Talk:Operation EXODUS

Composition of the Exodus Fleet

We know that there is a direct number given of the warships that were in the Exodus Fleet of 402 warships. Should we start to cite the class of the ships and the numbers, would the numbers listed in their Sarna articles qualify as a source? Also, there are many ship classes that are certainly listed but an actual number not given but given in terms that while we can infer a quantity, is not set in stone. --Orc Warrior (talk) 21:59, 12 March 2023 (EDT)

On something like this that I consider "a topic of high interest" that is likely to trigger all kinds of arguements, infered information is not good enough, if not explicitly stated then we don't include it.--Dmon (talk) 22:07, 12 March 2023 (EDT)

I see. Here would be the dilemma then. I can certainly say that the sources here are sufficient to provide that a ship-class was IN the Exodus Fleet. For example, I accept the number of 18 McKenna class or 7 Texas class battleships in the fleet, and could be listed as such. But for a ship class like the Lola III, where the source is that they were "the second most numerous warship class in the fleet". Would we enter it as "Lola III- number in the fleet Unknown" and then enter in the part about it being the second most numerous type as a way of the readers being able to look at the data and see that means if the Sovetski Soyuz number of 40 in the fleet stands, then the Lola III would have be under that. Same with other ships where quotes like "a surprising number" of Aegis class heavy cruisers were in the fleet but no actual number, where that could mean more than the Sovetski Soyuz. Just some thoughts --Orc Warrior (talk) 22:56, 12 March 2023 (EDT)