Talk:SeaOrbiter
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SeaOrbiter article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
resource
edithttp://www.euronews.net/2011/11/22/seaorbiter-ahoy/
99.181.131.33 (talk) 23:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
- Excerpt ...
If all goes to plan, construction is due to begin next year. Once completed it will be extensively tested in the Mediterranean and, sometime in 2014, SeaOrbiter will be launched into the Gulf Stream - and cast adrift for a number of years.
- 99.109.124.130 (talk) 02:20, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Translation...
editThis article is a translation of fr.wiki... You have to mention this fact somewhere to respect the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. Regards, VonTasha (talk) 18:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
"Artist's conception" removed
editI removed the "artist's conception" and the derivatives of said conception because it was of very poor quality. IMHO, it is better to have no illustration than such a poor quality conception. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note, the author of the colorized rendering left a note on my talk page disagreeing with the deletion. Since this appears to be an article with very few watchers and page views, I have requested a third opinion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Artist's note: I think what I provided isn't perfect, but Wikipedia is about editing and polishing. Someone can improve it if they don't like what I provided. Deleting it kills that process. I'm just trying to illustrate a technically confusing description and no free use image is available currently. Nesnad (talk) 18:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 Response to third opinion request:
|
| I've uploaded the logo of the project under fair use. I believe that this will serve to identify the ship while a higher quality free alternative is developed. I don't mean to offend the editor who created the illustration in any way, as I certainly could not do any better, but I don't think it was of high enough quality for use in the article. Does this satisfactorily resolve the problem?Millermk (talk) 19:11, 12 June 2012 (UTC) |
Thank you for uploading the logo and your opinion on the issue. I think the replacement of the drawing with the official logo is a good resolution. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Agree! Using the logo under fair use justification seems like the perfect solution to me. Thanks Ebikeguy (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- I forgot that English Wikipedia prefers fairuse content. I was just trying to provide something useful that was free use. Cheers, Nesnad (talk) 01:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC)