Talk:Trailer sailer

Template

A template called 'Classes of Trailer sailers and Trailer yachts worldwide' has been added to the Article the intent is to develop (1). a thorough list of such boats (2). Details of each boat on its own Article. This will require effort over time to complete, all hands welcome.

You can help by adding other boat types to the template. To do this click on the small 'e' in the upper left corner of the title block, replace one of the 'Blank number' entries with the name of the new entry yacht then 'save' it to the listing. If that does not work, then Edit the table on the Article 'Edit this page' then save there. Next click on the boat name in the template it will open a new Article page with that title, copy the Specification list etc. from this page then post it to the new boat Article and complete details or add text, images etc to that article, then 'save' it.

To assist commonality of data between boats, to enable better comparisions between them, I have prepared a Specification Template (see below) with basic details. Copy this from the Edit for this page onto each boat Article and complete any details you have.

General

Lead description of boat, its designer, number sold, etc. Photo, Class Insignia

Specifications

LOA Length	ft in ( m)
Length waterline	ft in ( m)
Beam Width	ft in ( m)
Draft Board down	ft in ( m)
Draft Board up	ft in ( m)
Displacement	lb ( kg)
Ballast	lb ( kg)
Tow Mass	lb ( kg)
Rigging	Masthead sloop
Mast	ft in ( m)	single, backswept spreader
Sails	Main	ft² ( m²)
	Jib < (100%)	ft² ( m²)
	#1 Genoa ( %)	ft² ( m²)
	#2 Genoa ( %)	ft² ( m²)
	#3 Genoa ( %)	ft² ( m²)
Spinnaker	ft² ( m²)

Sailing Details

Handicaps; PHRF = , Portsmouth = , IRC = , Class based Handicaps CBH = , Other = ,

Sailing Characteristics;

Notable Performances;

Accommodation

Number of crew to race =, Berths =, Galley =, Head =, Navigation =, Maximum headroom =,

Construction

Country of origin, Hull material, Manufacturer, Plans availability,

External links

Association,

(End of boat Article proforma) Jagra (talk) 02:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Clean-up required for inappropriate tone and style

This article needs significant clean up. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such informal tone and style should not be used. The following examples, taken from the article, are prime examples of the type of content that needs to be edited out and cleaned up.

"The concept is that dad races the yacht with the crew on weekends competitively. Next weekend or on holidays the family, mum and youngsters cruise short handed. To achieve this safely often requires a reduced sail plan."

"Probably the most neglected part of a trailer sailer is the trailer."

Dgf32 (talk) 20:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The article is not written as an encyclopedia article but more like a personal essay full of WP:NOTMANUAL material. Almost all the text is unsourced as well. I have tagged it, but I propose that unless it is rewritten and properly sourced to WP:RS that it be stubbed instead. One possible ref- Ahunt (talk) 13:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

With no objections to my proposal in the last seven days I will go ahead and remove the unsourced and tagged text and replace it with what can be sourced. - Ahunt (talk) 12:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 13:11, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Since about May 7, 2017, this page seems to have been ruined or vandalised (or made into an advertisment for MacGregor boats?) I have restored it to that date. DuncanMcC (talk) 01:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

and I have reverted your changes. Please read WP:AGF. The version you restored to contained lots of unsourced text and inappropriate tone and was tagged as such. You cannot just remove sourced text and replace it with unsourced text, particularly unsourced text that was previously tagged and that we have a consensus above to remove as unsourced. As per the discussion above, the article was completely rewritten to include refs for text that could be sourced. The M-26 is used as a single example, because it is one of the most produced boats in this class, but since the boat design is long out of production and the company no longer exists, the claims that this is somehow an advertisement doesn't hold water (if you pardon the expression). Calling the changes vandalism runs beyond WP:AGF and into WP:NPA. Furthermore if you read to the end of the article you would have seen the quote included (with refs to an independent third party source), that is essentially a pretty scathing review of flooding ballast boats like the M-26, so there is no reason to accuse this of being an advertisement. If you have constructive text with sources to add to the article, then please do so. - Ahunt (talk) 02:09, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

The old pages, had lots of nice sections and much better photos. Surely much of that information is good and they're all true statements. What *source* is there? Please help me out here, not trying to start a flame war, but it seems the "new" trailer sailer' page is just so plain and void of good information. They are popular boats in Australia and New Zealand. Many of the best ones are have not been in production for a long time now, such as the Farr and Noelex trailer sailers. I'll do my best to dig up some old references though. DuncanMcC (talk) 02:47, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

As we noted above, the previous text was written in a non-encyclopedic style (example: "So a 16 ft boat can do 4 knots and a 25 ft boat about 5 knots, not a lot of difference, unless you sail in tidal waters and face a 3 knot current where the larger boat will advance at twice the speed."), had lots of WP:NOTMANUAL text (like: "It is important to have a good trailer."), plus almost all of it was not referenced (like: "There are two styles." who says that is the case? I could have said there are ten styles, but without a ref who says that is right?). Most importantly, regarding the lack of references, much of the article was full of personal opinions (like: "The optimum trailer chassis material seems to be galvanised steel, which should be galvanised inside and out with adequate drain holes in all members."). Overall it was unsalvagable as an article, so we started over with proper references. I chose the M-26 as an example, because there are refs on it, it is a common boat in this class, it is out of production (so we are not promoting anyone's current production products), we have photos to back up the text (because photos make articles more interesting for the readers) and because it is near the upper limits for weight, beam and such. It also allowed the inclusion of the criticism quotation on the the limitations or flooding water ballast boats. We could have used the Siren 17 or similar smaller out-of-production boat, but I thought the M-26 was a better example, overall. Regardless, I don't mind if you can suggest a better example boat to use. As noted at WP:V, all text needs to be referenced to reliable sources. This article can definitely be expanded, but the added text needs to be properly referenced, free of opinions (unless quoting a ref) and not written like a "how-to" manual. If you can find refs to expand it, then great, let's see how we can make it a more useful article for our readers. - Ahunt (talk) 12:51, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring

I seem to be getting into edit warring territory with (talk). Please let me try to improve this page in good faith without immediately reverting my edits. Such reversion should only be used for blatant vandalism, edits that break wikipedia etc. If you have any issues with my contributions, discuss it here instead of taking the hostile act of deleting my content.Mozzie (talk) 22:24, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Please bring your proposed changes here for discussion, rather than removing cited text and replacing it with uncited text or adding text not supported by the refs you have provided. - Ahunt (talk) 22:28, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

There is no requirement to vet edits to pages through talk pages. If that were the case Wikipedia would grind to a standstill.Mozzie (talk) 22:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

It is for contentious edits and contentious articles like this one, and so far you have been adding a lot of unsourced text and text where then refs do not support the claims made. It is up to you, but it will go more smoothly and faster if you make your proposed changes here first, but if you want you can carry on adding them to the article and we can edit them "live" there instead. It's slower that way, but up to you. - Ahunt (talk) 22:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps you could let me make my changes and ask me here to add references. It is impossible to edit when someone is stalking around reverting your edits instantaneously. This page hasn't been edited in over a year, and isn't BLP, so it can be imperfect for a just a little while.Mozzie (talk) 22:59, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

No need to even worry: make your changes and cite proper refs for everything you add, don't remove cited material without a careful explanation. I'll verify them later, probably after I get back from sailng tomorrow. - Ahunt (talk) 23:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

First trailer sailers

Re the paragraph: "The trailer cabin sailboats appeared on the market in 1970 and were sailed on small lakes and rivers. A large number were initially sold in North America in areas such as Arizona, New Mexico and the Great Lakes region." this is ostensibly wrong. Trailer sailers were being produced in the 50s as per [1] This paragraph is also US-centric perhaps trailer sailers were only first produced in the US in the 70s, or only in large numbers were produced in the 70s?Mozzie (talk) 23:07, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

That is a very close paraphrase from the ref cited, which I have here as a paperback book. Now that ref could be wrong, almost any ref can be, all you have to do is cite a ref that sets the date earlier to show that it is wrong. The ref you have mentioned above doesn't say anything about the Silhouette being designed to be trailered. There were lots of small boats in the 19th century that could have been trailered, but we need a ref that says that was the actual design goal. - Ahunt (talk)

But it appears to be a fact that production trailer sailers existed before 1970. The book I have in my hands atm is also US centric, and it lists trailer sailers produced only from 1968. Perhaps there were only small numbers of production trailer sailers up until the fibreglass revolution in the mid 60s. Perhaps the 70s was when numbers became really big. Moreover, it says they were sailed on 'small lakes and rivers', surely some were sailed in salt water - in Australia they are definitely sailed on the ocean in protected waters. In any case we should not just blindly quote a single reference which appears to be wrong. If someone was writing this book purely for a US audience, this may well be contextually correct, but for a global encyclopedia, it is simply wrong.Mozzie (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Like I said, it could be incorrect, but that is what that ref claims. All we have to do is show that someone else was purpose-designing small cruising cabin sailboats for trailering before that. What does your ref say? - Ahunt (talk) 23:43, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Attribution

Text and references copied from Sportsboat to Trailer sailer, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)