Talk:Man-of-war

message: The revised phrasing implies that "man of war" has/had a rather precise definition, which is news to me. What's the authority for that? Stan 04:10, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed 1

message: This article claims that the Galleon evolved out of the Man of War by way of the carrack, while the Galleon article claims that the Man of War succeeded the Galleon as the standard warship. Which is  it?
The "man o' war" is a very general term.  There's not one ship type that can be precisely labeled as the man of war.  If it's a purpose-built warship, it's a man of war. 152.23.196.162 00:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed 2: Man of War vs. Galleon, etc 

message: Please, does anyone know the plural form of the word, man of war? If so, pray tell.
Men of War. Just like Commanders in Chief.  And other terms like that. =)  152.23.196.162 05:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plural Please? 

message: So the Man of War, e.g. Portuguese man of war is named after the this naval vessel? May someone please help me.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gouki88 (talk • contribs) 13:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Organism) Man of War 

message: The article states:
"As two more centuries passed, the man-of-war became even more popular. It became so popular that it was separated it into eight classes, the battleship, the 6th-rate, The 5th-rate, the 4th-rate or Monitor, The 3rd-rate, 2nd-rate, 1st-rate, and the ship of the line. The frigate and man-of-war are the same except that the man-o'-war is slightly larger."
I'm pretty sure this is wrong.  Everything from a 4th-rate to a 1st-rate was considered a ship of the line, and 5th-rates and 6th-rates were considered frigates.  Battleships are just big warships.  I am referring to the Ship of the Line article and the Battleship article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.87.229.138 (talk) 18:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's pretty much nonsense. I've replaced most of the text with a See also link to the Royal Navy rating system. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: The French WP has a great entry on Man O War.  --Smilo Don (talk) 03:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: NOTE: French WP has an incredible site to borrow from 

message: An image used in this article, File:Dutch man of war.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Dutch man of war.JPG)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:26, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Dutch man of war.JPG Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, File:Prince (1670).JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Prince (1670).JPG)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Prince (1670).JPG Nominated for Deletion

message: It is clear from the discussions above (see 'Contradiction' and 'Disputed 2:Man of War v Galleon, etc' above) that the term man-of-war is simply an obsolete expression for "warship" and does not refer to a specific warship design. This article is therefore another "Warship" article under a dated label. The term "man-of-war" belongs in a dictionary and therefore this article breaks the WP:not a dictionary rule. This article should be deleted.Provocateur (talk) 00:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: (also noted at WikiProject Ships) I would agree. A quick usage "reference grab" just in U.S. terms at NHHC reveals A SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE Several General Duties of Officers, OF SHIPS OF WAR; FROM AN ADMIRAL, DOWN TO THE MOST INFERIOR OFFICER in which "Thus a first-rate man of war has twenty-four [midshipmen], and the inferior rates a suitable number in proportion" in context of "ships of war" (warships). In  The Reestablishment of the Navy, 1787-1801 with "on 27 April 1798 Congress authorized the President to acquire, arm, and man no more than twelve vessels, of up to twenty-two guns each. Under the terms of this act several vessels were purchased and converted into ships of war. One of these, the Ganges, a Philadelphia-built merchant ship, became "the first man-of-war to fit out and get to sea" we see the same mixed use. It has been a while since I really looked at the history of the term but my recollection is that it originated in context of a "king's" (national) ship, as opposed to a private ship, equipped and intended purely for combat, as opposed to the also common armed merchant ships. If I recall correctly, in English it was generally reserved in technical use to rated ships, "sloop of war" for example used for the small unrated sloops, though in popular usage it might be applied to any warship. If someone up on Wiki procedure proposes a merge, with a useful paragraph noting the archaic usage, I would support the term being redirected. Palmeira (talk) 12:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete Man-of-war article