Talk:Raifuku Maru

Japan: History Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 20:56, November 25, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Low

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

This article is supported by the History task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Shipwrecks

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

???

This article has not yet received a rating 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

Ships Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Two of the three sources in the article omit the SS, Google Books search yields 5 hits for SS version vs. 500 without the SS. WP:COMMONNAME, and consistency with Seisho Maru. -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:56, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SS Raifuku Maru → Raifuku Maru – Japanese ships did not routinely use ship prefixes. Majority of WP articles on Japanese merchant ships do not use prefixes. See Talk:Seisho Maru for example of similar requested move. relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC) 72.177.178.41 (talk) 12:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, this website says it had the SS. Do you have any evidence such as a ship registry entry? Otherwise it's hard to say. G-13114 (talk) 10:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment - this one needs a serious WP:COMMONNAME based discussion, because apparently both names are used in sources at times. --Mike Cline (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The move would be consistent with other articles on Japanese ships.Boneyard90 (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Convention is that merchant steamship articles are generally housed at "SS Foo" titles (except where other prefixes such as RMS, TSS etc are appropriate). No need to move the article. Mjroots (talk) 19:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Is there any evidence that Japanese ships didn't use prefixes? And is there any evidence as to whether this ship didn't, such as a ship registry entry etc? Unless the answer to both of the above is yes, then I think it should stay here. G-13114 (talk) 20:37, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Er why has this been moved when there was no consensus to move it? G-13114 (talk) 01:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Er for the reasons given in the close, and WP:NOTVOTE. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Propose removing "Myths and legends" section

Unless this section can be supported with more reliable sources, I think it should just be removed. (I just came here to disambiguate Camperdown!) —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:33, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@96.247.146.97: Thanks for your edit to support this section. Berlitz is a questionable source on some subjects, but perhaps can be relied on to describe what the legend was. Is "Mystery writers" the right thing, though? Usually that applies mostly to writers of fictional whodunits. —jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:52, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]