Talk:USS District of Columbia

General characteristics

@ErnestKrause: why dump-in all this content from the Columbia-class page? Typically, ship articles are specific to the ship, and all the class-wide content is left to the class page (with the exception of the infobox). This page already has 30Mb of content, (more than half from that single edit and over two-thirds of which is duplicated from the class page), and the boat is still years away from being launched. - wolf 00:34, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Article is currently under development to move it toward peer review quality. Other editors will begin to trim the article when they log-in during the coming week. The specific construction details will also be subject to improvement during the build cycle for this submarine which started earlier this month. It might be useful to let other editors have a look at it during this coming week. Would you be interested in participating in the upgrade process for this article? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:43, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 13 July 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:17, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

---

USS District of Columbia (SSBN-826) → USS District of Columbia – Only ship of this name so number is superfluous. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 19:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:39, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Oppose - there are numerous ships named "USS Columbia", or that otherwise have "Columbia" in their name, this small addition to help disambiguate these articles, many of which also have hull numbers included, (like so many other ship articles), is only a benefit, with no demonstrable drawback. - wolf 02:51, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Naming articles about military ships does not recommend using the hull number unless it is needed for disambiguation giving the example of "HMS Royal Scotsman (only one ship of the name – requires no disambiguation)". This also aligns with the more general guidelines on being WP:CONCISE. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 07:01, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Unless someone can come up with a way to disambiguate all ship articles, there will always be pages that require a hull number in the title, which means that even with a guideline (not a policy) "recommending" the removal of the hull number from some pages, it still looks silly and unnecessary. - wolf 22:56, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Oppose - as Wolf says. PRRfan (talk) 03:40, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Naming articles about military ships does not recommend using the hull number unless it is needed for disambiguation giving the example of "HMS Royal Scotsman (only one ship of the name – requires no disambiguation)". This also aligns with the more general guidelines on being WP:CONCISE. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 07:01, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Support, USS District of Columbia is both the correct name and the natural disambiguation from any other USS Columbia's, even without the unnecessary (SSBN-826). Removing the ship number is inline with naming conventions. --Cerebral726 (talk) 17:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

I"m looking at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships) and not seeing the naming conventions you mention. Can you point to them? PRRfan (talk) 18:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

In the linked guidlines, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Naming articles about military ships does not recommend using the hull number unless it is needed for disambiguation giving the example of "HMS Royal Scotsman (only one ship of the name – requires no disambiguation)". This also aligns with the more general guidelines on being WP:CONCISE -Cerebral726 (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - The NCSHIPS guideline on this has always been contentious, and never had a consensus to begin with. (It was added by a small clique of users who dislike hull and pennant numbers, and prefer to use launch year for disambiguation instead.) Most US ships are identified by both name and hull number in a broad range of sources. A lot of readers will thus expect the hull number to be included in an article title, and thus its inclusion meets WP:NC#Consistent titling, which is policy. BilCat (talk) 23:40, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

This. - wolf 00:51, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.