Category talk:Vessel types
From Gineipaedia, the Legend of Galactic Heroes wiki
I've decided i'm going to go with the terms 'vessel' and 'type' rather than 'ship' and 'class', since they seem to be simultaneously more accurate and more generic. A shuttle is not a ship, for example, it's just a vessel. Also, apparently i've used class incorrectly according to naval terminology. A class is a specific series of a specific type of vessel; for example, in Star Trek the original Enterprise was part of the Constitution class, but its type was heavy cruiser. We're talking about types in LOGH obv so let's do that ♥ kine @ 11:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah I had noticed this too, but I forgot about it. Nice catch :) Vympel 12:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- That said, I think the standard warships deserve their own pages. I don't think we should be treating about FPA and GE battleships on the same page. They have their own dimensions, capabilities etc after all. EDIT: by that I mean, FPA standard battleships should have their own page, and Imperial standard battleships should get their own page - an so on. Vympel 12:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Kuhhh. I don't know. There are so many conflicting angles now that i think about it.
- On the one hand, we have a precedent for merging articles where we don't have or need a lot of information on their individual constituents (planets, navigation corridors, ranks, &c.). Also, looking at MA and WP, they both have generic articles for types of ships like this. Lastly, from a logistics standpoint, merging them makes it easy to direct readers to the right place (if we don't merge them, then we're going to need a disambiguation page for almost every ship type).
- On the other hand, it is conceivable that for some (or many) of these articles, we might start to gain a lot of information. I can't tell yet. Plus, MA does have specific articles for things like Klingon cruiser and Cardassian cruiser.
- I dunno. I guess, let's leave this here for the time being, and then when the time comes that we start actually fleshing these out, we can split them back off. If we do do that, let's make them in the form 'Alliance ______' and 'Imperial ______'. (Your use of the term 'Alliance' instead of 'FPA' in your articles has convinced me to start standardising on that.)
- On a somewhat related note, would you be in favour of moving 'FPA ships' to 'Alliance vessels', 'Imperial ships' to 'Imperial vessels', and so on? ♥ kine @ 12:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- We will have a lot of information when we translate the FFC booklets, thats for sure (except about destroyers and smaller ships, sadly!). Further, there is a fairamount of stuff I plan to write about some of the ships - at least a few paragraphs worth - purely from what we see in the episodes - so I've got a clear view in my head for the way forward, I'm just not there yet since I'm still teasing out all the unique ships first (I still need to go back and flesh out a lot in that regard too). But ok, lets leave it how it is for now, and when I do my first entry (probably Imperial Battleship) you can have a look and see what I had in mind. For example I was thinking a gallery at the bottom for the standard ship entries wouldn't go out of place, these ships are packed with fun stuff that a reader can only really appreciate with pictures, and there's lots of stuff in LOGH that people simply don't notice on one or two viewings. But yeah, shots in the dark for later. And yeah, "Alliance vessels" / "Imperial vessels" sounds good. Vympel 13:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)