 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
When I saw the name of this type of boat I assumed it was named after the whitehall steps, on the Thames, near Westminster. Small, oar-powered boats had been used on the Thames for hundreds of years. Whitehall steps, near the seat of government, was one of the loading points. Is the original author sure that these boats are named after a street in NYC? Geo Swan 17:32, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
There is some debate about the origin of the whitehall, which may have originated in Britain, or at the very least it's design and therefore namesake could have been influenced by small craft working in London. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.207.211.194 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 2006 July 27Skysail2 (talk) 22:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)skysail2
A source for the naming of this boat as 'whitehall' is Howard Chapelle in his 'American Small Sailing Craft' (Chapter 4). He does indicate that they probably developed from the naval gig in the 1820s and that the hull form is a refinement of an old type, rather than a new design.
I'm uncomfortable with referencing the Whitehall Spirit Solo, a commercial product, and even more uncomfortable with describing it as the "latest version of the Whitehall design." Variations on the Whitehall are built every day; the author cannot say with any authority that this is the latest design. Cwegscheid 02:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the questions about the origins of the Whitehall, although I think at this point there's a majority opinion that they did originate in NYC, which I guess is a result of Howard Chapelle. But in general, I'd say any statements about the boat's origins should be referenced. For that matter, there are a lot of statements in this article that should be supported by citations. Also, on a separate note, some Whitehalls (and wood ones at that) are being built today that are longer than 22ft and have crews larger than two. Scudck (talk) 00:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
"Original research" and "Unreferenced" tagged. Article appears to be wholly original synthesis and a little subjective opinion. Citations needed all over the place. --Ryanwould (talk) 06:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
It issue with "original research" is actually more of where the majority of the text is generally paraphrased from the Gardner book.