Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Renown class battlecruisers/archive1

Renown class battlecruisers

Renown-class battlecruisers

3 articles

HMS Renown

HMS Repulse

This GTC concerns a pair of British battlecruisers built during World War I. Neither saw much combat during the war, but were twice extensively reconstructed before World War II. Both ships were very active during World War II, including participation in the Norwegian Campaign and the search for the Bismarck. Repulse was sunk by the Japanese when they attacked British Malaya, but Renown survived the war while supporting multiple convoys to Russia and Malta, among other duties, and was scrapped in 1948.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support -MBK₀₀₄ 05:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)Oppose - it is rather pointless to have a topic promoted for just a few weeks before it is merged into a master topic. The British battlecruisers are now all eligible for their master topic like the German battlecruisers (the only obstacle is that the list anchor for the topic is currently at FLC and the Courageous class is pending promotion below us here at FTC/GTC) (See the progress table keeping in mind that the As are already GAs). This same situation occurred with the last class that Parsec completed of the German battlecruisers. He did not get that topic promoted since it would be immediately merged into another within a week or two after promotion. That same situation is now upon us here. -MBK₀₀₄ 06:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per MBK. Parsecboy (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ordinarily I'd agree with y'all, but as points from this count in the WikiCup I need this promoted separately so I ask that an exception be made.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - But you can't count these articles twice once the topics are merged, can you? Because that wouldn't technically be a "new" FT, it'd be a merged one. Parsecboy (talk) 17:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered. All of the other GTs in the overall topic were done earlier and points were awarded in those rounds so I'm thinking that this super GT nets me points again for each individual article. But maybe I'm indulging in a bit of wishful thinking. I'll ask a judge to rule on the proper way to score this, because I can see getting points only for the stuff that was completed this round.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK, maybe I was being greedy. I can withdraw this nom in favor of the big British BC GTC which would replace this shortly since that's only waiting on the FLC to be complete.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the scenario depicted by Parsecboy: that would be an expansion/merge, not creation of a new topic. Nergaal (talk) 06:33, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as withdrawn nomination. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]