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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
SS Mont-Blanc is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Some reason why this ship is being referred to in feminine pronouns?
It is not encyclopaedic, or just plainly appropriate, to refer to an object using the feminine pronouns "she" or "her". I move that this be changed to the correct, non-personal pronouns "it" and "its".
Alialiac (
talk)
23:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Yes, there is a reason: it is an accepted and very common usage in English - so, indeed, is "it" but this is already written in "she" style. Could you please have a look at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Style_guide#Pronouns - consensus is that we don't change from "she", etc, to "it" where this is the existing style, and vice versa. If you think that's wrong, it would probably be wise for you to start a campaign there to get agreement to change thousands of articles, rather than proposing to change them one by one. Thank you and best wishes
DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (
talk)
23:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Here's another thought that I hope might help: if you have a look at
this, it's a list of ship articles which have been "Featured Articles", that is, Wikipedia thinks they are good. I think if you look at a random sample of those - or even all of them - you'll find plenty of use of "she". Thanks and best wishes,
DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (
talk)
23:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)reply
She and ships is always an interesting language and gender issue. However I started this article with she because it is common and accepted language for describing ships and I'd very much like it to stay that way.
Letterofmarque (
talk)
02:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)reply
Both of you, and other interested editors, might want to have a look at the brief discussion of this topic
here. (edited later) I would respectfully suggest that that's a better forum for discussing this, since it's a very much more general issue than just this one vessel. Best wishes
DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (
talk)
10:17, 12 January 2009 (UTC)reply