This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
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 articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article 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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
I don't dispute that the Garibaldi is more carrier than cruiser, and that it was acquired and initially designated as such for political reasons. But the same is true for the Kuznetsov and Kiev cruisers, which many sources also clarify primarily or only as aircraft carriers - and we (rightly, in my view) count them here all the same. Like them, and unlike all traditional aircraft carriers, Garibaldi had anti-ship missiles until 2003; like them, and unlike all traditional aircraft carriers, it had, and still has, torpedoes. It differs from the Invincible-class legal fiction significantly in having its own anti-ship and anti-submarine armament.
I think there's a pretty good case for classifying it as an aircraft cruiser in this article, but we could add a note mentioning the removal/current lack of its anti-ship missiles and/or acknowledging the disputed nature of the ship and historical political incentives for designating it a cruiser. It's worth noting that a lot of the historical cruisers did not really match the specifications of their contemporaries (let alone the displacements of current cruisers!) but they are classified here as such all the same, excepting those which are the barest of legal fictions. PutItOnAMap (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If only this were it.wiki, then we would care what Italian sources said. This is en.wiki, and as such, we follow usage in English sources.
What difference does the armament make? The first generation of carriers generally carried cruiser-grade armament; does that make USS Lexington or Akagi a cruiser? In any event, you are making your own assessment of how to classify the ship, which is not permitted.
On the contrary, Global Security is a garbage source and has been largely deprecated. It should be entirely disregarded.