Talk:Ram (ship)

Suggested merge

This article is more or less a duplicate of Naval Ram. It does have information that the other doesn't, so it should be merged rather than just deleted. Any thoughts? Parsecboy 15:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes to proposed merge. Ships that have intentionally rammed without an actual ram or extra structural strength designed into the bow can be treated as an anomaly. Binksternet 20:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Support merge. Ram (ship) is a bad article name, as this is precisely what we would use for a ship named Ram. The related article ramming contains an incomplete section on ramming at sea. Suggest:

• naval ram - should describe the device's form and purpose across the ages
• ramming - should cover tactics and actual ramming events

Both articles should clearly reference the other. ram (ship) should remain as a redirect to naval ram. Maralia 20:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Your suggestion sounds reasonable. Should we do this now, or wait a little longer? I doubt anyone will object to the proposed merger. Parsecboy 00:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Support merge. As link from Naval Ram to merger discussion has just been redirected here, I suggest waiting a couple of days. Kablammo 17:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Support merge. Sounds reasonable with little controversy.Brumhildaa 02:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I may work on it later on today, if I have time. Parsecboy 11:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)