Talk:Ship class

message: This is mostly a description of "ship classes" in general, and not the "lead ship" specifically, so the article title is a bit misleading; but of course all the links are to this one and not to "class".  Splitting into two shorter articles is possible, say "ship class" or "class (shipbuilding)", although the one article reads well now. Any ideas, or is this too much ado about nothing? Stan 22:23, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Move to ship class and rewrite the opening paragraph. Gdr 12:27, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)
(from WP:RM)
===Lead ship → Ship class===
* because it's really about the latter subject. The first paragraph will need a bit of rewriting, but that's all. Gdr 12:29, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)
**There are a lot of links to lead ship. Will all those need changing? Will it make sense for them all to point to ship class instead? Angela. 03:24, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)
***I think one article can work for both topics, with some careful writing in the first paragraph. Gdr 22:34, 2004 Nov 3 (UTC)
===Move===
Sorry - I seem to have caused some confusion with my move of lead ship to ship class.  As requested on WP:RM, I moved the page; however, having read the text, I realised that there was sufficient information about the term "lead ship" to leave that there - see lead ship - so it isn't just a simple redirect here: the two articles cross-refer.  The bulk of the information was about "ship class" and remains here.  Hope that helps, and apologies for any confusion caused. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:45, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Move from [[lead ship]]

message: Sorry - I seem to have caused some confusion with my move of lead ship to ship class.  As requested on WP:RM, I moved the page; however, having read the text, I realised that there was sufficient information about the term "lead ship" to leave that there - see lead ship - so it isn't just a simple redirect here: the two articles cross-refer.  The bulk of the information was about "ship class" and remains here.  Hope that helps, and apologies for any confusion caused. -- ALoan (Talk) 23:45, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: This article misses the topic of ship classification entirely (there is no such topic with the name ship classification).  See Classification society.  To me, this is much more important than lines of military ships build to a template and thus labeled as a 'class'.  I will try to do something about this when I find the time.--Dj245 22:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ship Classes- the other kind

message: I've added a reference to confirm the definition of ship class given here. The article excerpt used as a reference (the full text of the article is not currently available online) doesn't fully spell out A.D. Baker's bonafides.  The book it reports he authored, Combat Fleets of the World, is the U.S. Naval Institute's Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World.  He edited it from 1977 to 2002. --Columbia clipper (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference Definition of Ship Class

message: Other than it being a pain to correct, is there any reason not to have proper hyphenation in the various ship-class articles, such as County class cruiser → County-class cruiser? (We use a link workaround in this article.) — kwami (talk) 06:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  hyphenation