Category talk:Bogue class aircraft carriers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Category rated as Category-Class on the assessment scale
NA rated as NA-importance on the assessment scale
MILHIST This non-article page is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
NA Non-article pages do not require a rating on the quality scale.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. Wow, what a chore - I'd appreciate if someone looked over my work and cleaned up remaining double redirects. Haukur 23:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed moves to RN names

Ok, I've decided that rather than have move discussions on every single ship's page, it'd be much better to have a single discussion here.

Here's the story with the Bogue class aircraft carriers. The majority were transferred to the Royal Navy under Lend-Lease either immediately upon commissioning or within a few weeks. When these ships were returned to the US, they were all scrapped or sold as merchant ships. None of the Lend-Lease ships ever served as aircraft carriers in the US Navy.

I believe Bogue class carriers which never saw USN service should be listed under their RN names. Some are already listed this way, but most are listed under their American names. Below is a list of moves that need to occur:

Unfortunately, all of these moves are obstructed, so this has been listed on Wikipedia:Requested moves. It seems uncontroversial to me, so hopefully it will happen quickly and smoothly. Please weigh in on this issue below.

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Support it seems obvious to me that ships that were never commissioned in the USN should be listed by their names of the RN. Just as long as their USN designations still redirect to the RN designations. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 19:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Haukur, thanks very much for your help! I'll work on cleaning the double redirects tomorrow. Most of them are in the Bogue class template, so once that's fixed things will look a lot better. TomTheHand 23:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)