Talk:List of battleships of the Royal Swedish Navy

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. A merge seems to be the direction here, maybe followed by a uncontested rename. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:07, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

List of battleships of the Royal Swedish Navy → List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy — What they actually were. Srnec (talk) 01:08, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Might it not be called List of capital ships of the Royal Swedish Navy ? 76.65.128.198 (talk) 05:29, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose -- The effect will be to overwrite a complete (but less well formatted) article with an incomplete one. The ships of the line article has much fuller information, but is not formatted as a table, which looks better. The best answer is to Close RM and Merge. After merger one article should be converted to a redirect to the other. Which this should be will depend on the precedents for similar lists for otehr nations. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:27, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

  I didn't even notice that the other article existed. The situation is patently ridiculous, but I also support a merge, if it's possible and a mere redirect otherwise. Srnec (talk) 05:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

  As indicated at Talk: List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy , that name is also not quite correct, since it includes ships that predate using lines of battle. (which is why I suggest a new article with a new edit history be called List of capital ships of the Royal Swedish Navy as a result of a merger. ) 76.65.128.198 (talk) 05:57, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I suspect that "capital ships" is not a contemporary term either. My main view of the name was based on the WP precedent for cognate articles on other countries. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• List of battleships of the Royal Swedish Navy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) are two different articles. 76.65.128.198 (talk) 05:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge

• I suggest that List of battleships of the Royal Swedish Navy and List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy be merged together into an article named List of capital ships of the Royal Swedish Navy. For the discussion, please see Talk:List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy. 76.65.128.198 (talk) 05:38, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
• Strongly support merger. These are two articles covering the same ground: see RM commetn above. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support merge, though these lists are usually by country (see for instance List of battleships of Germany, List of battleships of the Ottoman Empire, etc.) rather than by navy (as opposed to List of battleships of the German navies, List of battleships of the Ottoman Navy, etc.), so List of capital ships of Sweden would be the better choice as far as consistency goes. Parsecboy (talk) 10:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support Parsecboy's proposal. Manxruler (talk) 10:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
• Comment - I would support a merge to either 'List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy' or 'List of ships of the line of Sweden'. All of the ships listed are ships of the line, none are battleships (as wikipedia defines them). We have List of ships of the line of the Royal Navy, List of ships of the line of France, List of ships of the line of the United States Navy, etc. There aren't any 'Lists of capital ships...' beyond List of capital ships of minor navies. Capital ships is a vaguer and less precise term, which may be useful if we were dealing with both battleships and ships of the line in one list. As we aren't I suggest that this term not be used and the content merged into List of ships of the line of the Royal Swedish Navy and that title changed to '... of Sweden' if so desired. Benea (talk) 14:43, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
  • The problem is a number of the entries predate the adoption of line-ahead tactics by several decades (and in some cases by a century or so), so "line of battle ship" isn't strictly correct for them. Parsecboy (talk) 00:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support. I would actually prefer "capital ships" to "ships of the line" as I suspect it will be more familiar to lay readers. bobrayner (talk) 17:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

• Since a year and a half have gone by since this discussion ended and was forgotten, I have redirected this page and moved the other to List of capital ships of Sweden. Parsecboy (talk) 17:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)