This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Holland America Line 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of US Headquarters, 300 Elliott Ave W #100, Seattle, WA -
See map - Photograph entrance sign and building be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Seattle may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The subsidiary-ness of HAL is not obvious online, but http://www.hollandamerica.com/aboutus/news/press/3oost07f.htm mentions the 1989 acquisition for instance. Stan 03:34, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Why are the Holland America ships entitled "ms Ryndam" instead of "MS Ryndam"? If someone doesn't respond I'll go ahead and change it to all caps. Jarfingle 23:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
It's how the line refers to their ships. E.g., on their fleet description [1] -- PatriciaRF 01:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know what differences actually exist between the Vista class and the Signature class? Just based on deck plans, they appear nearly identical ( vista/ signature) - the only differences being mainly on the Observation deck and the Sports deck, plus less major shuffling of walls on other deck. Are the two classes mechanically different in their operations, or was the class name change more for marketing rather than being a design shift? --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 22:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
This section is considerably longer than needed, and contains several presumably "notable" entries that do not meet the criteria in WP:NOTE. In fact, the entire section seems to be a mirror of the dateline from Holland America's website. A simple link to that existing history article on HAL's website is all that's really needed. While some of this content may be notable, much of it serves no purpose other than marketing for the brand. -- 161.88.255.139 00:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I completely disagree with this comment from six years ago. Too many people go no further than Wikipedia. This article should include a lengthy and comprehensive overview of the Dutch history of this cruise line. Schildewaert ( talk) 11:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
I re-removed content that had been inserted by an anon ( user:71.231.130.81) - the anons edit was a reversion to an older version of the article. The re-removal of this content addressed multiple issues - the user had restored a long list of "key people" to the infobox; however, per {{ Infobox Company}}, the infobox should be restricted to at most 3-4 key people. The anon also restored the sections "Notable Dates/Events In Holland America Line History" and "Awards and Accolades". These sections clearly have more to do with advertising/marketing rather than encyclopedic content - additionally, both sections appear direct copies of text from the Holland America website (the awards and history tabs), which is already reachable via the external links section. Lastly, the anons edit remove multiple minor edits/fixes to the article (fleet navbox, commoncat link, image size in infobox, etc). --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 18:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to revive this issue. (See the comments above.) In particular, I'd like to invite users to rethink this justification by user Bellhalla: "I think that typical usage on Wikipedia overrides using a nonstandard lowercase prefix for ships. Related guidance may be gleaned from Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) where non-standard capitalizations are eschewed in favor of more standard punctuation and/or formatting. I have change to the more standard capital letter prefixes...."
Holland America Line (for a long time now an American company run by English speakers) has chosen to use the Dutch nomenclature and style to refer to its ships in English (e.g. ms Maasdam, with "ms" being the standard Dutch abbreviation for "motorschip").
Any decent style guide (including presumably Wikipedia's) will tell you that a foreign name is to be respected and not willy-nilly "corrected" by English speakers. In this case, we have the English speakers at HAL who have quite consciously decided to use the Dutch capitalization style in the references to their ships. I don't know why they have done this, but presumably it was out of deference to the (real or imagined) Dutch heritage of the HAL. I think it is inappropriate to correct this naming decision on their part.
Yes, I do agree that English capitalization conventions should ordinarily apply to foreign references used in English, especially if the application of those conventions in any case have a long history in English. However, that is not the case here. To the contrary, it seems that most English speakers are willing to respect HAL's idiosyncratic decision to retain the Dutch capitalization in English references.
If no one disagrees, I will change the references back to "ms", but I will add an explanation of its origin. Schildewaert ( talk) 01:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
This article's strength is in its listing of the various ships. It's handy to have a page like this.
However, the article is oriented towards the modern HAL, not dealing fully with the rich and fascinating history of this formerly Dutch line. I suppose this reflects the strange thing that has happened to HAL. A proud Dutch shipping line with an incredibly rich Dutch history has been transformed into something completely different. I suppose a decent Wikipedia article about this cruise line would have to have to be in two quite different parts: the first part would be a lengthy description of the history; the second part would be an objective verview of the cruise line's current operations.
The article seems too anglo-centric, not just in its content but also in its style and general approach. Has HAL really been so thoroughly severed from its Dutch roots? The Dutch version of the article is not much better so I cannot draw material from there. There are many HAL enthusiasts in the Netherlands who could write better about the pre-Carnival days. I'm wondering why none of them have taken the time to add depth and substance to the Dutch article.
Parts of the article seem to be drawn from the HAL website, not from proper historical sources. Is this article being maintained by HAL's public relations department? This article would only be complete if it included critical and even negative comments about HAL.
The introduction is poor. Not a true intro at all. The historical references there are too specific and should be moved to the historical section.
Not enough of the material has been footnoted. Schildewaert ( talk) 11:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
The cargo ships are completely ignored. Anyone wanting to provide a more complete listing of ships might find the fleet list at https://www.verenigingdelijn.nl/index.php/vlootlijst/hal and the extensive indexed fleet list at http://www.halpostcards.com/index.html useful. Even adding a count of vessels to the Wikipedia article would significantly improve the content. brian|bp 22:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian abp ( talk • contribs)
I tend to agree with Angelgreat on the ship listing sequence but the actual revision caused some damage with Future being split. The larger problem is the overall flow with History as a Dutch shipping and passenger line (1873 — 1989) logically preceding History as a US-based cruise line (1989 — today) (old to new) and then the ships listed being disassociated and reversed (new to old). Perhaps two top headers in matched sequencing? History with either new/old or old/new and then Ships in matching sequence. A matching table for former ships might also be nice if someone is so inclined. Palmeira ( talk) 18:06, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
This article states that the SS Nieuw Amsterdam and RMS Queen Mary were the only ships in the 1930's to make a profit. Not correct. The Cunard-White Star liners M.V. Britannic and M.V. Georgic were also making a profit due to their low operational costs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.57.150.68 ( talk) 15:57, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Seem to be using the old version of the logo. New branding was introduced Jan 22 2016 http://www.hollandamericablog.com/2016/01/22/hal-embarks-on-the-next-great-chapter-with-new-logo-brand-campaign/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petervcook ( talk • contribs) 20:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Holland America Line. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:54, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
FROM MS Zaandam
Coronavirus pandemic
On 7 March 2020 Zaandam departed Buenos Aires, Argentina, sailing for San Antonio, Chile. [1] [2] She became stranded off the coast of Chile after being denied entry to ports since 14 March. Of the 1,829 people (1,243 passengers, 586 crew) aboard, 13 passengers and 100+ crew members had fallen ill with "flu-like symptoms." [3] As of 24 March, the vessel was sailing for Port Everglades, Florida hoping to dock on 30 March. The total of sick persons aboard had risen to 77 as of 24 March. [4] Four passengers died while waiting for permission to transit the Panama Canal with the number of sick aboard climbing to 148. Holland America dispatched sister ship Rotterdam to aid the ship by bringing supplies, additional medical staff, and COVID-19 tests, and also with the intention of transferring healthy passengers onto Rotterdam. [1]
On 27 March, Zaandam was denied transit through the Panama Canal due to the number of sick people on board. [5] On 28 March 2020, however, both Zaandam and the accompanying vessel Rotterdam were cleared by the Panama Department of Health to transit through the Panama Canal towards their destination in Florida. [6] Rotterdam had followed Zaandam through the Panama Canal on her way to Port Everglades, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. An unstated number of passengers from Zaandam were transferred to the second vessel on 28 March 2020. [7] [8] [9] At that time, the crew of Zaandam included four physicians and four nurses while Rotterdam's roster included two physicians and four nurses. [10]
By 31 March 2020, the number reported as being "ill" had increased to 193. [11] By 31 March, Rotterdam had taken almost 1,400 people from Zaandam; none had flu-like symptoms, 450 passengers and 602 crew members on her sister ship. [12]
As of 30 March 2020, Holland America had not received permission to dock either vessel at Fort Lauderdale as planned. According to an Associated Press report, the city's mayor, Dean Trantalis, "said he didn't want the ship to dock near his city, at least without extensive precautions." [13] [14] The governor of Florida was also hesitant to accept Zaandam at Fort Lauderdale because the state already had so much to deal with during the pandemic; as of 31 March 2020, a decision had not yet been made. The president of Holland America made a public plea for acceptance of the ship and expressed concern that various ports in several countries had been reluctant to provide provisions and medical supplies. [15] During the governor's press conference on 30 March, he said that the best solution might be to send medical assistance to the ship. [16] On 1 April, the governor relented by saying that citizens of Florida could disembark when the ship arrived off the state. 190 passengers and crew reported "flu-like" symptoms and eight tested positive for COVID-19. [17]
President Donald Trump said on 1 April 2020 that "we have to help the people" [on the ships] and that discussions were underway about Canada and the United Kingdom "arranging flights to retrieve their citizens from the ship". News reports on 2 April stated that the ships would be allowed to dock at Port Everglades that afternoon. Nine passengers were to be taken to local hospitals but 45 others who are ill would not be disembarking. The cruise line was making arrangements for passengers from other countries to leave via chartered aircraft. [18] Peter K Burian ( talk) 14:36, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |last-author-amp=
ignored (|name-list-style=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |last-author-amp=
ignored (|name-list-style=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |last-author-amp=
ignored (|name-list-style=
suggested) (
help)