This is a page to discuss the suggestion to merge or delete "USS Veracruz (NCC-75400)".
- If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Rationale....".
- To vote simply add "Delete", "Keep", "Neutral" or "Merge" with an appropriate course of action.
- If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
- If a consensus has been reached, an admin will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".
In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.
Rationale[]
Veracruz NCC-75400.
Phalanx class.
I propose to merge the pages USS Veracruz (NCC-75400) and USS Veracruz (Phalanx class) into one. Here's why:
- Both ships are in service around the same time, and we got the class name for one and the registry for the other.
- While circumstantial, the NCC-75400 registry is close to the USS Phalanx NCC-74999 registry.
- Sources that reference any Veracruz during the 2370s don't need to "choose" which Veracruz to link to.
- The SOTL 2018 spread image explains that the Phalanx class underwent a "significant post-war refit". The undated SOTL 2016 April image would therefore depict the Veracruz in the post-war configuration.
- This eliminates another unnamed class/Veracruz-type.
- Radical reconstructions of ships have been seen before - ST: Trexels establishes that most major Ambassador-class ships started out in the Narendra-class/NX-10521 configuration before becoming the "familiar" Ambassador class. In Star Trek Online, a ship's appearance can be changed radically at each major shipyard.
- The Veracruz-type Enterprise from the comic Waypoint has the purported Phalanx refit configuration near the end of the 24th century. This would identify that Enterprise as a Phalanx-class ship.
Counter-arguments may be that the hulls of Veracruz-type and Phalanx-class are too wildly different; that there's plenty of precedence of multiple ships with the same name in service around the same time; and the lack of a need to reconcile divergent continuities.
Kind regards, -- Markonian 19:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Votes[]
- Merge -- -- Markonian 19:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete improper page (see below) -- TimPendragon (talk) 18:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Keep both pages separate - Bell'Orso (talk) 11:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Discussion[]
I think this is an instance of two ships getting confused. There aren't two ships named Veracruz in Ships of the Line. There is no Phalanx-class Veracruz in the 2018 calendar. When Bell'Orso made that page in 2017, I think he got mixed up. They are two different ships, by two different artists; and the 2018 calendar doesn't even mention the Veracruz. That page should be deleted. The actual Veracruz image from 2016 is of the the Insignia-class design by Mark Kingsnorth, which should probably be mentioned in the background, since the class name hasn't been used in the calendars yet, but it is in no way related to the Phalanx. The only thing that comes from the 2018 calendar is the tech specs centerfold for the Phalanx class. --TimPendragon (talk) 18:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
The 2018 SOTL calendar features a center spread that has schematics of the Phalanx class, a cutaway side view, as well as a few paragraphs of flavour text. The third of those paragraphs reads, in part, as follows: "The first three vessels entered service amidst renewed conflict with the Klingon Empire, a second Borg incursion, and ultimately the Dominion War. The starships U.S.S. Phalanx, Veracruz, and Repulse served with distinction throughout the period [...]" - Bell'Orso (talk) 11:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)