Talk:Shakedown cruise

Additional references?
There is a reference at the beginning of First Contact, "does Starfleet feel we need more shakedown time?" I think the quote is. Worth adding something about that to this article? --81.178.217.6 06:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If perhaps the page was moved simply to shakedown, a la . --Alan del Beccio 07:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge
Despite my above suggestion, I think that it might be better to forgo that and merge to nautical terms, which this is (see and ). --Alan 13:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support– Cleanse 13:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * While it may be a nautical term, this is also an actual event. Would it really be appropriate to just mingle it with a bunch of verbs, adverbs and phrases? --From Andoria with Love 07:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keelhauling and plank walking are events too. Support merge - it can still contain a note about the 3 particular events already mentioned. TribbleFurSuit 07:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keelhauling hasn't been merged yet, so let's not include that one. :) As for plank walking, it was merged with the nautical terms page as the phrase "Walk the Plank". At the moment, none of the sections on nautical terms are really fitting for "shakedown cruise" (functions of a ship and crew, perhaps?), so would we be giving it it's own section amidst the phrases or what? Not trying to be a pain in the oysters I just have a wee bit hesitant to merge every single "nautical" thing and event into one page, especially one event which is relatively important to Trek history (James T. Kirk was lost and presumed killed during a shakedown cruise). --From Andoria with Love 13:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I was just saying it's mergeable as a nautical term. I wouldn't argue for a special section, like plankwalking has. I'd stick it under "Miscellaneous", with the brief definition and a brief italicized in-universe note like you can see under "Evasive course or maneuver". If there's a particular historical shakedown cruise that deserves its own article, then, there's a particular historical shakedown cruise that deserves its own article. But I don't think the existence of such article(s) should eliminate the definition on the nautical terms page. --TribbleFurSuit 20:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose merge. This is an actual event, and has been depicted in Trek. As Shran said, it really shouldn't be mixed in with verbs and phrases. I could see merging it with an article about ship construction, but if there is not one, I think it should be left alone.--31dot 20:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't argue to merge hypothetical material like Shakedown cruise (USS Enterprise-B) to Nautical terms. I do argue that "shakedown cruise" has a place there, just as much as verbs and phrases like Evasive course or maneuver, shore leave, and Walking the plank. As far as "merg[ing] every single "nautical" thing and event into one page" goes, I don't find the argument defensible that any particular nautical term should be left out of this page. That's what it's for. As you can see by Evasive course or maneuver, it has both an entry there and a complete article of its own. So, I don't know, maybe I also really oppose a merge after all, but, I think I'll be bold on this one. Also, I hope nobody would object to my having expanded this article to include discussion of the specific events. --TribbleFurSuit 22:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)