Forum:CT Archive/"the" ship names

Wookieepedia &gt; Consensus track &gt; 

From the Manual of Style:


 * Names of specific spaceships should be:
 * Capitalized
 * Italicized
 * Used without the definite article
 * e.g.
 * "Thunderflare operated in the Core region."
 * NOT "The Thunderflare operated in the Core region."
 * Preceded by the appropriate Ship prefix. If the prefix is unknown, do not create one.

So... Han Solo was the captain of Millennium Falcon? Say that out loud, see if it sounds right.

Does this seem just flat-out incorrect to anyone else? Outside of this wiki, I can't think of a single instance where "the" did not appear before the name of a ship, be it the Executor, the Invisible Hand, the New Hope, or the Havoc. With the exception of the Slave series, now that I think about it, it seems to me that the omission of the definite article before ship names isn't such a hard rule and should be decided on a ship-to-ship basis.

I move to have "Used without the difinite article" stricken from the Manual of Style. -- SM-716 ...talk? 21:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Support. Like you, I can't think of a single canonical instance beyond Fett's ships where the definite article wasn't used. jSarek 21:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Adamwankenobi Talk to me! My home. 21:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) &mdash;Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC) ALways hated not using "the".
 * 4) Ozzel 23:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) This is how it's done in canonical sources. - Sikon [ Talk ] 00:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup, support. It's a silly convention to omit "the" for the sake of omitting "the". The source material from which we are working should be our guide, not some all-or-nothing rule. If the source says "Bob and Boba jumped into the Blah, use that. If the source material says "Boba got into Blah", use that. — SavageBob 13:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) We're supposed to write articles about ships, excepting BtS, from an in-universe perspective. In-universe, ship names are usually preceded by "the". Red XIV 08:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Complete Support I just cant stand ship names without the "the" Darth Kevinmhk 02:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. I'm all for grammatical correctness, but both source material and common sense support inclusion. RMF 03:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose. While you might be used to saying "the (ship name)", I believe that "the" shouldn't be used. It's just my personal opinion. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 21:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. particularly famous ships, such as the Millennium Falcon are appropriate cases for the use of the article. It is neater and using "the" is a crutch for writing in a casual style. --SparqMan 22:37, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose removing the rule entirely, but perhaps it could be amended. Darth Culator 22:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Kuralyov 23:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) MandalorianWarriortalk [[Image:Mandskull.jpg|20px]] 00:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Neutral/Comments

 * That's exactly what I said. Bearing in mind that canon probably doesn't match real-world practice, can anyone quote a real-world manual of style which explains what the procedure is supposed to be? &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 21:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Responding to myself: Ship prefix says "Note that while calling a US ship "the USS Flattop" may make grammatical sense, the preliminary article "the" is deprecated by nearly all style guides. Its British equivalent ("the HMS Flattop") is also deprecated, since "the Her Majesty's Ship" would be grammatically incorrect." Since (the) Millennium Falcon doesn't have a ship prefix, and HIMS is a fanonical prefix, that rule doesn't apply. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the reason that characters use "the" could just be because they're having a casual conversation. I mean, have we ever heard an Imperial Navy officer say a ship name in a formal conversation? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 22:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The ship prefix rule seems to suggest that using "the" is acceptable when no prefix is present-- i.e. "The Executor was Vader's flagship" and "HMS Executor was Vader's flagship" would both be correct (if the prefix of "HMS" were used in the GFFA-- roll with me here), while "the HMS Executor was Vader's flagship" would be an example of incorrect usage. So "the" would be used in most cases on this wiki, then? -- SM-716 [[Image:716chiss.gif]] ...talk? 22:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Check out the U.S. Navy style guide. Plenty of people use "the" casually, but most formal documents do not. Also, particularly famous ships, such as the Millennium Falcon are appropriate cases for the use of the article. --SparqMan 22:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Excluding the definite article should be the rule, but exceptions could be made for certain circumstances. Maybe it should be changed to saying it should be avoided rather than prohibiting it entirely. Darth Culator 22:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be nice. However, thanks to SparqMan, my guess appears to be correct&mdash;"the" is used in casual conversations, but not formally or in offical documents. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 00:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Wookieepedia is not a formal official document. - Sikon [ Talk ] 00:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right&mdash;we're an encyclopedia. Therefore, we should have it the way it would be in the real world: without "the". Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 01:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * We're an encyclopedia, eh? Let's check the Star Wars Encyclopedia, shall we?  I'm not saying we should follow Stephen J. Sansweet blindly, but it's something to consider.
 * p. xvi: "the Millennium Falcon"
 * p. 1: "the fleet carrier Intrepid", "the Astrolabe"
 * p. 3: "the Adamant", "the Liberator"
 * p. 4: "the Aggregator", "the Valiant"
 * p. 6: "the Allegiance"
 * p. 7: "the Emancipator"

... most examples use "the", but there are isolated counter examples:
 * p. 129: "Armed for war, Home One"
 * p. 171: "called Executor . . . later renamed Lusankya"
 * p. 267: "Silencer-7 had"

There are also many examples of forms like "the light freighter Ebon Hawk" or "the Star Destroyer Relentless", which I think are allowed under US Navy styles. Also, ships are universally referred to as "it" rather than "she" or "her". Interesting. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 03:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Silencer-7 is as much a droid as a ship, and the Lusankya is an odd case because it's both a ship and a prison facility. But once it's revealed to be a ship, it's referred to as "the Lusankya", while the prison within the ship is referred to as "Lusankya" (no "the", no italics). As for Home One...are other Mon Calamari cruisers preceded by "the" in the Star Wars Encyclopedia? Red XIV 08:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Silencer-7 really isn't a droid. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) [[Image:Implogo.jpg|20px]] 11:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It was heavily automated and run by a droid brain. That sounds fairly droid-like to me. There were humans onboard, but the X-1 Vipers also have human crews and they're certainly droids. Red XIV 03:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * p. 197: "the Mon Remonda", p. 178: "the Liberty". So it appears that "the" is used for Mon Cal ships other than Home One too, at least in the SWENC. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 03:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * No one is arguing that most in-universe mentions of ships include the article. Authors can take those liberties within their creative style. I'm also sure you would also find that 90% of naval personnel use the article before a ship name, but that doesn't make it stylistically correct. Star Wars uthors also use run-on sentences, misused semicolons and other stylistic no-nos that shouldn't alter the level of our own writing here. --SparqMan 04:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * That's just it: We determine what is and is not a sylistic no-no. Wookieepedia is run by its editors, after all. So, we get to decide if we want to go with the style used by .5% of people in the real world, or 95.5%. I vote for the 95.5%. (Of course my numbers are made up, but I'm using hyperbole.) — SavageBob 12:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * In that case, we should roll out a new style guide that permits other choice grammar options executed by 95.5% of the population: ending sentences with prepositions, using double negatives and split infinitives, and so on. We make our own style guide, but our style guide is not just a reflection of colloquial English. In the same way that we should avoid conjunctions in our writing, we should avoid using the article "the" before ship names. --SparqMan 14:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Call me a colloquialist, then. I find requiring "the" to be elitist and overly fanboyish. But so is a lot of Wookieepedia, so there you have it. — SavageBob 15:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You mean requiring the omission of the, right SavageBob? 8)  More to the point: our recent decision to capitalize Human is a precedent for breaking the rules of real-world grammar on this wiki.  (I should also point out that not all style guides require the to be omitted: the Canadian Press would say "the USS Enterprise", but not "the HMCS Athapaskan", because they go by the grammatical rules you'd use if the prefixes were written out in full.)  It also sets a precedent for picking a standard which makes more sense in-universe when canonical sources differ, even if our choice conflicts with the style of most canonical sources: but since we have so few canonical ship prefixes, and ship prefixes seem to be the main reason for this rule in real life, I don't think omitting "the" is necessary. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 00:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)