Wikipedia

Talk:Kamorta-class corvette/Archives/2024/June

< Talk:Kamorta-class corvette
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Francomemoria in topic 3300 tons ship a corvette??


Requested move

Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


Project 28 Anti-Submarine Warfare corvette → Kamorta class corvette — The page name need to be changed to Kamorta class corvette. Bcs09 (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

There's been a lot of discussion about naming of military hardware generally... does this request reflect any of that? Andrewa (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Until launch of the first ship the ship class will not be known hence has to use the Project name. All warships are grouped into their class they belong. In this case the first ship name is Kamorta and hence it become "Kamorta class corvette" which is the standard followed in Wikipedia as well. Bcs09 (talk) 01:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes I dimly recollect seeing that somewhere. I found the part that matters most at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Ship classes, can you recall where the part covering the name before launch is? Andrewa (talk) 03:25, 21 April 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsindian-navy-launches-third-kamorta-class-p-28-asw-corvette
    Triggered by \bnaval-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

  Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 21:14, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kamorta-class corvette. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:13, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Contradicting sources

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello and thanks for the help Adamgerber80. I included the 16 cell VLS for Barack 1 having originally gotten the info from this source, but I wonder which one's true after seeing the aermech source. Regards—UY Scuti Talk 18:51, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey UY Scuti, there is some bit of contention on this issue. One thing I can confirm is that none of the ships currently in service are fitted with SAM's(1,2,3). There have been differing media reports on the proposed SAM's but the conclusion is not clear since the Indian Navy is yet to decide(or make the decision public). The sources you point to mention Barak 1 and then are sources which point to Barak 8 as well 1. There are other sources which claim that the French made MICA would be fitted on these ships.1 which is based on this article [1](a pretty good analysis but not backed by sources). AFIAK, the source you can really trust is an Indian Navy press release or IHS Janes. My guess(I am not a naval expert here but have been following the Indian Navy for quite some time) is that these ships will be fitted with Barak 8 or the new SR-SAM which India is currently considering during their first refit. Barak-1 SR-SAM is a good system but a decade old and the Indian Navy would prefer a modern system which can serve for the next two decades. Barak-8 LR-SAM is a good alternative but might be an overkill for a ship this size. India has been negotiating with the French on the VL MICA system for quite some time now(since 2012 from media reports) and it seems to be the best fit for these class of ships. Plus, the IAF also operates MICA and has been reasonably please with their performance. To conclude, I would remove the missiles from the armament list for now but do mention these alternatives in the armament section(I do mention Barak-8 there with the reference). It can be added at a later stage when we have an actual press release from the Indian Navy. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 01:23, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Regards—UY Scuti Talk 10:47, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 8 years ago13 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kamorta-class corvette/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 02:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Well constructed, will get back within a day or two. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
Additional suggestions

20 August 2016

  • The third sentence from last in the lead must be checked. It reads Project 28 was approved in 2003, with construction commencing on 12 August 2005, please be clear with construction of which ship was started on 12 August 2005, all the the four ships or the lead ship. Clear this confusion.
  • First sentence of the second para in lead; tense confusion. I think it must be The corvette's platform and major internal systems were indigenously designed and built, instead of The corvette's platform and major internal systems are indigenously designed and built. Because the word "were" is the helping verb for past tense and as the design and building was already complete, I think "were" is preferable.
  •   Partially implemented The intention was to refer too all the ships of the class. I however, have reworded the sentence to, The platform and major internal systems of this class of corvettes are indigenously designed and built. Please let me know if it sounds okay or not. Regards—UY Scuti Talk 13:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Please reword this sentence in section 1; The main machinery is raft mounted and each gear unit and the associated engines are mounted on a common raft, I feel some confusion, what exactly does it mean to say.
  • Section 2.1; the sentence reads The overall length of the Kamorta-class corvettes are 109 m (358 ft), and the beam spans 13.7 m (45 ft). It must be The overall length of the Kamorta-class corvettes is 109 m (358 ft), and the beam spans 13.7 m (45 ft)

I have also done some extra tweaking and rewording as it would be heavy to mention all those here. Will get back after reviewing the final sections (2.3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:56, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Anything up for correction? —UY Scuti Talk 03:49, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Last sentence of Armament section; it reads The corvette also can hold one Westland Sea King Mk.42B helicopter. But a ship can hold any helicopter which is assigned to it. But as currently Indian Navy operated Westlands for ASW vessels, it is used on the ship. There is no restriction for that. The reference also says the same The Ship also includes 1 Westland Sea King Mk. 42B helicopter, it presently includes Westland. Please reword it accordingly.
  • Section 3; table; add (expected) after commissioned date of INS Kiltan and INS Kavaratti, as they were not yet commissioned the date is only a expected one. Example: September 2016 (expected).
Review completed, I have passed the article. Thank for your contributions. Please update the article when the other two ships are commissioned accordingly with that data so that the article doesn't lose its GA status. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 10:27, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

3300 tons ship a corvette??

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Francomemoria (talk) 18:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kamorta-class_corvette/Archives/2024/June&oldid=1257853968"