Talk:USS Ouellet

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To merge HTMS Phutthaloetla Naphalai to USS Ouellet; same vessel, and the service for both navies can be easily discussed on one page. Klbrain (talk) 12:07, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

---

It has been suggested by Blue Elf that HTMS Phutthaloetla Naphalai be merged with this article. The merge was first mentioned at WT:Ships. In my comment there I suggested the discussion be moved here.

• Merge - (this is a copy of my merge comments) - "USS Ouellet (original name) has a decent sized article while HTMS Phutthaloetla Naphalai (second name) is basically a stub and could be easily merged into this page. This is fairly common on ship pages." (proposer has been not'd of this discussion) - wolf 18:10, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. I think it is more likely that the stub will be expanded by those interested in the Royal Thai Navy (including updating and incorporating some information from Phutthayotfa Chulalok-class frigate, the class article), than adding such information to the article on the US ship. Certainly it was a more important component of the Thai navy than the US fleet. Kablammo (talk) 20:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
  • "Likely to be expanded"... based on what? This has been a stub for 15 years. It's had very little activity, gets very little traffic, and the fact the ship is no longer active doesn't help. The class page, as well as the article for her sister ship are both in similar states. This article only has a single source, and that's just a report on the refit for the Thai Navy when she was first acquired. If this page is merged, and the content subsequently expanded, there is nothing saying it can't be spun off again. (jmho) - wolf 23:03, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
• Merge - Much better to read the story of this ship in one place, unless or until the article becomes too large. That is not at all likely, especially if the existing Ouellet text is given a long-overdue comprehensive edit to remove non-encyclopaedic cruft, to improve referencing (and even to add some meat to the several vague references to "coming under fire" in the "Western Pacific"); strangely, DANFS' own text on the ship history seems to have gone AWOL and replaced by "I" - or perhaps it is not written yet).Davidships (talk) 02:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

If it is to be merged, Phutthayotfa Chulalok-class frigate would be a better choice. Kablammo (talk) 19:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Why not do both? - wolf 23:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

• Merge - neither article is so long as to warrant a split, I'd say. Two articles on the same hull are really only warranted in unusual cases like USS Phoenix (CL-46)/ARA General Belgrano, where a significant amount of material can be said about the ship. This is not the case here. And while we're at it, why do we have a separate class article for these ships in Thai service? Even if they're markedly different in terms of weapons and systems from their original configuration, that no more makes them a new class than a heavily modernized ship that stayed in the same navy (which is to say, did HMS Queen Elizabeth's refit create a new class?) Parsecboy (talk) 20:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Parsecboy: you're suggesting that each Thai page be merged into each USN parent page and the Thai class page be deleted or merged/redirected to the Knox class page? - wolf 22:01, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Yes, that seems to be the best course of action to me. Parsecboy (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 12:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)