Talk:USS Swordfish (SS-193)

duplication
The last two paragraphs of the article are a complete duplication of the rest of the article. Any particular reason why? Just hasn't been tidied up yet after a rewrite? CraigWyllie 12:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

every single date a link
Do we really have to linkify every single day of the year?

It's horribly annoying and hides all the other links in a mountain of pointless links. (I could understand if we were linking to a specific date, so you could see what else happened on that day of that year, but everything that ever happened on September 9 or December 11?? Why not randomly split all historical events up into 100 and number the pages 1-100?  The real problem is that in an an article like this where every single sentence has a date in it, and now we've got 100 pointless links all over the place.

You know what WOULD make sense? A single link the first time a given month of a given year is named - that link being to a page whose contents are all the other important things that happened that month of that year in this particular field or particular sequence of events - aka World War 2. (I'm going to regret suggesting this.)

CraigWyllie 12:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Swordfish's propulsion
The early Sargo-class submarines had composite diesel-electric and diesel-hydraulic propulsion, while the later ones were all diesel-electric. K. Jack Bauer's Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy states that SS-194 through SS-197 were full diesel-electric, but Norman Friedman's U.S. Submarines Through 1945 states that SS-193 was the first full diesel-electric Sargo. I've left the propulsion ambiguous in the infobox of this article, but if anyone figures it out, please update the infobox to match either the early or the late Sargos. TomTheHand (talk) 19:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)