impossible for readers to know where the information came from and therefore whether or not it is correct. Gatoclass (talk) 08:59, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That may be true for WP:FA class articles, but it's not required for every article on Wikipedia. We're all admins here, so I'm actually surprised that we're having this conversation. But let me try again. There are many possible citation styles on Wikipedia. One of them is to have footnotes in every paragraph, this is true. But this is not a required format. Per WP:CITE, there are several alternate methods of citing an article, one of which is "General Reference", where the sources are included at the end of the article. See also WP:CITEHOW, which states, "where there is disagreement, the style used by the first editor to use one should be respected." I am the first editor of this article, and I used a General Reference style. It's a perfectly acceptable style. Now, if anyone has a reasonable challenge to any of the information in this article, by all means add a {{cn}} tag. But before doing this, it would be wise to review the essay at Wikipedia:When to cite, especially the part about "Challenges should not be frivolous". Or in other words, before tagging, consider if there is a reasonable concern that anything in this article is untrue. If so, feel free to challenge it. But if the challenge is just "there aren't footnotes", then that is not a reasonable challenge. Now, please, can we all get back to more important things in the project, like sorting out nationalist disputes, and cleaning up articles that really need cleanup? --Elonka 15:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just FA anymore, you can find the same basic requirement at GA and even humble DYK these days. Like everything on Wikipedia, standards do tend to change over time, and a higher standard of citation is now commonly expected for articles.
In regards to the "General reference" section of WP:CITE, what it actually says is:
If a source supports a significant amount of the material in an article, it may sometimes be acceptable to simply add the citation at the end. It serves as a general reference, not linked to any particular part of the article. This is more likely to be appropriate for relatively undeveloped articles or those covering a very simple or narrow topic
So even there the use of "general reference" is highly qualified, and deemed appropriate only for "undeveloped" articles or those heavily reliant on a single source. In this case, the article is reasonably well developed, and also has plenty of references listed, so I don't think the "General reference" standard could be said to apply in this instance. Gatoclass (talk) 06:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Four Flyers.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:The Four Flyers.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:The Four Flyers.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:07, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on SS Kronprinz Wilhelm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:12, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Iceberg survivor[edit]

The incident where it crashed directly into an iceberg and lived in 1907 ought to be added.184.186.4.209 (talk) 18:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SS_Kronprinz_Wilhelm&oldid=1213814832"