Talk:Monitor (warship)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Monitor (warship) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Maritime / Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States / American Civil War / World War I / World War II

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force
	World War I task force
	World War II task force

Ships

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 articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

Suggestions

I'm not expert enough to change the page, but I'd make a couple of suggestions which, if right, could be added to the page.

While much factual information is given, my understanding is that the monitors' role was essentially as a floating gun platforms with one or two (or more??) guns much heavier than normal for craft of this size, and slow speed. The article does not make this clear (as of 19 April 2005). I believe monitors were more used against land targets than for naval warfare, with the exception of the well-known USS Monitor.

Monitors continued to be constructed until World War II, Some monitors had 15-inch guns, while the largest guns widely used on battleships were 16-inch. (A few battleships had 18-inch guns, but they had a reputation for more recoil damage to their host than gunnery damage to the enemy). The impression is given in the article that the monitors were superseded by ironclad battleships. The first ironclad battleship was commishioned in 1861 (HMS Warrior); it would be more appropriate to consider perhaps the bomb ketch (carrying one very large mortar) of about the time of the Peninsular war giving way to early monitors then to WWI and WWII monitors; and the old wooden ship-of-the-line giving way to increasingly powerful ironclad battleships from 1861 on. 213.208.107.91 03:10, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Origin of the name: My understanding has always been that the Monitor (And the subsequent class name) came from the monitor lizard, a very large, dangerous and well-armoured reptile. Not the Latin "To Admonish". Can either source be confirmed?

I agree with defining a monitor as a floating gun platform. I also note that the U.S. Civil War era monitors were indeed heavily armored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.88.236.192 (talk) 13:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Armament

Quote: "One British monitor mounting an 18 inch gun was able to shell a bridge several miles inland". Question: Which? ((RJP 11:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]

General Wolfe, one of the Lord Clive class monitors, the gun in question came from those for the "large light cruisers" (see Glorious class aircraft carrier) for an explanation. GraemeLeggett 12:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. (RJP 13:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Twentieth century -> Second World War

In the sentence "Only one United States Navy monitor, the Amphitrite (laid down in 1874), still existed at the start of the war", the words (laid down in 1874) have just been added by me, because it is possible for a reader to assume that the Amphitrite was some sort of modern ship when it fact it is ancient. I was surprised to see that it was old as it was, as the reference gave no clue that this ship was anything other than an antique. Hi There 05:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet river monitors

i added the short story of one of famousest River monitors "Zheleznyakov" in Soviet Union. please dont crash it all. i think the story of soviet monitors shall be told in wikipedia to. not only they were build until WW2 they were also big part of action during the WW2 in the south west and far east of Soviet Union and Asian battles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.245.63.234 (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

here more infos and fotos of the ship http://heroesship.ru/monitor-zheleznyakov/

Ironclad vs. Monitor Terminology

The Ironclad article makes a clear definition of the required characteristics a vessel must possess to be categorized as an ironclad. The article for Monitor does not plainly make a similar statement. My point is that, if the USS Monitor is an ironclad, then what is a "monitor"--the very namesake of this term? I personally have never heard of a category of ship called "monitor" and have always believed the correct term to be "ironclad," but it appears to be well documented here. What isn't is the firm definition of how a monitor is significantly different from an ironclad. To me they seem to be synonyms.--Heavy (talk) 02:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The opening makes clear to my mind the types of ship that have been called a monitor - the early ones were ironclads and the 20th century ones were steel hulls. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A monitor is either...

a low-freeboard ironclad turret-ship (1860s-90s) (named after USS Monitor)
a coastal bombardment vessel (1910-1950) (so called because Churchill liked the name)

The common features between the two are big guns and limited seakeeping ability. There are plenty of non-monitor ironclads. Regards, The Land (talk) 13:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC) this ship was very useful![reply]

re: merge proposal (river monitor into monitor)

respectfully oppose; the subject merits a separate article, also there's too much material there to merge in & the monitor article is already fairly long; adding all of that to it wouldn't be helpful for either topic. Lx 121 (talk) 02:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think that a brief "river monitors" section can be added to this article with a main article link instead. Karmos (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The picture of the USS Monior is a submarine and has no turrets. I think someone muddled the pictures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.20.128.61 (talk) 01:03, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Linking?

Hi,

slightly curious that there is no link to the "Admiral Spiridov" class monitors (or other monitors, for all I know). Today it was on WP front page, and clicking "Monitor" to learn more, there was no way to get to those russkies.

T85.166.161.51 (talk) 13:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The origins of the term

I didn't want to edit the article as I don't know is this source reliable enough, but in a book by Russell F. Weigley titled "A Great Civil War. A Military and Political History, 1861-1865" published in the year 2000 I've just read that the name of the USS Monitor came indeed from admonishing, like it is suggested above. You may find this information on the page number 121. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.146.133.218 (talk) 21:51, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Monitor (warship). 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: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:36, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

The photo in this article of "probably the USS Sangamon" is listed as a photo of "probably USS Patapsco" in ironclad warship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.212.97 (talk) 22:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Sub-aquatic warfare" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Sub-aquatic warfare. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 30#Sub-aquatic warfare until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Talk 05:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rename proposal

Do y'all think it would be a good idea to rename this article Monitor (warship type) or Monitor (type of warship) to better differentiate it from the namesake USS Monitor? Wandavianempire (talk) 18:57, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]