Talk:Norwegian Cruise Line

message: :Image:NCL logo4C PRE,0.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:NCL logo4C PRE,0.gif

message: :Image:Logo ncla web.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Logo ncla web.gif

message: :Image:NCL logo4C PRE,0.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:27, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:NCL logo4C PRE,0.gif

message: :Image:Logo ncla web.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Logo ncla web.gif

message: :Image:NCL logo4C PRE,0.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 08:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:NCL logo4C PRE,0.gif

message: Why are Wikipedia articles so vague when it comes to the propulsion systems of NCL ships? --Ragemanchoo (talk) 08:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hamster wheels, but you are made to recant it if you speak about it. No, of course i didnt mean it, im a good citizen of NCL...108.94.2.172 (talk) 23:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Propolsion?

message: Content has been repeatedly removed by .  I was not the one who initially added the content, but I have been reverting the blanking of that content.  Initially, no reason was given by the IP for the removal of the material; later, the only reason in their edit summary was "facts" - but they have not provided any other explaination.  As they did not respond on their talk page, I interpreted the edit summary to mean they were removing uncited criticism of the company; so when I had time, I restored the content again - this time rewording it to a more NPOV and added refs for the content.  Today, the IP user has again blanked the now cited content, with no reason other than the edit summary "facts".
Please, if there is an issue with the content, we need a discussion on it here.  I would also value third-party opinions on the content and its removal. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of content re: [[SS France (1961)|SS ''France'']] 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.ship-technology.com/projects/breakaway-ships/
*:Triggered by \bship-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:46, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Norwegian Cruise Line. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090725072713/http://www.maritimematters.com:80/norway.html to http://www.maritimematters.com/norway.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070929005655/http://www.cruisebusiness.com/news.php?u=20070817175042 to http://www.cruisebusiness.com/news.php?u=20070817175042
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Norwegian Cruise Line. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090802213300/http://www.cruisebusiness.com:80/news.php?u=20080506191733 to http://www.cruisebusiness.com/news.php?u=20080506191733
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Norwegian Cruise Line. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/news/ncl-close-to-offloading-cruiseship-trio/20017522772.htm%3Bjsessionid%3DC139FEAE5B7ACF39DD67C12590103669
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091210171408/http://www.cruisecritic.com/reviews/review.cfm?ShipID=43 to http://www.cruisecritic.com/reviews/review.cfm?ShipID=43
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Norwegian Cruise Line. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.ncl.com/nclweb/contactUs.html%3Bjsessionid%3DLJQGQS4Fn2NYC0v4zCFMmjyv8LKvPRC5%21-27535706
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090901133443/http://www.ssmaritime.com/norway.htm to http://www.ssmaritime.com/norway.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090901060132/http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?section=subcontinent&xfile=data%2Fsubcontinent%2F2007%2Fseptember%2Fsubcontinent_september432.xml to http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?section=subcontinent&xfile=data%2Fsubcontinent%2F2007%2Fseptember%2Fsubcontinent_september432.xml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is there any point in this column in the ship summaries? It appears to be more a list of ports visited, or in the case of Berlin, a nonsense.  As the ships are Bahamanian flagged, their legal home port is, presumably, there. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Home Port 

message: In the Notes section I added the capacity for a couple of NCL ships, since there is no column for capacity, as there is in the Royal Caribbean International Wikipedia page. My additions were reverted by Murgatroyd49 with the note, "belongs in individual ship articles". I guess my question is 'says who'? Why shouldn't the notes section be open at additional information about ships? It is clearly not a Wikipedia policy since the RCI template says otherwise. This is why people don't like contributing to articles or supporting Wikipedia financially because it seems some contributors get very proprietary about topics. To a person researching NCL being able to find information on ship capacity all in one article without going to 20 different individual articles is a good thing is it not.Scottca075 (talk) 16:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to add a column for the capacity of all the ships, that is one thing, just to add it for a couple renders your argument about all the information being in one place pointless. And I hate to disappoint you but I have no proprietary interest in this or any other article. I am more concerned about information being presented in a consistent fashion across similar articles. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with Murgatroyd49 on this. I doubt the information on capacity is of interest to the general reader furthermore sourcing is likely to be a continuing problem and it will cause confusion between number of cabins, double occupancy and changes, the crew size is likely to vary too. It's definitely more suited to individual ship articles. Likewise I would like to see some consistency across similar articles. Lyndaship (talk) 17:58, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If I knew how to add columns, I would. My intent was to add the capacity to every ship, as time allowed me. Can I assume Lyndaship and Murgatroyd49 aren't cruisers? Passenger capacity and crew size are important items to many cruisers. I also would think the general public cares more about passenger capacity than it does gross tonnage of a ship. As to accuracy and consistency of the passenger and crew numbers, I pulled them from the Wikipedia articles on the individual ships. There is no consistency in Wikipedia on the cruise line articles. Royal Caribbean International is completely different from Princess Cruises which is completely different from Holland America Lines. I still haven't heard how less information is better or what is acceptable content in the Notes section. Scottca075 (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's irrelevant if any editor is a "cruiser" or not, it's a fundamental principle that anyone can edit any article. Nor is the purpose of wikipedia to be a "cruisers" guide. Less information is covered by WP:NOTEVERYTHING Lyndaship (talk) 07:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is most definitely NOT a fundamental principle in practice that anyone can edit any article, otherwise my edits would not have been reverted. It is relevant that Wikipedia articles have MORE information, not LESS. No one is served by less information. It is easy to understand the WP:NOTEVERYTHING principle because articles could be come unwieldy, but additional information in the existing space doesn't get to be unwieldy. It also doesn't answer the question of what SHOULD go in the Notes section. It is also relevant whether or not people who are editing articles understand the basics of the subject matter. The purpose of Wikipedia is to benefit readers by acting as a free widely accessible encyclopedia; a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge. That presumably includes cruisers and adding capacity to the ships grid summary makes the article more comprehensive. Where is the collaboration in creating the article if one user gets to overrule another?Scottca075 (talk) 12:39, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes 

message: Does any of the ships accommodate kidney dialysis members? 2601:41:4301:48C0:608D:1415:A4BA:8D3F (talk) 00:54, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical