Talk:USS Missouri (SSN-780)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States / Post-Cold War

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 met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Post-Cold War 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

Article improvements

@Thewolfchild: You took out a section on this stub article and now have mixed history with current. Something that happened on 26 January 2018 could be considered recent "history" but if the submarine is now stationed at the port it is "current" information. I get a little confused when a stub article seems to be under some "protection" when added content certainly can't harm the article. Is there a concern with just keeping the articles as stubs? Otr500 (talk) 07:51, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to do with being a stub or being under any kind of protection. There is just no need for that sub-heading or section. Basically, everything that happens during the service life of a ship or boat is part of It's "history". Only the most recent event would be considered current, and that's only while it is actually "current" or actively occurring. If you look at other ship article's they don't, or shouldn't, have a "current" section. It would have to be moved everytime there is a new entry. Besides, all entries are dated, making such a section/sub-heading redundant. Please note the other corrections I made to your edit as well. Thanks - ^theWOLFchild 16:02, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Being fucked up by "Marshal Shaposhnikov" on 02.12.22.