Talk:Port/Archive 1

message: Okay, so we have just had 2 Korean ports added - out of alphabetical sequence. What next ? Who decides what ports are listed here. The AAPA lists show that the port of Kwangyang ranks higher than Incheon, so why include the latter.
We need to put some objective criteria on what should be included in this list and why? Frelke 17:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Ports

message: I'm am doing research for an article on thedevelopment at the Southport Spit and I need to know the distinction, if any, between a "Shipping Terminal" and a "Port". Thanks --202.182.101.3 13:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not easy to say. A terminal is probably not publicly owned, it may be part of a larger port, but it might also be an offshore loading/discharging facility.Frelke 13:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shipping Terminal/Port 

message: Searched wikipedia for "Port" using the box on the left and was brought to a low quality article about the left side of a boat. I don't have the skill to recommend deletion of the article, create/redirect to a disambiguation page, or anything else. There already exists an article describing the left side of a boat, at Port_(nautical). May I suggest someone with a bit of knowldge on the working of wikipedia take a look? Thanks. 172.143.160.225 04:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Searching for "Port" on wikipedia 

message: Matchrthom has moved the section about United States ports to a new article.  This action may be OK if that's what editors here want to do, or may need to be modified a bit; see WP:SUMMARY. e.g. maybe having a short summary about U.S. ports here too. --  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coppertwig (talk • contribs) 22:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a concept it seems fine, though there needs to be a summary of the spinoff article here as well - I will do this later today if no one else does.   Euryalus (talk) 06:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary style? 

message: Does there really need to be an enormous list that takes up half the article?  It's a very generic article.  Klosterdev (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is really weak 

message: :The following discussions were merged here from Talk:Warm water port
Name: I think this page should be more properly called 'warm water port' as this is the more common term - a fact the article itself indicates. 
Rampant POV: This page uncritically accepts the 'geopolitical' Cold War analysis in which the term originates. Surely this should be reexamined in the absence of any Soviet documents supporting this rather ludicrous strategic aim (ever heard of Vietnam, people???) and given the changed complexion of Afghanistan (from freedom fighters to global terrorists!). At the very least supply some citations for this guff.--Jack Upland 07:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Editing done as per above.--Jack Upland 09:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

text: My editing has now been deleted on the grounds that it is 'weasel words'.  It's not weasel words to say that not everyone agrees with a certain proposition.  I've fact-tagged the relevant sentences and if no one comes up with a good response I'll edit again.--Jack Upland 09:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: As far as I know this term has always been used in a "geo-strategic" evaluation of Russia/the USSR, but any indication of this has been deleted from the article.  As noted in a previous version of the article, Russia/the USSR has always had ice-free ports, but in popular analysis a "warm water port" has always been a goal of their policy. Even if this analysis is obviously wrong, its popularity means it should be acknowledged.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged from [[Talk:Warm water port]] 

message: This article, or perhaps one on the same subject only specific to Russia, would benefit from a discussion of Russia's major ports and why they don't count.  Archangel is too cold and gets iced in; I don't know about Murmansk, St. Petersburg, or Krohnstadt; the Black Sea ports don't county because they are too easily blocked off by Turkey.  So why does Vladivostock not count, but Port Arthur would have had the Japanese not won it in 1904-5?  There are both political and meteorological considerations here, and it would be nice if info on all of them were in the same place.  Maybe a chart saying how many days a year, on average, a port is expected to be open, would be useful.  (And if I find this out myself, I will write the article!)  Boris B (talk) 00:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know this term has always been used in a "geo-strategic" evaluation of Russia/the USSR, but any indication of this has been deleted from the article.  As noted in a previous version of the article, Russia/the USSR has always had ice-free ports, but in popular analysis a "warm water port" has always been a goal of their policy. Even if this analysis is obviously wrong, its popularity means it should be acknowledged.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More about Russia 

message: speedy close: do not move Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Port → Seaport — This article clearly refers to a seaport. Other ports (eg airports) also exist. the Port article should move to the disambugation. Also request partial merge with harbour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.79.192 (talk) 16:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

text: This article expressly includes inland ports (such as Chicago). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: Sea traffic control and Sea traffic control towersSea traffic control tower definition need to be mentioned  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.88.169 (talk) 16:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Got any suggested wording? Euryalus (talk) 03:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are talking about vessel traffic management services see vessel traffic service. This is currently something of a political hot potato. Ship owners want PECs (pilot exemption certificates), whereas seafarers and other others have grave doubts about such projects. There is a European Union project in this connection which goes under the name of Marnis. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:59, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Mentioning of sea traffic control

message: Perhaps bioport can be mentioned as another subtype of seaport ? The concept of a bioport would support the transition to an economy where halffabricates, and other materials for the construction of objects are no longer derived from fossil oils. See http://www.innovatienetwerk.org/nl/concepten/view/53/Bioport.html Bioports would be able to classify as a type of port as it may involve a special set-up of the factories in the vicinity of the port (eg constructed in such fashion that they are able to generate several products eg from waste organic matter, ...) Example: biomass production into ethanol, artificial fertiliser, livestock feed, bulk chemicals 
KVDP (talk) 10:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bioport

message: Following on from the above, there does appear to be a contradiction in the definition of a port and a harbor at these two articles. The harbor article says "Harbors and ports are often confused with each other. A port is a facility for loading and unloading vessels; ports are usually located in harbors." whereas the port article says "a port is a location on a coast or shore containing one or more harbors where ships can dock and transfer people or cargo to or from land." So is a port part of a harbour or vice versa? 
Looking at the latest Oxford Dictionary of English (which is international) it has the following:
:harbour (US: harbor)... a place on the coast where ships may moor in shelter, especially one protected from rough water by piers, jetties and other artificial structures.
:port: a town or city with a harbour or access to navigable water where ships load or unload. ♦ a harbour: (as modifier) Belfast's port facilities 
Thoughts? Please reply at Talk:harbor to keep the discussion in one place. Bermicourt (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ports and harbo(u)rs 

message: Environmental effect
In order to decrease the environmental effect ports have, several initiatives have been started. These include the World Ports Climate Initiative, the African Green Port Initiative and EcoPorts.EOS magazine, 6,2012
Perhaps that a "Green port" article needs to be made ?
91.182.29.215 (talk) 08:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Added info

message: The search term "deep water port" redirects to this article, but is never explained. It's a commonly used term. Something like this from marineinsight would be useful:
"What are Deep Water Ports?
A deep water port, from its nomenclature can be suggested that is different from regular ports in respect of the depth of water....
However a deep water port is usually made up for the usage of very large and heavily loaded ships. The depth of water helps get them access to the deepwater ports. Regular ports are by and large of recreational types where the water is not more than 20 feet deep, whereas deep water port is compatible with the large heavy loaded ships which may require the water to be 30 feet deep or even more." 24.6.156.141 (talk) 06:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deep water port not explained 

message: An offshore port is either a port which has no connection to land or a port that floats freely from land (not sure which). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Offshore_Oil_Port http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalifa_Port http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/Offshore-Ports-Could-Suit-US-and-Africa-2014-09-05 https://www.port.venice.it/en/the-offshore-terminal.html 184.166.4.117 (talk) 07:00, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Offshore Port 

message: I have added some info on the history of ports and some very basic info. on historical ports but the section added needs to be greatly expanded. Please help.
Johnscotaus (talk) 09:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of the historical section, there needs to be some treatment of historical and modern-day free ports in this article. — LlywelynII 11:35, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Help!

message: These shouldn't exist... — LlywelynII 11:35, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: There is a subheading entitled seaport in this article. No definition is given of a seaport. All the item does is to specify subcategories of seaport. Is this useful or could this information be provided elsewhere and the redundant "seaport" heading be eliminated? Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 20:50, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seaport 

message: This page has so many subparagraph headings that it is hard to read as a article. I suggest that legibility should be improved. Arrivisto (talk) 12:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now rewritten the lead and the history sections, adding modern history to the latter. I've pruned the ancient history as there is now a new Main Page. Any editors interested in ancient ports are invited to develop the Historical Ports page.  Arrivisto (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Readability