Talk:Superfiring

Is the Fuso the best example of a combined superfiring and non-superfiring arrangement?

Seems to me there might be a simpler ship to use which doesn't have the additional complication of funnel and/or tower placement. Also, if we're going to use the British turret naming scheme for a Japanese ship (which is defensible, since it's also the most popular scheme generally), the non-superfiring turrets would be P and Q, not "Z" (there is never a Z turret). Q is possibly superfiring although blocked by a tower; P does not appear to be. Ryan (talk) 03:36, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 15 December 2014

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: moved. Number 57 23:42, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

---

Superfire → Superfiring – Per WP:TITLEFORMAT, rename to the gerund form as Superfiring or Superfiring turret Andy Dingley (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

• Support – looking at books, it appears that "superfire" almost always refers to something unrelated. "Superfiring" however is almost always used as an adjective, so "Superfiring guns" would be another good option. 2620:0:1000:157D:65C7:61C5:C6D:FDA5 (talk) 19:03, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

---

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.