Talk:Davion (WarShip)

Separate pages vs Variants

I guess my question is, is there enough difference between the Davion Blocks and any of the other (FWL Zec for example) to warrent separate pages as opposed to just covering the additions within the Variant section? Cyc 22:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I pondered the same question for quite some time - I avoided these writing these entries for this very reason. I decided this decision was already made once before on BTW (see Lola).

Here is a rationale: the Lola III-class destroyer is actually the Block III Lola-class, the 2nd refit of the original Lola-class destroyer. Most people would not refer to separate blocks by the same name; in military parlance, the name Lola refers to a distinct class of vessels compared with the Block III Lola (or, shorter, Lola III-class), right? So I guess my question is, if players/in game personalities are referring to the Lola III as the Lola III, why are we forcing it into the same entry with the Lola-class? Of course, if consensus is against splitting the entries, then we can change it around--S.gage 05:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The Lola III article exists separately for the same reason we had a Whirlwind article before the Davion, TRO3057R came out years after TRO2750 and the original TRO3057 so those existing article were written based on older information when there was no stats for the other name only ships which 57R delighted in expanding. I don't have a copy, but doesn't TRO3057R smoosh both the older Lolas and both Davions into a single entry too? Cyc 05:43, 22 October 2009 (UTC)