Talk:Japanese cruiser Furutaka

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconJapan: Military history Low‑importance
WikiProject icon
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.
WikiProject Japan to do list:
  • Featured content candidates – 

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

WikiProject iconShipwrecks Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

  • Lady Elizabeth (1879)
    • Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
    • Improve grammar
    • Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
    • Discuss desired additions -None

Class size

The lead line says this was the lead ship of a 2-ship class, but there were four ships in the class. Was it originally intended to be just two, and then supplemented? Or is the "2-ship" reference just a mistake? Rem01 09:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked this up myself - the third and fourth ships listed as part of the class are in fact part of the
Aoba class, which is nearly identical to the Furutaka. I'm changing the listing of ships accordingly. Rem01 11:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Awkward title

I suggest we move this to Furutaka (Japanese cruiser), or IJN Furutaka. Vice regent 20:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely OPPOSE. The existing title is in conformance with WP:Ships and WP:MIL-Hist format, and is the the same format for every other Imperial Japanese Navy cruiser article in Wikipedia. I find nothing awkward about the title of this article and no justification for change.--MChew (talk) 02:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. This is the agreed-upon format for Japanese warship article titles. Cla68 (talk) 05:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]