User talk:Joshbaumgartner
Add topicLatest comment: 2 months ago by Joshbaumgartner in topic hyphens in vessel classes, including vessel type
Italian Royal Navy
[edit]I think changing the English description of Royal Italian Navy (Q855186) to Royal Navy is unwise. It directly conflicts with the British Royal Navy. English historians would always refer to Italian Royal Navy or Regia Marina, never just Royal Navy. Vicarage (talk) 13:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
hyphens in vessel classes, including vessel type
[edit]The convention for vessel classes is to have a hyphen before the class and describe the vessel type. Your new Nikopolis-class torpedo boat (Q138642043) should have English label Nikopolis-class torpedo boat. Vicarage (talk) 13:42, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- That is true when the term is followed by the type, for example, 'Nimitz-class aircraft carrier', where 'Nimitz-class' is an adjective of 'aircraft carrier', but not when simply the class itself, such as 'Nimitz class', where 'Nimitz' is the adjective of 'class'. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- But we have Nimitz-class aircraft carrier (Q309336), and all vessel classes should be similar. I don't understand why you are omitting the vessel type in your new classes, as it makes them inconsistent with the rest of WD. Vicarage (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- That is a different question. My reply was specific to the use of hyphens. As far as new items go, they are groundwork for further statements and development, so their exact L/D/A formats will develop with batches soon. The convention of including ship types is at odds with general WD naming conventions but is pretty broad because the original labels were originally imported from enwiki which uses that format for their own reasons. As such it remains the default norm, but isn't exactly universal. At any rate, my batches will include them since they are so common. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 17:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for changing your process from now on. XXXX-class YYY is certainly common in naval literature and en:WP, with XXXX-class an abbreviation. If you are doing automated changes, I suggest you set short name (P1813) to XXXX too. This will allow languages with other conventions to automate their naming. At some point I will do a sweep to get all the labels consistent again. The convention generally applies when its the lead ship name, not numbers or projects etc. Vicarage (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- I guess I'm not sure what change you are talking about, or what the point of your comment is. Anyway, take care. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 18:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for changing your process from now on. XXXX-class YYY is certainly common in naval literature and en:WP, with XXXX-class an abbreviation. If you are doing automated changes, I suggest you set short name (P1813) to XXXX too. This will allow languages with other conventions to automate their naming. At some point I will do a sweep to get all the labels consistent again. The convention generally applies when its the lead ship name, not numbers or projects etc. Vicarage (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- That is a different question. My reply was specific to the use of hyphens. As far as new items go, they are groundwork for further statements and development, so their exact L/D/A formats will develop with batches soon. The convention of including ship types is at odds with general WD naming conventions but is pretty broad because the original labels were originally imported from enwiki which uses that format for their own reasons. As such it remains the default norm, but isn't exactly universal. At any rate, my batches will include them since they are so common. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 17:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
- But we have Nimitz-class aircraft carrier (Q309336), and all vessel classes should be similar. I don't understand why you are omitting the vessel type in your new classes, as it makes them inconsistent with the rest of WD. Vicarage (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)