Presumably, this article has been moved from Groumall type to Groumall class because a source has been found claiming that the Groumall was the prototype of the class. Or am I wrong? --The Doctor 16:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a citation has been added to the article's first paragraph. -- Captain MKB 17:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

How come this article lists 25 "known" Groumall-class ships, while the template for Groumall class ships has 35 names? (For that matter, why do we need two separate files listing names of Groumall-class ships?) --Seventy 01:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That would be a lack of updating to both page and template when additions were made... They are separate because they are formatted differently - the reason is less evident on a page such as this with no prefixes or registrations, but for many starship class pages the vertical lists of names provide additional information to the templates which exist more as a navigational aid.

And I don't buy the reason for making this "Groumall class", who's to say Cardassians follow the same class naming conventions as the Feds. --8of5 01:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, they called it the Groumall class in the source i cited, and theres a ship named the Groumall -- that's a pretty good indication that they do, at least in this case. -- Captain MKB 06:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This page has never had a citation added by you... --8of5 11:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I apologize as I thought that I had taken care of this (as evidenced by my earlier comment) -- the source is Decipher RPG module: Starships where the class is explicitly called the Groumall class.

Not sure what happened -- maybe I didn't give my browser enough time after I hit "submit" back on 29 January. Anywho, thanks for bringing up the omission. -- Captain MKB 12:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)