Talk:RFA Sir Tristram
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the RFA Sir Tristram 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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg)
 | On 22 May 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from TV Sir Tristram to RFA Sir Tristram. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Page move
editHer most notable history is from when she was in active service as "RFA Sir Tristram", including her role in the Falklands War. Just because she has been resignated as a training ship, with limited history since (and I suspect even less to come now), I don't believe justifies renaming the page. - wolf 07:31, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with wolf. Despite the name change in 2008, I think the original name remains the ship's most identifiable one. It's in keeping with the article names for ships of the same class and still retains Tristram in the title. On a side note, the current name is incorrect; the Sir has been dropped so the name should be TV Tristram. Ajsmith141 (talk) 10:09, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Best known name is RFA Sir Tristram. Going to revert the bold page move Lyndaship (talk) 10:23, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
@Blackshod:, I see you just changed the name again. Care to comment? - wolf 13:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Agree that RFA Sir Tristram is the better title - it's the name that the ship undertook most of its 38 year life, and the name under which the ship went to war. And once the move had been reverted and a discussion started here, it shouldn't have been moved again until consensus had been reached.Nigel Ish (talk) 15:09, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Requested move 22 May 2022
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
TV Sir Tristram → RFA Sir Tristram – Per consensus above, and reasons provided by those contributing that consensus. The editor who first moved the page, (and then moved it again), did so without providing rationale in summaries or discussing on talk page, nor are they expected to as they have a history of page move-warring and refusing to engage on talk pages. - wolf 00:57, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support RFA Sir Tristram is the better title per consensus above. Dormskirk (talk) 09:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support RFA Sir Tristam is the better title. Llammakey (talk) 11:16, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - of the three potential ship prefixes (i.e. MV Sir Tristram as used when the ship was owned by the British Army, RFA Sir Tristram used when in service with the RFA and TV Sir Tristram used when the ship is a immobile training vessel for special forces), the great majority of the ship's career was as operated by the RFA and it's under this prefix that the ship went to war.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support RFA Sir Tristram per best known name Lyndaship (talk) 13:41, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support per WP:COMMONNAME. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support per WP:COMMONNAME. WCMemail 14:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)