Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of frigates of India

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No consensus to promote at this time - Ian Rose (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 01:06, 14 March 2017 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

List of frigates of India edit

Nominator(s): Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail)

List of frigates of India (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

I am nominating this article for A-Class review. After my first list, List of destroyers of India, has passed the A-class review, and eventually a featured list. This list of frigates from the Indian Navy is constructed on par with the destroyers list. The GOCE edit was also complete, so I think there wouldn't be much MoS issues. Kindly suggest any further improvements required. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:05, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments: G'day, thanks for your efforts with this list. I have the following suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 11:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Indian Navy is overlinked in the lead, and the duplicate link script reveals a number of other examples which should be reduced
  • per MOS:LEAD there should be a maximum of four paragraphs in the lead
  • "File:HMIS Hindustan SLV Green.jpg" needs a US licence in addition to the Australian one, and the source link should be adjusted to link to the image if possible
  • the Reference list should be sorted alphabetically by author's surname
  • in the References, is there a date of publication for the Raymond source? Also, is there an ISBN or OCLC number that can be provided?
  • is there a place of publication for the Conway sources?
  • is it "Conways" or "Conway"?
  • is there a citation for Hooghly being scrapped?
  • the sentence ending "... capable of countering modern Western naval assets" appears to be unreferenced
  • same as above for the sentence ending "...was the only Anchusa-class sloop used by India"
  • same as above for the sentence ending "...two Godavari-class frigates in service are scheduled to be decommissioned in the coming years."
  • same as above for "...Eight ships of this class served in the Royal Indian Navy"
  • same as above for "...Two ships from this class served in the Indian Navy"
  • same as above for "The Type 41 or Leopard class was a class of anti-aircraft defence frigates built for the Royal Navy (4 ships) and Indian Navy (3 ships) in the 1950s.
  • same as above for "A total of ten ships from two different projects, Project 17A and Admiral Grigorovich classes, are expected to be commissioned into the Indian Navy. Most of these ships are in the planning phase."
  • are there decommissioning dates for the Whitby and Leopard class ships?
  • hyphens should mostly be endashes when spaced, for instance in citation # 4 and others
  • is there a citation for Baluchi being sold for scrapping?
  • is there a citation for Elphinstone being wrecked on the Nicobar Island
  • there are minor inconsistencies in the referencing format, particularly around the publisher/newspaper/website names displayed in italics
@AustralianRupert: I have addressed all your comments from 1–9. Regarding 10–14, is it necessary to cite these sentences as they are the summaries of the immediate tables following them, anyway, if it is a must, I'll add the citations. Unfortunately the decommissioning dates for the Whitby and Leopard class ships are unavailable. Regarding the last one, respective templates are used for news sources and web sources differently. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 09:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think they should be added. Regarding the citations, I would suggest at least converting the "colledge" template to the "citation" template for consistency then, or the "citation" templates to "cite book/web/journal" etc as there are subtle differences with commas and full stops. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@AustralianRupert: All done. Please have a look. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:16, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, I've cropped one of the images for you and added my support. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:30, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

  • Starting a list article "This is a list" is generally discouraged as it just repeats the information in the title. The second and third sentences are vague. I suggest deleting this paragraph and starting the second paragraph with something like "Frigates, which are naval vessels intermediate between corvettes and destroyers, have had a significant role in the naval history of India." Other information could be relegated to a note.
  • The fact that sloop is the former name for a frigate is too important to be relegated to a note.
  • "Later, sloops of the Black Swan," It would be better to specify the period - in the 1930s? A similar comment applies to "Last" in the final sentence in the paragraph.
  • "The Shivalik class is the heaviest of the frigate classes presently serving with the Indian Navy." "with the Indian Navy" is superfluous.
  • "stealth warship" Could this be linked? (I see stealth is linked below but it should be when first mentioned).
  • Comments about ships still being in service should specify as of 2016 as they will become out of date.
  • 'Ships currently in commission' 1. It should be "in commission" as of a date. 2. The comments in the first paragraph of this section are repeated below. It should be deleted (or revised to avoid repetition).
  • "currently being developed" and "are projected" As said above, comments which may become out of date should be as of a date.
  • "reduced radar cross section" Could this be linked?
  • No date for when INS Tarkash was laid down. Is this not known? If so, it would be better to say "unknown" as you do elsewhere.
  • ""Flower class" (which were also referred to as the "cabbage class", or "herbaceous borders")" This is stated under Anchusa and repeated in Aubretia.
  • "The two Godavari class frigates in service are scheduled to be decommissioned in the coming years." Another comment which will become out of date.
  • No decommissioning dates are given for Whitby and Leopard class.
  • No information on Godavari class?
  • There are two error messges in the references. 1. Colledge is not used in the references. 2. Access date wrongly given for Conway as this should not be supplied for print sources. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@AustralianRupert and Dudley Miles: Sorry for the delay. Done the edits. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 09:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Some "as of" dates have been added, but there are still several places where they have not been added to comments such as "currently" and the vague "scheduled to be decommissioned in the coming years". you need to check through the article thoroughly. Also you have not dealt with my last comment about error messages. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dudley Miles: Done, thanks for the review. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment

  • "Later, during World War II, several frigates of the River class were commissioned." You just said that the first frigates were commissioned in 1945 and later transferred to the Pakistani navy, so how can WWII be later? Dudley Miles (talk) 19:16, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dudley Miles: Fixed. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 15:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose by Sturmvogel_66 edit

  • have had a significant role in the naval history of India, have had a significant role in the naval history of India. typo
  • Link frigate, sloop, corvette, destroyer, lead ship, Kolkata, cruise missile, Shivalik Hills, CIWS, torpedo, sonar
  • Though the Maratha Navy, the naval branch of the armed forces of the Maratha Empire, used Grabs and Gallivats to project naval power, the concept of frigates or sloops (Earlier, frigates were called sloops, and only later were reclassified as frigates) was introduced by the British. I do not understand this. AFAIK, the Marathas aren't really relevant for this list and the parenthetical note needs to clarified to cover modern warships only.
    • Still needs to be done.
  • The Royal Indian Navy was expanded significantly during the Second World War. HMIS Clive, HMIS Lawrence and HMIS Cornwallis of the Aubretia class, which served in World War II, were some of the early sloops commissioned into the Royal Indian Navy during the 1920s. This needs to be chronological; start out with the introduction of the RIN ships in the 1920 and '30s and then mention the expansion of the RIN during WW2 with the wartime classes like the Black Swans and Anchusas.
    • Still needs to be done.
  • Fold the second para into the first one and be sure to mention the ship classes in the order that they were put into service by the RIN.
    • Still needs to be done.
  • Be sure to talk about the shift from British ships to Russian/Soviet ones in the lede. More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:28, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Still need to explain why the IN shifted to Soviet designs.
  • The Shivalik class is the heaviest of the frigate while technically correct, we think of ships in terms of size. Change heaviest to largest.
  • Mazagon Dock Limited, Mumbai, change to "in Mumbai" delete the commas and do the same for the builder in Kolkhata later in the paragraph.
  • Hyphenate VLS launched and guided missile frigate.
    • Throughout the list.
  • What kind of missiles are Barak 1s? and what kind of rocket launchers are the RBU-6000s? It's always useful to tell the reader what the function or type of a weapon is when mentioning it for the first time. Same thing for ships.
    • Specifically for the Igla-E and RBU-6000 rockets. What is their function? Same with the Shtil-1. Make sure that this is handled throughout the entire article.
  • 8 × VLS launched Klub In the interest of saving space, consolidate these a little by using "8 × VLS-launched Klub, anti-ship cruise missiles or BrahMos..."
  • 1 × OTO Melara 76 mm naval gun slightly redundant, delete "naval" More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: Done, thanks for the review. Please have a look. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:40, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hyphenate and link surface-to-air missile; hyphenate medium-range missile
  • Delete "naval" every time you see "naval gun"
  • Link cruise missile, torpedo tube
  • Move "BrahMos, anti-ship and land-attack cruise missiles" to the first mention.
  • This is kinda frustrating as I'm citing specific examples as problems and you're not realizing that I mean that they're only examples of larger problems.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:47, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: Firstly sorry for the trouble, actually this list was copy edited by guild, but all the issues were not taken care. Anyway, changes done, have a look. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:41, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: Please have a look. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: Once again, Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:11, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The chronology in the lede is still messed up. Why hasn't this moved to the second para? The sloops HMIS Sutlej and HMIS Jumna, of the Black Swan class, took part in Operation Husky, the Allied invasion of Sicily.
  • And this contains some redundancies: The Royal Indian Navy was expanded significantly during the Second World War.[4][5][6] In 1945, HMIS Dhanush and HMIS Shamsher, of the River class, were the first frigates, so-called, commissioned into the Royal Indian Navy. During World War II, several frigates of the River class were commissioned.
    • Still not done. And the whole middle paragraph isn't in a logical order either.
      • @Sturmvogel 66: Please check the commission dates and the dates of the battle, they are in order. If you don't feel so, please elaborate.
  • Still need to briefly discuss switch from British designs to Soviet ones.
    • I don't agree; this was a significant change done in the 1970s and needs to be explained.
      • Sturm, I don't know how do you get that. I can't find anything from sources, nor any significant reason. Did you read about the change somewhere, if so please provide me the link, so that I can add.
  • And why does the Talwar class get special love in the third para? If exceptionally important, then that needs to be explained.
  • This is redundant to the last sentence of the lede: As of February 2017, Fourteen frigates from four different classes are in active service with the Indian Navy
    • done.
  • I'm going to oppose until these issues are fixed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: Sorry for the trouble. I've done all of them, but except the about switch from British designs to Soviet ones. Because there is no significant reason for that. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:32, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what you want HJ Mitchell. I have supported. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, somehow I missed that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:51, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Images all check out, but it seems that two of them ought to have attribution directly in the article (File:HMS Andromeda, 1970 (IWM).jpg and File:Адмирал Григорович.jpg), per the terms of their license. Perhaps Nikki could give us a more definitive answer, but that's my interpretation of the license. I'm not sure a caption would be appropriate in the table, so perhaps you could add a note to the column header that provides attribution. Parsecboy (talk) 16:30, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Parsecboy: I have attributed the images, have a look whether it is in the place. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why I'm opposing edit

  • HMIS Clive, HMIS Lawrence, and HMIS Cornwallis, of the Aubretia class, which served in World War II, were some of the early sloops commissioned into the Royal Indian Navy during the 1920s. The chronology here is messed up because the ships served during WWI and WW2, but the sentence then goes onto mention the 1920s. So move that last bit to the middle and then add the bit about WW2 service. BTW, this exact sentence is used in the sloop section.
  • The sloops HMIS Sutlej and HMIS Jumna, of the Black Swan class, took part in Operation Husky, the Allied invasion of Sicily.[13] The Royal Indian Navy was expanded significantly during the Second World War.[4][5][6] In 1945, HMIS Dhanush and HMIS Shamsher, of the River class, were the first frigates, so-called, to be commissioned. Several frigates of the River class were also commissioned.[14] Some of them were later transferred to Pakistan during partition. The chronology here is all messed up.
  • Later in the 2000s, the Indian Navy acquired six Russian-built frigates under Project 11356, designated as Talwar-class. Project 11356 is the first Indo-Russian collaboration. Missing a decimal point in the project number. These two sentences should be combined.
  • All of these ships were delivered to the Indian Navy by 2013. This sentence needs to be deleted as it's better covered in the Talwar section.
  • "hyphenate medium-range missile" still got a lot of these unhyphenated
  • INS Shivalik, which is named after the Shivalik hills, is the lead ship of the class and the first stealth warship built by India. The namesake of this ship is redundant to info in the section on the class
  • The lead vessel, and thus the class, is named after the Shivalik hills, and the subsequent vessels in the class are also named after hill ranges in India.

The class and the lead ship, INS Brahmaputra, are named after the River Brahmaputra. Subsequent ships of the class, INS Betwa and INS Beas, are also named for Indian rivers.

  • The lead ship, INS Godavari, and the class, are named after the Godavari River. The subsequent ships in the class, INS Ganga and INS Gomati, also take their names from the Indian rivers.
  • The lead ship and its class are named for the Nilgiri Hills. Subsequent ships in the class are also named for hill ranges of India

Each of these should be consolidated by saying that they are named for rivers or hill ranges or whatever. No need to specify which ones; that's what the class or individual ship articles are for.

  • Be consistent about using WW1 or First World War, etc.
  • Abbreviate the Royal Indian Navy after first use.
  • Provide Imperial conversions for metric weapons like the Bofors and Oerlikon guns.
  • However, this made the Whitbys more sophisticated and expensive to produce in large numbers in the event of a major war, and so the Type 14 "utility" or "second-rate" anti-submarine frigate was developed to supplement the Type 12. Since the Indians never operated the Type 14, there's no need to mention them.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:26, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: I request a week to fix all the issues raised. Will ping one I'm done. I request the coords for the same. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:02, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sturmvogel 66: I think I've fixed all of them, please go through. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:29, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
While I appreciate that you've made these fixes, I still believe that the quality of prose is not up to A-class standard and no one's done a source review. Forex, what makes the Leander-project, rediff.com, weaponsandwarfare.com, Leander Class General Purpose Frigate (Type 12 Improved) reliable sources? They just look like websites put together by some guy(s). I would also recommend replacement of naval-history.net and globalsecurity.org as I've found numerous errors in both sources. Uboat.net is a reliable source, but not a highly reliable one since nothing is documented therein and it should also be replaced. The various editions of Jane's Fighting Ships and the relevant volumes of Conway's All the Worlds Fighting Ships should be able to replace these sources. I'm going to recommend that this nomination be archived to allow you the time necessary to replace the questionable sources and improve the prose.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:29, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

comments by Auntieruth edit

I realize I'm late to the party and I know absolutely nothing about ships except that they float, to my mind miraculously. That said, I fixed a stray comma and I agree with Sturm that there are some prose elements that could be cleared up for the sake of readability. auntieruth (talk) 21:38, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, archive it for now. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 23:59, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/List_of_frigates_of_India&oldid=1075714080"