Talk:Third-rate

Military history: Maritime / British / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

First paragraph is navigational aid

Please do not remove the first paragraph as it functions as a quick navigational aid to the other articles in this series. Thank you. Petersam 03:52, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

While I have not removed this paragraph, I have severely modified it to correct the large amount of misinformation that the article contained. Rif Winfield (talk) 18:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation

It has become apparent that the words "first rate", "second rate", etc have become capitalised over the last year or so. This seems to me to directly contradict the guidance at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters), and I have changed them back again. To clarify, if we were talking about frigates, we would use lower case, because it's not a proper noun; "first rate" is exactly analogous. The usage on Category:Set indices on ships follows the lower case usage almost exclusively, as far as I can tell. Please address any concerns here before making wholesale changes back again.

On another note, some of the hyphenation has been rather patchy. Adjectival use will require a hyphen (first-rate ship) but when used as a noun (first rate), it does not. Again, I've made the changes were I've spotted the need.

Apologies if I've missed any or introduced any errors, since we all err from time to time. Shem (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why the hyphen?

It's a compound noun, right? Not a compound adjective. The hyphen needs to come out of the title (to match its absence in the main text). OR make it "Third-rate ship", or "Third-rate ship (British Navy)", if that pleases. We must be aware of the likely wrong meaning most readers will attach to "third-rate/third rate", too. I don't know how to get around that. Tony (talk) 08:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]