Talk:Concordia-class fleet carrier: Difference between revisions
Aeronautico (talk | contribs) (New page: New article on the Concordia line. If anyone has more to add to its history or whatever else you can contribute, please feel free to do so. I will be updating this article as time goes on....) |
|||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
-Aeronautico | -Aeronautico | ||
You need to rework the last line. It's speculation and just doesn't fit well with the article. I only glanced over the rest but think you may also need to fix some more of it up as well. | |||
- Dund | |||
I agree. While the Midway class may have been developed as an economical replacement for the ageing fleet carriers, I doubt they would decomission the entire fleet of Concordias immediately. | |||
The rest of the article seems okay, even if I don't like Americanisms, but that's just me. - Wedge009 | |||
The history might want to be rewritten a bit more though. I'm not sure how we should do these sometimes...do we include every single detail in a article like this or do we spread it out between individual ship articles? While I like the idea of having tons of info in one place, we have to organize it in a way that is useful to both us and anyone else wanting to buff up on WC history. | |||
- Dund | |||
What is the source of the 28,000 tonne mass figure? As far as I know, there was never a mass stated for the Concordia class. | |||
-dragon1 | |||
I did a quick bit of looking last night and could not find a source for it. So it should probably be removed. | |||
--[[User:Dundradal|Dundradal]] 14:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Done. - Wedge | |||
---- | |||
Cut the following ships from the list, given their dubious status as ''Concordia''s and in some cases even as proper carriers: | |||
*''TCS Armageddon'' | |||
*''TCS Leyte Gulf'' | |||
*''TCS Liberty'' | |||
*''TCS Lincoln'' | |||
*''TCS Moskva'' (Destroyed) | |||
*''TCS Petrov'' | |||
*''TCS Saratoga'' | |||
*''TCS Verdun'' (Destroyed) | |||
*''TCS Viking'' | |||
*''TCS Viper'' (Destroyed) | |||
*''TCS Winterrowd'' (Destroyed) | |||
- [[User:Bob McDob|Bob]] 11:34, 21 August 2010 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 01:24, 9 September 2012
New article on the Concordia line. If anyone has more to add to its history or whatever else you can contribute, please feel free to do so. I will be updating this article as time goes on. Thank you.
-Aeronautico
You need to rework the last line. It's speculation and just doesn't fit well with the article. I only glanced over the rest but think you may also need to fix some more of it up as well.
- Dund
I agree. While the Midway class may have been developed as an economical replacement for the ageing fleet carriers, I doubt they would decomission the entire fleet of Concordias immediately.
The rest of the article seems okay, even if I don't like Americanisms, but that's just me. - Wedge009
The history might want to be rewritten a bit more though. I'm not sure how we should do these sometimes...do we include every single detail in a article like this or do we spread it out between individual ship articles? While I like the idea of having tons of info in one place, we have to organize it in a way that is useful to both us and anyone else wanting to buff up on WC history.
- Dund
What is the source of the 28,000 tonne mass figure? As far as I know, there was never a mass stated for the Concordia class. -dragon1
I did a quick bit of looking last night and could not find a source for it. So it should probably be removed. --Dundradal 14:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Done. - Wedge
Cut the following ships from the list, given their dubious status as Concordias and in some cases even as proper carriers:
- TCS Armageddon
- TCS Leyte Gulf
- TCS Liberty
- TCS Lincoln
- TCS Moskva (Destroyed)
- TCS Petrov
- TCS Saratoga
- TCS Verdun (Destroyed)
- TCS Viking
- TCS Viper (Destroyed)
- TCS Winterrowd (Destroyed)
- Bob 11:34, 21 August 2010 (CDT)
