Talk:Hawaii Superferry

message: Reviewed References and edited some lines to bring statements in-line with references, also correcting some references to proper wikipedia format.  Also Searched for and found other references where they were needed.--Daishi808 19:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Facts 

message: I believe the article should be locked from unregistered and newly registered users until the controversy dies down
--Daishi808 09:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless we start to see edit warring, etc. go on, I see no reason why we should lock the article.  There remains a lot of information that could still be included that would be prevented if the article were locked. Zoomwsu 15:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

text: With the article not being very large to begin with, that information could be included in the main article for the time being.  It can be offloaded later if it gets too bulky. KeithH 22:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock Until Situation is resolved 

message: With everyone trying to edit this article, I think there needs to be clear organization here.  I took a stab at creating headings to organize things.  The material in the Facts section probably should be folded into the revised article. Also, the way it looks right now it looks heavy on post-launch and really thin on the early history (formation and the early history of the controversy).  Probably need more info from the newspapers, etc.  Also, the conversational tone has got to go.  KeithH 08:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Organization

message: I'm requesting that someone gather a better, perhaps larger image of the ferry and a map or it's route for this page... --Mercola over Merck (talk) 18:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Images and a Map 

message: What I really miss in this article so far is a summary of the controversy... the forest for the trees.... mendicott.com (talk) 01:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very true. my goal in the next couple of days is to work on folding the trivia into the body and formulate some new sections and break up the "Inaugural voyage and suspension of service" into a more readable style with the following sections: 
*Vessel
*History
*Controversy
*Series of events
*Inaugural voyage
*Protests
*Suspension of service
*Current Status
Anything objections, additions, or general thoughts? --MercolaOverMerck♫ (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary of controversy missing 

message: What was the ferry's scheduled travel time, and how did that compare to air travel?  What competing methods for transporting cars were there, and what was the cost differential? -- Beland (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Travel time and competition 

message: Militarization. It is pointed out that the Superferry's CEO, John F. Lehman, is a former U.S. Navy secretary whose expertise is in the acquisition of private endeavors with military applications,[17] and that the Superferry is designed to be able to transport military equipment and vehicles, including Stryker combat vehicles
Are you freakin' kidding me? That's an argument?   Solicitr (talk) 01:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I suspect there are good secondary sources that put this in a more appropriate and neutral context, the current wording and sourcing is not acceptable, so I recommend removing the first statement from the article and placing it on the talk page with a request for better sourcing and composition.  "South Kona Youth" is not a reliable source for Wikipedia.  However, the quote for the second part of the sentence is somewhat reflected by the The Honolulu Advertiser source.  The article should be severely pruned to reflect only the most notable aspects of what the reliable sources report, no more. Viriditas (talk) 02:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Militarization 

message: The website in the Infobox -- -- appears no longer to be in service.  It just leads to one of those standard "parked" pages, full of links to scammy-looking sites, and has a message at the top that the domain name "may be for sale."
I'm kind of a newbie to editing Wikipedia, and so I apologize if a general policy is written down somewhere that I didn't find, but what's the best-practices way to deal with a situation like this?  Seems to me we don't want to direct people to a site that's no longer of use (and could potentially be malicious).  Should the website line in the Infobox just be deleted?  Should the URL be deleted, but a message put in its place about the site no longer being active?  Should the URL be replaced with a link to the Wayback Machine, if an appropriate one exists?
Any tips would be appreciated.  Thanks. bjkeefe (talk) 14:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obsolete website 

message: Could someone update that the US Navy has bought the vessels as of May of this year. I seem to be unable to fix a reference problem I'm having. Mrld (talk) 23:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Navy bought vessels