Talk:Constitution

RFV discussion — failed
Sense 2: Any of ship, real or fictional, named USS Constitution. The Constitution is moored in Charlestown.

Obviously, this would refer to a particular Constitution, not any one. Anyway, which, if any, Constitutions meet CFI? —Michael Z. 2009-03-30 15:03 z 
 * This raises a larger question of whether we ought to have names of vessels, particularly those that happen to be named after common nouns as opposed to proper nouns (e.g. Enterprise, which we have, and Endeavor and Monitor, which we don't). I propose that the test for inclusion of a ship by name ought to be the same as that of any other famous single object, as in the Empire State Building or Eiffel Tower. bd2412 T 23:26, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That's what I was thinking of. No need to propose it, as it is the current policy in effect.  This clearly falls under WT:CFI. —Michael Z. 2009-03-31 05:54 z 


 * Which unfortunately makes this particular case muddier, since the fictional Star Trek usage is a class of vessels, not a particular one. My sister informs me that the Enterprise in the original show was a "Constitution class vessel", so the term is used attributively.  On the other hand, this is a sense specific to just one fictional universe. --EncycloPetey 05:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * In that case, we should use the CFI for in-universe fictional terms for the fictional sense. bd2412 T 01:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

RFV failed, sense removed. —Ruakh TALK 18:12, 7 November 2009 (UTC)