Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26091970-20150604000724/@comment-26574811-20150927143816

Qunow wrote:

And as expected, some IP user added BBV to the page after KanColle anime air. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_hull_classifications&type=revision&diff=648753647&oldid=635717034

Also, we do not categorize ships according to how their original owner did, we classify them according to how Kadokawa did. LOL, so now we know that KC is actually doing damage to people's WWII naval knowledge.

Yea, I guess you're right. We should do it the KDKW way, and that would mean that "is Taihou too small to be called CVB" is not important, because we know that the KDKW categorization will definitely divert from the historical one at some point.

So it seems like the question is more like "should we use the imperfect CVB, or the completely fictional CVR/ACVR?".

CVB has some degree of historical accuracy, as the only hull classification symbol ever put on an armored carrier (other than just CV), but as we all know, it's far from perfect.

CVR on the other hand has perfect freedom from historic burden, for being completely fabricated by our community. But as a WWII historic fan, I would (and I know some others would, too) find it weird to be talking around a non-historic and non-universal term.

I personaly prever CVB, it's nearly never used anyway, so the size of Midway doesn't mean that much to me, but it's at least the only distinct classification ever put on an armored carrier.