Talk:L'Adroit-class destroyer

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 18:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Naming

This page was moved a while ago, without discussion or explanation, and the ship names edited, to remove the definite article from L'Adroit and several of the others. I have reverted this, as there was no justification for it. All the sources on the page (and I have now added some more) list these vessels (or 8 of the 14 anyway) as having names with the definite article. If anyone has a source that says differently, I suggest they bring it here, as it may warrant a footnote informing of the difference; but the weight of evidence is for the names to be as they were originally written. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:26, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. -- tariqabjotu 05:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

---

• Adroit-class destroyer → L'Adroit-class destroyer
• Hardi-class destroyer → Le Hardi-class destroyer
• Fantasque-class destroyer → Le Fantasque-class destroyer

– Correct names for these ships per sources. The definite article is an integral part of the name, and is capitalized in running text, per WP:THE. Relisted. BDD (talk) 22:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC) Xyl 54 (talk) 00:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comment: These pages were moved a while ago, without discussion or explanation, and the ship names edited, to remove the definite article from L’Adroit, Le Hardi, Le Fantasque and several of the others. (see above). This has also been the subject of lengthy discussions (here and here) and so has been listed at WP:RM as a possibly controversial move. Xyl 54 (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support; if the new names are in line with sources, it's hard to think of any reason to stand in their way. bobrayner (talk) 01:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
• Comment the articles say "The Le X-class destroyer", seems weird, because it's saying "The The X-class destroyer", should the definite article be used in a more sensible manner in the text of the article? Or do we use it as a set term? -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 04:48, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

There was a discussion about this here; but it's probably no less weird to say "L'Adroit class destroyer was...". And it isn't saying "The The", clearly; the word Le doesn't have a meaning in English, except as part of a French term (such as a ship's name, like here). AFAIK the definite article is being used correctly here, so it's sensible enough. Xyl 54 (talk) 22:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. The comments by User:Rama at his own talk page convince me that this is probably incorrect. Srnec (talk) 22:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

In which case some sources for that wouldn't go amiss. Xyl 54 (talk) 22:33, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Rama clearly cited his sources. Srnec (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

What I’m talking about is reliable, verifiable sources (what we are supposed to defer to, in preference to our own pet theories on subjects.)

There are half a dozen sources (books and links, English and French) on this page (and similar on the others) attesting to the correct rendering of these names. In contrast, Rama has made reference to Roche's Dictionaire and Granier’s Histoire. In both cases, after claiming they support his contention that the names are wrong, he states they both include the article in names that are substantivized adjectives. So what are L'Adroit, Le Hardi or Le Fantasque but substantivized adjectives? I have asked him to confirm that his sources do not use definite articles either upfront or in parenthesis for these specific ships, and have not yet seen a reply. Can you confirm this for us?

I also pointed out this comment at WT:SHIPs, which suggests that (in the case of Roche at least) he had misunderstood the situation; the images also are fairly persuasive. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved

I've gone ahead and moved this to "L'Adroit class destroyer", per WP:TITLE, so that it matches the name in the article and the sources here. It also reverses the unexplained move in December 2008, which has not been verified in any of the discussions linked above. I reckon the fact that there weren't enough votes to satisfy the RM process does not invalidate the policy grounds for a move.
If anyone has a verifiable source that supports the contested name ("Adroit class"), without the definite article, I would be interested to see it. Xyl 54 (talk) 19:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on L'Adroit-class destroyer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120911152725/http://www.warshipsww2.eu/lode.php?language=E&period=&idtrida=260 to http://www.warshipsww2.eu/lode.php?language=E&period=&idtrida=260
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130704090219/http://navypedia.org/page/1505 to http://navypedia.org/page/1505
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120207124446/http://users.swing.be/batnaval/+navires/3208.html to http://users.swing.be/batnaval/+navires/3208.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)