Talk:Fore-and-aft rig

message: I think this page should include a list of alternative (non Fore-and-aft) rigs. --Skyscraper 16:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :The Uniform section should be split into its own article. drbrain 
04:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am removing the uniform section altogether— it does belong in a stand-alone article, but since the whole section does not have any citations, it can't be put there easily and will be speedily deleted.  In any case, it does not belong here. KDS4444Talk 10:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Uniform

message: It seems the key difference lay in the use of yards on a square rig, but the photo included here shows a craft that also appears to have yards. swain (talk) 19:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a topsail schooner, so quite valid on the page, though I agree a photo of a more explicitly fore-and-aft rigged vessel would be more appropriate as the top image on the page. Martocticvs (talk) 19:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I'll cobble together a photo gallery at some point to show variations on the fore-and-aft rig, but you're right; might as well avoid confusion in the meantime. --Fullobeans (talk) 20:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But to answer your question, a square-rigged sail is set "square" to the keel of the ship (as opposed to along it), hence the name (which has nothing to do with the shape of the sail, incidentally).  KDS4444Talk 10:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does this differ from a square rig? 

message: I have never seen a Wikipedia article that so completely misses the target of providing information on a subject. The European section is laughable. Fore and aft rig was used in classical Roman times - see Casson's Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World for the mention of spritsail fore and aft rig. The article suggests that fore and aft rig arrived in Europe in the later part of the middle ages. Given that this a standard source for the subject, this is a major failing. However, since the only source used for that section was written 2 years before Casson was born, that is perhaps not surprising.
There are a multitude of sources that could be used: 
John Leather: Gaff Rig
John Leather: Spritsails and Lugsails
Tom Cunliffe: Hand Reef and Steer
Underhill's Sailing Ship Rigs and Rigging 
The Schooner, Its Design and Development from 1600 to the Present
Sailing Rigs, an Illustrated Guide
....and probably many more. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 12:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: ThoughtIdRetired, Would you have time to rewrite the article? You are eminently qualified to do so, and we could rest easy knowing that an expert has vastly improved the article's coverage. Regards, Carlstak (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ordinarily I would just get on with it, but right now I have a big old house to get painted before the weather turns. If the job is still outstanding when I'm done, I might have a go. I don't know how other editors tackle a task like this, but I reckon it would take a week to 10 days, 3 to 4 hours a daymost of the work is the reading and planning. I reckon I would need a few more sources to cover all angles, hence the listing of some sources in this talk page post ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be great. I would consider giving it a shot myself if I had more time, at least a start (with your input, of course), but I know you would do a much better job. I hope you write it. Best, Carlstak (talk) 19:01, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is totally deficient