Talk:Sixth-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

Template:Move to Wiktionary

The Template:Wiktionary which redirects to Template:Move to Wiktionary was removed as this article is one of six ratings of the Rating system of the Royal Navy. This stub is to be developed further as noted in Talk:Rating system of the Royal Navy. Please do not move this article. Thanks, Petersam 03:35, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

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 03:54, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

18 officers seems too much for such a small ship.

18 officers seems a little much. Counting the officers (commissioned, warrant, mids), I only count 13, where are the other 5 then? --ProdigySportsman 04:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC) -just thought of one more officer, Captain of Marines. That still leaves 4 UA. --ProdigySportsman 04:38, 22 October 2006 (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]

Fiction

The "Atropos" in "Hornblower and the Atropos" (C.S. Forester)is also a sixth rate although a sloop-of-war rather than a frigate. Davidt63 (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]