Talk:Cog (ship)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated start-Class) Middle Ages Portal Cog (ship) is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. WikiProject Middle Ages To do: WikiProject Ships (Rated start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale Top rated as top-importance on the assessment scale Military history WikiProject     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Maritime warfare task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Medieval warfare task force (c. 500–c. 1500) WikiProject Hanseatic League     (Rated Start-Class) This page is within the scope of WikiProject Hanseatic League, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on the Hanseatic League on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

In expanding this article I kept the external link. It has other valuable links and good pictures. But, I disagree with some of the refernced site's dates, especially for development of the cog. Lou I 20:11, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I reduced the Seal of Lübeck b/c it can be easily seen at a smaller size and added a pic of "Lisa von Lübeck" to illustrate what a complete cog looks like. Naufana : ^talk 02:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Jargon 2 Jargon, Cogs, and Stupid Corrections 3 Lisa von Lübeck picture 4 Request for clarification

[edit] Jargon

I added a {{cleanup-jargon}} because the text, while certainly interesting, is quite difficult to understand without a great deal of prior knowledge of fairly archaic ship-building terms. Some examples from the first paragraph:

• flush-laid
• strakes
• posts
• full lapstrake planking
• garboards
• rabbet
• plank hoods

Peter ^Isotalo 18:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, almost unreadable —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.136.207 (talk • contribs)

Those are not archaic terms. I have linked some of them to existing articles. Tag removed. Meggar 01:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jargon, Cogs, and Stupid Corrections

This is ridicules! First of all, these terms are not “archaic ship-building terms” but common nautical terminology – if you do not want to use them, do not correct this article! Second of all, if you want to describe ship’s structure you need to use precise technical terminology because otherwise you only confuse people. Finally, what an idiot added Peter von Danzig, which was a carvel-built vessel (completely different shipbuilding philosophy!!!), to an article about a cog? If you do not understand the difference between bottom-based cog, nordic lapstrake, and carvel-built shipbuilding techniques and methods switch to something you have at least a slight idea of. --Bojan7 20:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The Peter von Danzing was erroneously labelled as a cog at List of world's largest wooden ships, until someone corrected it about two weeks ago. It could certainly stand to be removed from this article. --Grimhelm 08:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lisa von Lübeck picture

On the Lisa von Lübeck page, it lists her as being a caravel, not a cog. Does anyone know which one is correct? --Tabun1015 02:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed the picture. It is listed as a caravel in both the English and German articles, plus the design and method of construction, as seen in the photograph, are inconsistent with that of a cog.--Tabun1015 05:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for clarification

Can someone please revise this article so that it does not say "from 12th century and earlier". This puts no bounds on when it first appeared, or why the 12th century is mentioned. If things are not clear, it could say, "from 12th century (and perhaps earlier)". Or maybe "clearly apparent in the 12th century, and probably earlier". Please free to delete this section after clarifying. Thanks! Another cog in the wheel - RedKnight7 07:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. It says in the history section that they appeared in the mid-10th century. --Grimhelm 11:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)