Talk:SS Red Oak Victory
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SS Red Oak Victory 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)
Article name
editThis article is improperly named. It should be named either SS Red Oak Victory (its civilian name) or USS Red Oak Victory (AK-235) (its official US Navy name & designation)—not a conglomeration of the two. Maralia 02:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I would go with the civilian name, because that's how it's represented as part of the national park. howcheng {chat} 02:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I too believe "SS Red Oak Victory" is the most appropriate. Technically, I believe "ex USS Red Oak Victory (AK-235)" would be the correct designation, since her name was stricken from the naval register long ago.Martinihenry (talk) 02:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Moved to SS Red Oak Victory. howcheng {chat} 18:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, this had fallen off my radar. I've tweaked the article text a bit to clarify the Navy connection. Maralia (talk) 20:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
It's partially visible in a live webcam feed
editSpecifically the "Around the Nest" feed here. Include? Too Obscure? - Immigrant laborer (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
European format for date on article for American ship
editI noticed that the article has dates in European style. Of course, there is nothing wrong with this format, but is it appropriate for an article detailing an American ship? My general impression has always been that articles related to European issues or things should have European dates. Should the same not be true for articles on American things? Thoughts? Blinkfan (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Because this is a Military article it follows WP:MILDATE rules, I also believe that WP:SHIPS has agreed that all ship articles are to use this date format.Pennsy22 (talk) 03:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, because WP:MILDATE but I don't think that WP:SHIPS has taken such a restricted position on date formats for all ship articles. It they have, they don't seem to have documented that decision in any of the the obvious places.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 10:37, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Trappist the monk, you are correct, I couldn't find anything on the WP:SHIPS page that said it was required, but I mostly edit warships so it applies to almost everything I do. Sorry about any confusion.Pennsy22 (talk) 10:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)