Talk:Speedwell (1577 ship)

First version was "contributed by Vincent M. Benz, St.Louis Missouri. 8/21/2004" Stan 12:09, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

name 'Speedwell'
Is it worth mentioning that the name 'Speedwell' is a UK native wild flower? So as well as the pun on its abilities, it is named, like its sister ship the Mayflower, after a native wild flower. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.157.50.255 (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed page move

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: MERGE Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:48, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

This article is mostly about the 1577 ship, but also refers to (some) other ships called Speedwell. I'd like to move this article to Speedwell (1577 ship), tidy it up, make Speedwell (ship) a ship index page for all ships called Speedwell, and interlink all the pagers with Speedwell (disambiguation). Any comments? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedwell was a very common name for sailing ships over the centuries. If there are no other articles on ships named Speedwell, I'd just move this article and leave the redirect alone. Maybe a need to distinguish HMRC Speedwell and HMS Speedwell by way of a hatnote. Mjroots (talk) 10:18, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * HMRC Speedwell (1797) is a redirect (I've added a hatnote to the target). Other actual articles are HMS Speedwell (1780), HMS Speedwell (1815) and Hired armed lugger Speedwell.  Speedwell (disambiguation) now lists 7 ships with articles or mentions in articles and a separate HMS Speedwell ship index page lists a further 18ish with articles, mentions in articles, or redlinks with potential.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 05:28, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I realise you know HMRC Speedwell (1797) is a redirect because you put it there! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 05:39, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Would you allow me to proceed, with consensus? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:38, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, go ahead. Mjroots (talk) 06:46, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have a slight preference for Shhhnotsoloud's approach, but am OK for now with Mjroots's approach. I just don't like it when editors allocate a general name such as "Teacup (ship)" to a specific "Teacup". Acad Ronin (talk) 12:28, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

(non-admin closure)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.