Unnamed ships[]
Hello, I noticed you working on the lists of unnamed starships and there is a lot of overlap when dealing with ships in fleets, mostly during the DS9 war. I wonder if it might be better to have pages for the fleets and links on the unknown ship pages back to the pages dealing with the particular fleets. Any thoughts? Jaf 03:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC) I suggest we create pages for unnamed fleets, we'll name them by the person in charge where we can. It should help to save on the repetition taking place on the unnamed ship pages. Jaf 04:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- It is always inevitable that there will be some overlap when dealing with multiple things appearing at once, however, the point of organizing the ships by class is to identify as many ships of a class (as mentioned in the "appearances" of said starship class page) in their own topic page. Redirecting users here, there and everywhere to see all of the appearances of all unnamed Excelsior class starships seems much easier when they are all together with their sister (class) ships, verses a mix-match with a little bit over here and a little bit over there. --Alan del Beccio 04:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Overlap is not inevitable on a wiki, just lazy. There is no reason that the information shouldn't be compiled in one place. Jaf 04:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Jaf
- No, that is lazy. Lumping everything together robs those ships of their individuality. They should be (and are currently) treated as if they had their own names, and some of which, actually have details that fortify their individuality. Otherwise, what you suggest would be like removing all information from Star Trek Nemesis in the articles for the Intrepid, Valiant, Galaxy, Aires, Nova, Hood, and Archer and placing it solely in the Star Fleet Battle Group Omega. That robs those ships of their individality just as much as it does from the unnamed starships that have been individualized. --Alan del Beccio 04:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, how about the other way, create the fleet pages and direct the user back to the ships involved? Jaf 12:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Jaf