M.S.+St.+Louis

[|MS St. Louis Wikipedia Page]


 * 1. Account for the postings (number of revisions, time range from first to last, notation of periods of activity) **

This article has been revised fewer than 500 times since its original post on June 4, 2004. The first posting was known as a stub with three total sentences. It has been much expanded since then, with the most recent update on October 20, 2010, which had undone a revision done earlier in the day. For the first year, most of the updates had a large period between them. For instance, the second overall posting came 4 months after the original. From September 2005 to 2008, the postings became more frequent with postings occurring between two and seven times a month. Starting in 2008, postings came an average of every two or three days. August 11, 2009 was the day with the most postings, 24. All of these postings were by a user named Parkwells, who won awards for being a Wikipedia Good Article Contributor.


 * 2. Describe progress or development in the article from the original post to the most recent update **

As I mentioned above, the first posting was called a stub. Wikipedia even had a line at the bottom that said, “This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.” There are no references on the first page, nor are there any pictures. The article is three sentences long and there are obviously no sub categories. Over a year after the original posting (October 2005), the first external link was added to the website sending viewers to Jennifer Rosenberg’s Jewish Virtual Library to see “The Tragedy of the S.S. St. Louis.” At this point, there is still no reference page, but the information has extended to three paragraphs. The first picture from the MS St. Louis was added on January 12, 2006, and it was only of two women sticking their heads out a window. It is a famous picture of the voyage, but it had no caption and it is not easy to tell that the picture is of a boat (the caption was later added on January 27). In August of 2006, sub categories were added, including The Voyage of the Damned and Later Life. The first references for the article were not added until July 18, 2007 by John Z, when he added six references. At one point, there was a chart in the article with background and specifications of the ship. The chart was added on August 13, 2006 before the introduction section, it later moved to the Later Life section on January 8, 2007, and then moved to the right-hand sidebar where the current bibliographical information is found on Wikipedia on March 12, 2008.

Information wise, the article went from having a majority of its information in the introduction section, to moving it to the Voyage of the Damned section, which is what is most often referenced to the MS St. Louis. The Voyage of the Damned section is still the section with the most information, followed by short sections called Legacy and Later Career. More pictures were finally added to the website in 2008 and 2009 and the main picture was changed to be a picture of the actual ship. With Robert Rosen’s book Saving the Jews: Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Holocaust (2006), more information became available for the page. Eight of the 17 references refer to works from Rosen, as well as a link to his website. The article now has 13 paragraphs, with the large ones found in the Voyage of the Damned section.


 * 3. Critique the quality of the article in its current state (writing quality and factual information) **

The information in this article is overall very factual. It correlates with other websites, especially that of the United States Holocaust Museum. The writing style is fine, but it is sometimes too wordy and adds unneeded information. I think the article gave too much background on the situation in Cuba with the different decrees about accepting refugees, when it could have mentioned the actual journey a little more. I also do not like that the article based its information on the book and the movie Voyage of the Damned. It almost does not give enough background information before the trip on the MS St. Louis and then it does not talk a lot about the conditions on the ship. The Wikipedia article contains only four photographs, but it does have links to other more recent information and some “see also” sites. This website uses Rosen as a reference a lot and does not share many other references. I would not recommend this article over what the United States Holocaust Museum offers. The Museum website has many pictures, including a map of the journey the refugees took on the MS St. Louis. It also has accounts on some of the survivors and is much more thorough.


 * 4. Describe the discussion around the article **

The discussion about the article is actually quite interesting. There was a proposal to begin referring to the ship as the MS St. Louis. Many people were calling the ship the SS St. Louis instead, apparently in the article as well. The debate centered on the fact that the St. Louis in this instance was a motor ship rather than a steam ship. Even though it was a motor ship, many people referred to the ship as the SS St. Louis. Some people even proposed calling the page “St. Louis (ship)” just to alleviate any confusion. However, one person commented that there are two ships (the MS and the SS) and therefore there need to be separate pages. Although the name was officially changed to MS St. Louis for good, an interesting dissenting opinion mentioned that it is not Wikipedia’s job to prescribe “correct” language. The writer mentioned that the page should describe common usage, which would align with the common misconception of the SS St. Louis.

The discussion for this section was preserved as an archive of the proposal and it asked readers not to modify it. It was very intriguing.


 * 5. Provide background information on the most active contributors. **

There are only three contributors that had 10 or more postings, and only eight that had more than five postings. [|Parkwells] is the top contributor with 29 edits. His first revision was on August 11, 2009 and his most recent post was on April 17, 2010. As I mentioned earlier, he posted 24 times just on August 11, which skews the results slightly. When looking up information on Parkwells, he has won nine awards for being a Wikipedia Good Article Contributor. Some of his awards include “The Working Wikipedian’s Barnstar” for his help on Ste. Genevieve, a city in Missouri; “The Copyeditor’s Barnstar” for his work on African American culture; “The Tireless Contributor Barnstar” for his work to a variety of articles; and the “Red Beans and Rice Award” for his contributions to New Orleans and South East Louisiana related articles. He also has a few accomplishments on his page for helping to promote articles to “good article status.” Most of Parkwell’s awards and postings have come from 2007 and later.

The second most frequent user is [|John Z] who modified the web page 18 times between July 18, 2007 and October 28, 2009. When looking at John Z’s page it only says, “Wikipedia is an endless wild party, where no editor is not a vandal, but because as each article is edited it is immediately revised, it is equally clearly ‘the right version.’”

The other 10+ contributor was [|PatGallacher] who posted 10 times between March 25, 2009 and November 18, 2009. When looking at his page, it says, “Pat Gallacher is a Wikipedian who refuses to disclose his real name. He has contributed to the English, Spanish, and Esperanto versions of Wikipedia. He doesn't like vandalism.” The only other thing on his page is the Bronze Editor Star metal he won for being a Veteran Editor II.