Talk:Brigantine

message: Having a picture is good.  But I sent the person who recently added one a question, because it looks like a schooner to me.  Geo Swan 18:22, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rama's picture 

message: I've added a third use of "brigantine:" as an alternate spelling for brigandine, a piece of armor.  Perhaps there should be a disambiguation page for this word. Durova 04:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguaton page needed? 

message: I am happy to see the difference between a Brig and Brigantine spelled out, although I wouldn't even know what was different was looking at the actual vessels unless it was pointed out to me by someone with more experience.  The problem I have with maintaining Brig separately as a stub is that unless the article Brig is significant on it's own, it should be combined together with Brigantine and have the differences explained which is basically what is already being done now.  Brig is an archaic reference to a similar type of ship and can refer back to Brigantine in order to clarify the differences between both.
The fact that Brig and Brigantine are not synonymous does not justify a separate page for Brig if it is only a stub.  Unless there is significant content that clearly delineates one type of ship by another, not just a slight modification of the masts and ship construction, then the articles belong together, not separate.  
In reviewing the other ship links, it would be likely that Hermaphrodite brig should also be combined here for the same reasons.
I thereby propose that Brig and Brigantine be combined. Gohiking 19:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense after all, since the definitions apparently vary through time and places. After a lifetime reading everything I happen to stumble on about sailingvessels, I can sum up that anyway in the Baltic it has mostly (not always) been defined that a brig has square sails on both masts, and a gaff sail in addition on the mizzen mast, whereas a brigantine has squares on the main mast, but only fore-aft sails on the mizzen, exactly as the pictures in both articles show today. Snow is an unknown type here, but seems to me to have more to do with size and possibly countryvise differings. With thorough explanation and redirections above proposal seems logical. Islander(Scandinavia) 01:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this would be ok as long as both terms are emboldened, and the difference between the two is clearly articulated at the beginning of this article. Care should be taken to ensure that a casual reader does not mistake the redirect for an indication that the two are synonymous. Gsnixon 12:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Modern parlance makes distinctions where, historically, there were none in regard to brig vs. brigantine.  For much of the brig(antine)'s history as a working vessel, the terms brig and brigantine were fully interchangeable.  Unless significant material can be added to contextualise these intimately related vessels, I agree that Brigantine, Brig, and Hermaphrodite brig should be merged.Chang E 04:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The terms 'brig' and 'brigantine' are still interchangable for the most part. People know what a 'brigantine' is, but a 'brig' could be a 'brig' or a 'brigantine'. The difference between brigs and brigantines is incredibly small, and the 'brig' article is - right now - completely focused on that difference, leaving little to discuss. I think that if someone found a different focus for the article, while still conveying the difference it would be worth preserving the article individually. But as it stands the article could be merged into 'brigantine' with a line similar to: "a brig is similar to the brigantine, however it is square rigged on both masts". Edit: In light of the de-stubbing of the brig article and large addition of material I don't think that the articles 'brig' and 'brigantine' should be merged. Digital Lyon 21:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Brig and need to maintain a separate listing for a stub 

message: As I was working in the Wikipedia:Most wanted stubs page and Brig was listed as number 2, I managed to move the article from stub class to B Class as per the judgement of someone from the Military history WikiProject. I would argue that there is now sufficent material in the brig article to merit it not being merged.--Wowaconia 22:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  De-stub of Brig article 

message: The article says:
By the first half of the 18th century the word had evolved to refer not to a ship type name, but rather to a particular type of rigging: square rigged on the foremast and fore-and-aft rigged on the mizzen.  Many sloops were "brigantine-rigged".
 (italics added)
A sloop can't possibly have a different rigging on the foremast from the mizzen, it doesn't have either. I have therefore deleted the italicized text.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 04:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP already has the distinction clarified, under the article Sloop-of-war. A link within a sentence explaining that "Sloop-of-war" was often shortened to "Sloop" should suffice, no? Czrisher (talk) 20:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is internally inconsistent 

message: It seems we have a picture of a Hermaphrodite Brig on the Brigantine Page, and a picture of a Brigantine on the Hermaphrodite Brig Page. Is there some reason for this? IgniFerroque (talk) 04:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures? 

message: source 1 is no longer a working link.... prob should be deleted and new sources found.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.167.127 (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: link broken

message: Stone Roses '....and fills up her brigantine sails...'  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.126.31 (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: poem

message: 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)
thread_title:  Usefull Diagram 

message: I've been back and forth over both articles several times now, and I honestly don't see any difference between this: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brig#/media/File:Brig3.png
And this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigantine#/media/File:Brigantine.png
Is the difference that the brig has a square mainsail, and the fore-and-aft sail is merely an auxiliary, while the brig has a dedicated fore-and-aft mainsail? The only obvious differences in the images are that the brig has a furled square sail on the main yards, and that the brigatine has a mainstaysail set between the masts, which ought to be perfectly possible for the brig as well. If that's really the main difference between the two, it ought to say so in plain language, because it took me a while to come to that conclusion the way the articles are phrased. I mean, the difference between the two is one sail...that seems like a relevant piece of information that could be highlighted instead of just saying "not to be confused with a brigatine, which is rigged differently". Obviously, the difference is more obvious in the "hermaphrodite" brig, with the full fore-and-aft mainsail..45Colt 09:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, we need and explanation in plain language, in an easy and neat way. I've just posted at Talk:Sail-plan#Brig and Brigantine some minutes ago, please see. --62.19.46.1 (talk) 13:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is a "brig" different from a "brigatine"? 

message: "the Oxford English Dictionary has about 1525 definitions of..."
I don't know what this sentence was meant to say but, even without opening my OED, I'm willing to bet that it does *not* contain 1500 definitions of "brigantine." ;)
Can the author, or someone else who understands it, please clean up this sentence?
  
Thanks.
WikiAlto (talk) 06:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "1525 definitions"