Talk:USS Wasp (CV-7)

Wreck?

Article could use a paragraph on information on the wreck if it's been located and dived. Tempshill 19:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Criticisms

Okay writing for a third rate military rah-rah sight (lots or "roared down the runway," depicticions of being "undaunted", etc.) Poor for an encyclopedia. Please, just the facts, mam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.191.157.40 (talk) 04:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Concur. FAR too many adverbs.--Phyllis1753 (talk) 19:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The text here is a verbatim transcript from the entry in the Dictionary of American Fighting Ships [1]. It's a decent start, but I agree it needs work to become more encyclopedic in tone. SkipSmith (talk) 04:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Foolish to label it a third rate military rah-rah sight. Just the facts and no hypocrisy please! take a little of your criticism and apply ample dose to self mam!! No verification the ship exceeded 15 kilotons standard load in accord with Washington Naval Treaty so have stricken comments concerning such. No such verification found in my research if you have it document it please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.90.88.57 (talk) 05:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Missing info

Dont know if its avalaible..but there is no info about how many casualties and injured were in the final struck and fires of Wasp.. not for morbid info.. but its a part of the history . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.9.165.184 (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Class

Wasp looks like a mini-Yorktown-class.--LandonJaeger (talk) 04:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

As explained in the article, Wasp was specifically designed to use United States available Washington Naval Treaty tonnage to get more than USS Langley (CV-1) offered with similar tonnage. Langeley was simultaneously converted to a seaplane tender to remain within the total treaty tonnage limitation for aircraft carriers. In comparison to Yorktown, Wasp retained aircraft capacity by sacrificing speed and protection. When the Washington Naval Treaty was abandoned a few years later, Hornet was built to get what the navy had really wanted when Wasp represented all that was available. Wasp vulnerabilities may be best appreciated by comparing the combat histories of USS Ranger (CV-4), HMS Ark Royal (91), Japanese aircraft carrier Sōryū, and the escort carriers with Yorktown class aircraft carriers, Illustrious class carriers, and Shōkaku class aircraft carriers.Thewellman (talk) 19:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Copy & paste

Some parts of the article, mainly on the Early days section are exactly the same as the ones you can find at hazegray. 210.165.133.93 (talk) 09:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Both are taken from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships, which is in the public domain. - BilCat (talk) 10:17, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Faulty Conversion

Some faulty conversion is being used that has 5" as 130mm. Should be 127mm. I didn't look at the other conversions (miles to km) but they may be suspect too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RZid (talk • contribs) 05:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Name

I'm not military historian, but this ship is noted to be named after USS Wasp (1814) without explanation. Why that ship? Why not the four preceding ships of the name? Is it something that was specifically noted for this ship when it was named? Every other ship that lists a namesake mentions the insect, which seems logical. If there isn't a specific reason, someone more informed than I am should change that. Westrim (talk) 11:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Second question about the name that follows from the first: I can see that that the Essex class and amphibious assault ship/class are so named to honor the Wasp as part of the carrier lineage, but why was this ship named the Wasp? I see that three of the preceding carriers were named after battles, and the Essex class mostly repeated that, but there are several ships that did not match that naming scheme. I'm not inclined to dig into those ships now, but there seems to be no reason for this ship to have received the name Wasp; the preceding ships were a motorboat, a training ship, and a Confederate gunboat, which would seem to make it an inglorious name to give a carrier commissioned in 1940 as the US prepared for potential war. Perhaps it was rehabilitation for the name? Westrim (talk) 11:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on USS Wasp (CV-7). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100405084644/http://hnsa.org/doc/plans/index.htm to http://www.hnsa.org/doc/plans/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)