Talk:County-class cruiser

Exeter and York
Exeter and York were not members of the County class. When I have time in the next few weeks does anyone object to me splitting this article into the County class and the York class? Is there a reason they are combined here? Emoscopes Talk 23:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * no objects in a month, I'll go ahead then... Emoscopes Talk 08:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Infobox?
I'm not really sure what the infobox achieves, apart from disinformation. The Counties aren't really a homogeneous single class, rather they are three distinct classes. This is what I have tried to achieve in the recent extensive re-working of the article, with extensive specifications included in the text spelling out the numerous and major differences between the 3 groups. The infobox, as it is, is incorrect for the following; There is no one "at a glance" answer to any of these fields for the County class, and I would strongly suggest that the infobox serves no real purpose, and there are no grounds for keeping it there, apart from the "but other articles have one", which is spurious at best. Emoscopes Talk 22:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ''displacement
 * ''length
 * ''speed
 * ''protection
 * ''Complement
 * ''armament
 * ''aircraft


 * Generally speaking, I enjoy the consistent style and format across the various class pages, so I would prefer to keep the infobox. However I certainly would not be opposed to removing the parts of the infobox that are not consistent across the three sub-classes.  --Kralizec! (talk) 12:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've started tro trim the box down to a more approximate form. GraemeLeggett 12:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Mark XVI mounting?
"The single 4-inch guns would later be replaced by paired mountings. In a fruitless attempt to keep within treaty limits, the Mark XVI mounting was stripped down to reduce the weight, the result being the Mark XVII, an exercise described as "ridiculous punctiliousness"[5]. They were later converted back to standard Mark XVI mounts." This is confusing and possibly ambiguous. Some of the ships had the 4 inch MK V guns replaced by Mk XVI, which were usually mounted in twin turrets. Is this what it is referring to? If so it should be explicit. Mks of gun and mounting are separate things.Rcbutcher (talk) 00:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

HMAS Australia, mis-identified in photos
I've come across some USN photos that claim to be of HMAS Australia (D84) durinng a visit to New York in 1932-33. However, during those years, that cruiser did not leave the south-west Pacific. I think the ship is likely another County class vessel. More detail is at Talk:HMAS_Australia_(D84), and any help in figuring this out would be appreciated. -- saberwyn 22:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Garbled Design and Development section
Not sure how to fix it, but this section appears to have been vandalized.

75.50.156.57 (talk) 03:20, 9 March 2013 (UTC) Phil