Talk:C&C 34/36
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the C&C 34/36 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Multiple specs in the infobox
[edit]I started the article with just a single set of specs for the boat titled in the infobox. The addition of many different specs for many different models I find very confusing and hard to follow which-one-is-which. There seems to be some new specs added, too, that are unsourced, like "Air draft". - Ahunt (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
- I rearranged the rig dimensions (IJPE) a bit to make the layout easier to read. I also added a couple of references to show where that and some other data comes from. I'm open to suggestions on how to make it all easier to read. The entries on Sailboat Data for the 34/36 are not completely accurate. For instance, this is no such thing as a "C&C 34-2". Randy Browning, the owner of Sailboat Data, and I were working on getting that tidied up when he got sick a couple of years ago. He never really recovered from his illness, and has recently passed away, so those entries will remain incorrect for the time being. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken Heaton (talk • contribs)
- Thanks for working on this. I am sorry to hear about Randy Browning, his website is a great reference. I hope someone will keep it up to date and continue to work on it.
- There are still a number of problems I have with how the infobox reads. 1. The attempts to put all the specs for all the models is incomplete, while there are multiple I/J/P/E, for instance, there is only one LOA and waterline length, even though the C&C 34+R has a different LOA and WLL, so the multiple stats are still incomplete. 2. Even if totally complete (in fact especially if totally complete), the myriad of multiple stats are very hard to read and confusing. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a specialist sailing reference aimed at sailors, boat owners or buyers, but a general encyclopedia for general readers and the presentation is suppossed to be clear and understandable. Template:Infobox sailboat specifications gives no guidence on how the box is to be used with regard to multiple models, but we did have this same debate at WP:AIR about the use of multiple specs for aircraft. The same problem arose there, that long lists of multiple specs for multiple models are very complicated and confusing to readers. The solution we settled on there was to present one set of specs for the base model, or a representative variant, and then describe any differences in the text describing each variant, which is the approach I took with this article, too. The infobox, labelled C&C 34/36, presented just the specs for the C&C 34/36 variant and then the variants section described each model, showing where each was different from the base model. - Ahunt (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
- "C&C 34+R has a different LOA and WLL" - actually it doesn't. That one of the problems with the info on Sailboat Data, the various sources Randy used to compile it. All the 34/36's came from the same mould and have the exact same LOA, LWL (WWL), and beam. Some preliminary information was published by C&C before any actual hulls were produced and there are discrepancies between the numbers in those compared to the later documents which contained the actual measurements as built.
- There are still a number of problems I have with how the infobox reads. 1. The attempts to put all the specs for all the models is incomplete, while there are multiple I/J/P/E, for instance, there is only one LOA and waterline length, even though the C&C 34+R has a different LOA and WLL, so the multiple stats are still incomplete. 2. Even if totally complete (in fact especially if totally complete), the myriad of multiple stats are very hard to read and confusing. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a specialist sailing reference aimed at sailors, boat owners or buyers, but a general encyclopedia for general readers and the presentation is suppossed to be clear and understandable. Template:Infobox sailboat specifications gives no guidence on how the box is to be used with regard to multiple models, but we did have this same debate at WP:AIR about the use of multiple specs for aircraft. The same problem arose there, that long lists of multiple specs for multiple models are very complicated and confusing to readers. The solution we settled on there was to present one set of specs for the base model, or a representative variant, and then describe any differences in the text describing each variant, which is the approach I took with this article, too. The infobox, labelled C&C 34/36, presented just the specs for the C&C 34/36 variant and then the variants section described each model, showing where each was different from the base model. - Ahunt (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
- I see the merit of your suggestion that we only publish the specifications for the C&C 34/36+ in the info box as that is by far the most common model / variant. I'll make those edits. Please note, there are only three actual models, the 34/36+ (first sold as the 34+, then as the 34/36+, and later sold as the 36+), the 34/36R, (first sold as the 34R, then as the 34/36R, later sold as the 36R), and the 34/36XL (later sold as the 36XL). There was never a 34/36 (no + sign). There was also never a 34+R, nor was there a 34-2, these are just incorrect names for one of the +, XL or R models. To complicate things further, there was another C&C called a 36R, way back in 1971 or so.
- "I hope someone will keep it up to date and continue to work on it." There is a small group of his friends who are carrying it forward, they are just getting used to managing it, it was (and still is) a big project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken Heaton (talk • contribs)
- The specs are much more readable now, thanks for doing that. It sounds like there is more work to do at Sailboat Data. It is hard to write good Wikipedia articles when the refs have incorrect information! - Ahunt (talk) 20:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)