This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I came here off the Wikipedia:Most wanted stubs page, made additions and destubbed the article. I had User:Beland check the work and he removed the stub class rating that Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history had on this talk page and reccommended that I request they classify it. If it has areas that need to be improved or are missing I hope they will list them here after their review is done.-- Wowaconia 16:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Assessment was made below-- Wowaconia 20:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Text removed from brigantine:
Brig redirects here, for an alternate use see: Brig, Switzerland
The target article does not exist. Suggest adding
This article is about the sailing vessel. For the town in Switzerland, see Brig, Switzerland.
if and when it does (assuming it's a town). Andrewa 17:17, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The town has a wiki-page moving last suggested formulation to top of article suggeston.-- Wowaconia 16:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
There are more articles named brig so went with other uses tag.-- Wowaconia 16:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
All the sources I'm seeing are saying that to be a brig both sails must be square not as the current article says "at least one". I think the modern usage takes precedence and its not as modern as you might think because I found a LOC ref to a brig George Washington had and they say that at that time 1774 there was already a common distinction between Brig and Brigantine. I'm going to change this if I find historical usage that indicates that at one point a ship could be a brig with just one square sail I'll note it in a historical perspective segment.-- Wowaconia 01:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
This info is all in the segment "Development of the brig".-- Wowaconia 18:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think these articles should be merged, while the brig evolved from the brigantine they had seperate histories after that and to try and weave them together into one article would confuse the reader. When these articles were both small that might have made sense, but I think this article can now stand on its own and perhaps the brigantine article should be cleaned up and expanded.-- Wowaconia 18:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Just looking over the article, I would say expanding the introduction and adding an infobox should be enough to move this up to "B class" status. For now I still think it is a "Start-class". Cheers-- Looper5920 19:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
These were added and Looper5920 upgraded class to B.-- Wowaconia 20:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I alphabetized the list of brigs. Removing the Mary Celeste, as the painting on her page makes clear that she was a brigantine. Chrono would likely be a better order than alpha, but I wasn't quite up for that. -- Akb4 20:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, my English is very bad. I hope, you'll nevertheless understand me.
What you describe is no Brig, it" a Brigantine: Brig has both masts full square-sail-rigged! Brigantine is different in having main mast full or partetly fore-and-aft sail rigged. That this is not only my opinion and aswell not based on different definitions in engl. or german did show me aswell your own article Brigantine:
So of course aswell the Lady Washington is no brig, but brigantine and her foto is here wrong. As wrong as the whole infobox: Place of origin is not Mediterranean - might be Atlantik, might be Chanal. Weight, length and crews are nonsens, brigs are only specyfied on their rigg: if you'll build tomorrow a 100-m-2-mast-square-rigged ship, it will aswell be a brig. Please, change these misstakes, before no-sailors will begin to lough. -- Skipper Michael 18:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
It is hard to understand what you are saying. There are references provided concerning the rigging if you take issue with them provide alternative references backing your position. The Lady Washington (recreation) is a brig as shown on her own article page and if one follows the external link to her own internet homepage it states the same thing. Remember within Wikipedia any claims you wish to make must have references to third-party experts.-- Wowaconia 16:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Am finding conflicting info regarding the use of Brig Unicorn from St. Lucia and its appearances in Pirates of the Caribbean. It's being marketed on various St Lucia websites and elsewhere as being the Black Pearl in at least the first film (and with appearances as other ships in the other 2 films). The official unofficial PotC website Keep to the Code said that the brig played a different role in the movie (at least in the discussion forums). If someone can shed some light if they know more and update both this page with the Unicorn's participation as well as adding it to the appropriate PotC / Black Pearl page, that would be swell. SpikeJones 20:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
How'd the transition get made from brig to military prison, etymologically speaking? Probably relevant here, innit? MrZaius talk 13:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Apparently the use of these vessels as prison ships led to the use; see http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=brig&searchmode=none should we make a note of this in the article?
The brig is also the title of the 19th episode, 3rd season, of the tv series Lost. The main event of the episode takes place inside a brig.
No consensus to move as proposed. The discussion makes clear that the proposed move is not correct. However the discussion raises the issue of what is the primary use of brig? That question was raised but not given, in my opinion, a fair hearing. So if someone wants to raise that as a possible rename to some form of brig (ship), feel free to open a new discussion. Vegaswikian ( talk) 03:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Brig → Brigantine — Both articles describe the same thing, except for a small paragraph that can be moved to the article "Military Prison" InternetMeme ( talk) 09:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Move to brig (ship) and move brig (disambiguation) to brig.
This assumes that there is currently no primary meaning for brig, and that there's no better disambiguator for this article than ship.
I'm going to offer no evidence regarding primary meaning, but others are welcome to. If the primary meaning is the ship or rig, then we need do nothing. If it's anything else, then we still need to disambiguate this article title.
My main concern here is, if we do move this article, where to? Some other possibilities:
Interested in other suggestions. Andrewa ( talk) 10:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
1) Brig (ship), which would describe the type of ship.
2) Brig (rigging), which would describe what you're talking about.
InternetMeme ( talk) 19:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
In situations such as this, in which the title of an article refers to two closely-related but separate objects (in this case a class of vessel and a system of rigging) the title is usually disambiguated with a term that refers not to either type of object, but to a subject category that covers both objects.
Vessel classes and rigging systems are both topics that are within the field of sailing, so in this case, I would nominate the article title:
Brig (sailing)
InternetMeme ( talk) 16:27, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
AFAIK, brig is used for naval prisons, not those of the army or air force, at least in the US. So I think your case to move the article is even weaker than you originally thought.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 20:11, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I see what you mean, but my resoning was purely anecdotal. I've heard the term 'brig' used many times, and I've never heard it in reference to a ship (I'm not from the US). InternetMeme ( talk) 20:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
InternetMeme moved the article Brig to Brig (ship). This move needs to be reverted immediately for the following reasons:
This move requires an admin, since the article Brig (ship) cannot be moved straight back to Brig without Brig being deleted first. Please can we go back to the (correct) previous naming conventions as soon as possible. Shem ( talk) 20:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm not at all comfortable about this edit which added In the narrow technical field of sailing rigs, a brig is distinct from a three-masted ship by virtue of only having two masts to the already overly long lead paragraph. This is more about what a ship is than about what a brig is. It's probably too long-winded for this article at all, let alone the WP:lead, let alone the first paragraph. Andrewa ( talk) 05:33, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
See also Category:Two-masted ships and related categories and articles. Note two-masted ships. Is the lead of the article on the brig rig really the place to split hairs like this? In normal conversation, even among sail enthusiasts, a brig is a ship. Andrewa ( talk) 09:51, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
It seems to me that a couple of hundred years ago, the word ship was a very technical term that described a particular vessel with three or more masts. By virtue of this old definition, virtually no vessels today are ships—they have no masts, as they are powered by diesel-electric motors.
Nevertheless, today we use the word ship to describe a vessel without regard for of its number of masts. Any vessel bigger than a boat is a ship. The question is, in this article, should we be using the term ship in the historical sense, or should we be using the term ship in its current sense? InternetMeme ( talk) 16:30, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
This seems to be getting out of hand. Of course the word ship has evolved to mean any large ocean going vessel (too large to be carried on another, I believe) but in sailing circles the word 'ship' still retains its old meaning. Is it really such a problem to avoid the use of the word in articles such as this one?-- Ykraps ( talk) 09:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
So the question is: Do we need a disambiguator at all? If "Brig" as used here is the primary meaning, then we do not, as I understand it. This also happens to be the status quo. I would suggest that every dictionary I have consulted has the sailing vessel as the primary meaning, and that I'd be interested to hear of a counter argument that argues powerfully against the dictionary usage - all I hear at the moment is personal opinion. Shem ( talk) 14:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
A ship is a large vessel that floats on water. (according to my most valuable reference (wikipedia)) ViniTheHat ( talk) 21:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
awesome! ViniTheHat ( talk) 02:27, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
If you read the descriptions on Hermaphrodite_brig, brigantine and brig, there seems to be a conflict about how the mainmast should be rigged.
Meanwhile,
Is the difference the presence of a square rigged main course in addition to the gaff-rigged spanker on the brig vs. the hermaphrodite's main course being gaff-rigged and therefore 'not' technically a spanker? ViniTheHat ( talk) 14:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
That is one sexy photo! ViniTheHat ( talk) 02:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, how typical for Americans to forget about us once again.
In this article there the World's one of most famous brigs, Russian brig "Mercury" wasn't mentioned by even couple of words! In those battle in 1829 those Russian brig "Mercury" (armed with 18 light guns) had against 2 line battleships (flagman and vice-flagman, 90 and 120 guns each by Turkish data) of Ottoman Empire, Russian brig fatally damaged both of them, demanding Turkish ships to lie down on the drift, and then escaped. Nobody couldn't believe in this until Ottoman side confirmed the fact.
See for brig "Mercury" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_brig_Mercury — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troske ( talk • contribs) 07:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The following is a usefull diagram to show the different two masted vessels rigging plans, in relation to their classicifaction.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ship_Rigging_differences_in_schematic_view.png — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Refundpolitics (
talk •
contribs)
14:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
The Section
is in contradiction with:
Let me explain why: The difference between a Brig and a Brigantine is in the mainsail. A brig has a square-rigged mainsail, while the Brigantine had a fore-and-aft rigged mainsail. This fore-and-aft mainsail was identical to that of a gaff rigged schooner (at the time, bermuda rigged schooners did not yet exist). It is my understanding that square sails needed more man to handle than fore-and-aft sails (I don't have a source ready, but will see if I can find a credible one). So while the second quote is correct, the first one is really odd.
The information in the Development of the brig section has on the Ocean as a source. This very source also fails to note the difference between cutters and sloops (at the linked page); so it may not be the best source nautical correct information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.0.54.197 ( talk) 17:52, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Sail-plan#Brig and Brigantine. -- 62.19.46.1 ( talk) 13:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Brig. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/VC/visitor_info/quiz/ship.htmWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Brig. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
The term "Weight" in the info box is meaningless. The term should be "Tons burthen", and the measurement is volumetric with respect to the cargo capacity. The measure of burthen was Builder's Old Measurement, usually abbreviated "bm". Acad Ronin ( talk) 21:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
(1) Use of RM Ballantyne as a reference is questionable. What special knowledge does he have of the subject? There are other sources out there.
(2) The omission of the collier brigs that served the North Sea coast of the UK is quite surprising. The article is generally very light on merchant vessels of this type.
May add more to this list on further study.
ThoughtIdRetired (
talk)
23:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I came here off the Wikipedia:Most wanted stubs page, made additions and destubbed the article. I had User:Beland check the work and he removed the stub class rating that Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history had on this talk page and reccommended that I request they classify it. If it has areas that need to be improved or are missing I hope they will list them here after their review is done.-- Wowaconia 16:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Assessment was made below-- Wowaconia 20:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Text removed from brigantine:
Brig redirects here, for an alternate use see: Brig, Switzerland
The target article does not exist. Suggest adding
This article is about the sailing vessel. For the town in Switzerland, see Brig, Switzerland.
if and when it does (assuming it's a town). Andrewa 17:17, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The town has a wiki-page moving last suggested formulation to top of article suggeston.-- Wowaconia 16:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
There are more articles named brig so went with other uses tag.-- Wowaconia 16:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
All the sources I'm seeing are saying that to be a brig both sails must be square not as the current article says "at least one". I think the modern usage takes precedence and its not as modern as you might think because I found a LOC ref to a brig George Washington had and they say that at that time 1774 there was already a common distinction between Brig and Brigantine. I'm going to change this if I find historical usage that indicates that at one point a ship could be a brig with just one square sail I'll note it in a historical perspective segment.-- Wowaconia 01:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
This info is all in the segment "Development of the brig".-- Wowaconia 18:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think these articles should be merged, while the brig evolved from the brigantine they had seperate histories after that and to try and weave them together into one article would confuse the reader. When these articles were both small that might have made sense, but I think this article can now stand on its own and perhaps the brigantine article should be cleaned up and expanded.-- Wowaconia 18:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Just looking over the article, I would say expanding the introduction and adding an infobox should be enough to move this up to "B class" status. For now I still think it is a "Start-class". Cheers-- Looper5920 19:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
These were added and Looper5920 upgraded class to B.-- Wowaconia 20:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I alphabetized the list of brigs. Removing the Mary Celeste, as the painting on her page makes clear that she was a brigantine. Chrono would likely be a better order than alpha, but I wasn't quite up for that. -- Akb4 20:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, my English is very bad. I hope, you'll nevertheless understand me.
What you describe is no Brig, it" a Brigantine: Brig has both masts full square-sail-rigged! Brigantine is different in having main mast full or partetly fore-and-aft sail rigged. That this is not only my opinion and aswell not based on different definitions in engl. or german did show me aswell your own article Brigantine:
So of course aswell the Lady Washington is no brig, but brigantine and her foto is here wrong. As wrong as the whole infobox: Place of origin is not Mediterranean - might be Atlantik, might be Chanal. Weight, length and crews are nonsens, brigs are only specyfied on their rigg: if you'll build tomorrow a 100-m-2-mast-square-rigged ship, it will aswell be a brig. Please, change these misstakes, before no-sailors will begin to lough. -- Skipper Michael 18:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
It is hard to understand what you are saying. There are references provided concerning the rigging if you take issue with them provide alternative references backing your position. The Lady Washington (recreation) is a brig as shown on her own article page and if one follows the external link to her own internet homepage it states the same thing. Remember within Wikipedia any claims you wish to make must have references to third-party experts.-- Wowaconia 16:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Am finding conflicting info regarding the use of Brig Unicorn from St. Lucia and its appearances in Pirates of the Caribbean. It's being marketed on various St Lucia websites and elsewhere as being the Black Pearl in at least the first film (and with appearances as other ships in the other 2 films). The official unofficial PotC website Keep to the Code said that the brig played a different role in the movie (at least in the discussion forums). If someone can shed some light if they know more and update both this page with the Unicorn's participation as well as adding it to the appropriate PotC / Black Pearl page, that would be swell. SpikeJones 20:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
How'd the transition get made from brig to military prison, etymologically speaking? Probably relevant here, innit? MrZaius talk 13:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Apparently the use of these vessels as prison ships led to the use; see http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=brig&searchmode=none should we make a note of this in the article?
The brig is also the title of the 19th episode, 3rd season, of the tv series Lost. The main event of the episode takes place inside a brig.
No consensus to move as proposed. The discussion makes clear that the proposed move is not correct. However the discussion raises the issue of what is the primary use of brig? That question was raised but not given, in my opinion, a fair hearing. So if someone wants to raise that as a possible rename to some form of brig (ship), feel free to open a new discussion. Vegaswikian ( talk) 03:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Brig → Brigantine — Both articles describe the same thing, except for a small paragraph that can be moved to the article "Military Prison" InternetMeme ( talk) 09:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Move to brig (ship) and move brig (disambiguation) to brig.
This assumes that there is currently no primary meaning for brig, and that there's no better disambiguator for this article than ship.
I'm going to offer no evidence regarding primary meaning, but others are welcome to. If the primary meaning is the ship or rig, then we need do nothing. If it's anything else, then we still need to disambiguate this article title.
My main concern here is, if we do move this article, where to? Some other possibilities:
Interested in other suggestions. Andrewa ( talk) 10:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
1) Brig (ship), which would describe the type of ship.
2) Brig (rigging), which would describe what you're talking about.
InternetMeme ( talk) 19:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
In situations such as this, in which the title of an article refers to two closely-related but separate objects (in this case a class of vessel and a system of rigging) the title is usually disambiguated with a term that refers not to either type of object, but to a subject category that covers both objects.
Vessel classes and rigging systems are both topics that are within the field of sailing, so in this case, I would nominate the article title:
Brig (sailing)
InternetMeme ( talk) 16:27, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
AFAIK, brig is used for naval prisons, not those of the army or air force, at least in the US. So I think your case to move the article is even weaker than you originally thought.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 20:11, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I see what you mean, but my resoning was purely anecdotal. I've heard the term 'brig' used many times, and I've never heard it in reference to a ship (I'm not from the US). InternetMeme ( talk) 20:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
InternetMeme moved the article Brig to Brig (ship). This move needs to be reverted immediately for the following reasons:
This move requires an admin, since the article Brig (ship) cannot be moved straight back to Brig without Brig being deleted first. Please can we go back to the (correct) previous naming conventions as soon as possible. Shem ( talk) 20:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm not at all comfortable about this edit which added In the narrow technical field of sailing rigs, a brig is distinct from a three-masted ship by virtue of only having two masts to the already overly long lead paragraph. This is more about what a ship is than about what a brig is. It's probably too long-winded for this article at all, let alone the WP:lead, let alone the first paragraph. Andrewa ( talk) 05:33, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
See also Category:Two-masted ships and related categories and articles. Note two-masted ships. Is the lead of the article on the brig rig really the place to split hairs like this? In normal conversation, even among sail enthusiasts, a brig is a ship. Andrewa ( talk) 09:51, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
It seems to me that a couple of hundred years ago, the word ship was a very technical term that described a particular vessel with three or more masts. By virtue of this old definition, virtually no vessels today are ships—they have no masts, as they are powered by diesel-electric motors.
Nevertheless, today we use the word ship to describe a vessel without regard for of its number of masts. Any vessel bigger than a boat is a ship. The question is, in this article, should we be using the term ship in the historical sense, or should we be using the term ship in its current sense? InternetMeme ( talk) 16:30, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
This seems to be getting out of hand. Of course the word ship has evolved to mean any large ocean going vessel (too large to be carried on another, I believe) but in sailing circles the word 'ship' still retains its old meaning. Is it really such a problem to avoid the use of the word in articles such as this one?-- Ykraps ( talk) 09:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
So the question is: Do we need a disambiguator at all? If "Brig" as used here is the primary meaning, then we do not, as I understand it. This also happens to be the status quo. I would suggest that every dictionary I have consulted has the sailing vessel as the primary meaning, and that I'd be interested to hear of a counter argument that argues powerfully against the dictionary usage - all I hear at the moment is personal opinion. Shem ( talk) 14:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
A ship is a large vessel that floats on water. (according to my most valuable reference (wikipedia)) ViniTheHat ( talk) 21:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
awesome! ViniTheHat ( talk) 02:27, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
If you read the descriptions on Hermaphrodite_brig, brigantine and brig, there seems to be a conflict about how the mainmast should be rigged.
Meanwhile,
Is the difference the presence of a square rigged main course in addition to the gaff-rigged spanker on the brig vs. the hermaphrodite's main course being gaff-rigged and therefore 'not' technically a spanker? ViniTheHat ( talk) 14:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
That is one sexy photo! ViniTheHat ( talk) 02:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, how typical for Americans to forget about us once again.
In this article there the World's one of most famous brigs, Russian brig "Mercury" wasn't mentioned by even couple of words! In those battle in 1829 those Russian brig "Mercury" (armed with 18 light guns) had against 2 line battleships (flagman and vice-flagman, 90 and 120 guns each by Turkish data) of Ottoman Empire, Russian brig fatally damaged both of them, demanding Turkish ships to lie down on the drift, and then escaped. Nobody couldn't believe in this until Ottoman side confirmed the fact.
See for brig "Mercury" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_brig_Mercury — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troske ( talk • contribs) 07:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The following is a usefull diagram to show the different two masted vessels rigging plans, in relation to their classicifaction.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ship_Rigging_differences_in_schematic_view.png — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Refundpolitics (
talk •
contribs)
14:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
The Section
is in contradiction with:
Let me explain why: The difference between a Brig and a Brigantine is in the mainsail. A brig has a square-rigged mainsail, while the Brigantine had a fore-and-aft rigged mainsail. This fore-and-aft mainsail was identical to that of a gaff rigged schooner (at the time, bermuda rigged schooners did not yet exist). It is my understanding that square sails needed more man to handle than fore-and-aft sails (I don't have a source ready, but will see if I can find a credible one). So while the second quote is correct, the first one is really odd.
The information in the Development of the brig section has on the Ocean as a source. This very source also fails to note the difference between cutters and sloops (at the linked page); so it may not be the best source nautical correct information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.0.54.197 ( talk) 17:52, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Sail-plan#Brig and Brigantine. -- 62.19.46.1 ( talk) 13:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Brig. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/VC/visitor_info/quiz/ship.htmWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Brig. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
The term "Weight" in the info box is meaningless. The term should be "Tons burthen", and the measurement is volumetric with respect to the cargo capacity. The measure of burthen was Builder's Old Measurement, usually abbreviated "bm". Acad Ronin ( talk) 21:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
(1) Use of RM Ballantyne as a reference is questionable. What special knowledge does he have of the subject? There are other sources out there.
(2) The omission of the collier brigs that served the North Sea coast of the UK is quite surprising. The article is generally very light on merchant vessels of this type.
May add more to this list on further study.
ThoughtIdRetired (
talk)
23:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)