This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Future of the Indian Navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Nicky mathew, when writing about a statement made by a high ranking military official (such as Admiral RK Dhowan), you are obliged to provide a source. Also, bold claims such as Indias "lack of a strong submarine fleet have diminished its capabilities" need a reliable citation. Wikipedia is not a place or Original Research or personal opinions! Antiochus the Great ( talk) 11:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
@
Antiochus the Great, i understand your concerns i will provide the necessary citations for all my claims. 2 months ago only i started editing wikipedia so i am still a rookie when it comes to editing page but i created this page future ships of indian navy because i know deeply about indian navy and its future plans and. when i undo your edit i didnt mean that i was not going to provide the necessary citations,within 6 hours i will put necessary citations for all my claims ,consider it as a rookie mistake and thank you for your guidance :)
Nicky mathew
@
Antiochus the Great, thank you for your support :).i am happy to a part of wikipedia community.
Nicky mathew — Preceding
undated comment added 15:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
@ Nicky mathew: Carriers are just metal boxes, little more than targets, without their airwing, for any article e.g. Future of the Royal Navy, covering future military planning of a carrier operating navy, future aircraft should be covered not just ships. There is no such myopia in the lead which includes mention "long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft" and "unmanned aerial vehicles such as the IAI Heron-1". I don't see any where that says aircraft should not be covered, if thats the case this article is misnamed and should be moved to Future ships of the Indian Navy.-- KTo288 ( talk) 11:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
@ KTo288: I agree with you When this page was created in 2014, the name given to this page was Future ships of the Indian Navy but later it was changed to future of the indian navy. Indian Naval Air Arm already have a future aircraft section so if we add future aircraft here some editors might not see the need to do that and might not agree with us. actually i don't have any problem if we add aircrafts to this page and i support that addition :) Nicky mathew ( talk) 15:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
@ KTo288: Air arm forms a major part of the Navy. Since the article is titled Future of Indian Navy, I wish the Future of naval air arm reference also to be included. I don't think that it may cause any confusion. M.srihari ( talk) 00:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Srihari
india is negotiating a deal for 3 to 4 additional talwar class frigate they should also be mentioned in this list and in the air arms column 16 s70 asw helicopters should also be added
india is negotiating a deal for 3 to 4 additional talwar class frigate they should also be mentioned in this list and in the air arms column 16 s70 asw helicopters should also be added
@ Rishabhanand33: created a new section called missiles in the article in good-faith. It is a good-idea to have a section about future missiles but won't this make the article very long if we use the table format. It is better if these missiles are mentioned in a paragraph with the concerned wikilinks instead of the table. standardengineer ( talk) 04:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Rishabhanand33: I don't think a missiles section is even needed there. There are lot more missiles in the works like Barak-8, Brahmos-II, Maitri(VL-MICA) etc. Even if we keep the section I recommend removing the picture, speed and range column as missiles do different jobs and their characteristics are detailed on their specific wikipages and there is no need to describe them in the table here. standardengineer ( talk) 04:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Future of the Indian Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Future of the Indian Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
@
Adamgerber80: We need to have a clear criteria for inclusion into the page that is compliant with
WP:CBALL. RFIs are meant to gather information which eventually shapes procurement. A mere issuance of RFI does not necessarily mean that a procurement is underway. Quoting from
DPP-2016 of MoD, The issue of RFI is not a commitment for procurement
. It would be speculation to treat RFI as start of procurement.
I propose using Acceptance of Necessity from CCS/MoD or issuance of a RFP as criteria for inclusion. The first one signals the start of procurement as MoD has accepted that the item in question is needed, while the latter is the actual start of procurement. There also needs to be two exceptions (a) Items that are developed rather than just procured, like INS Vishal (b) Government to government procurement; as they don't go through the RFI-RFP process and their mere existence proves that a procurement is under way. This would result in removal of about 5 entries in the page, which is less than 15% of the content. Gazoth ( talk) 03:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Please stop attempting to put the "Project 18 Destroyer" on this page. It originates from a fictional defense project on a geopolitics roleplay subreddit.
StSeanSpicer ( talk) 16:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:07, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Have these aircraft carriers been decommissioned or is there another reason for omitting them? Sooku ( talk) 00:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Future of the Indian Navy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Nicky mathew, when writing about a statement made by a high ranking military official (such as Admiral RK Dhowan), you are obliged to provide a source. Also, bold claims such as Indias "lack of a strong submarine fleet have diminished its capabilities" need a reliable citation. Wikipedia is not a place or Original Research or personal opinions! Antiochus the Great ( talk) 11:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
@
Antiochus the Great, i understand your concerns i will provide the necessary citations for all my claims. 2 months ago only i started editing wikipedia so i am still a rookie when it comes to editing page but i created this page future ships of indian navy because i know deeply about indian navy and its future plans and. when i undo your edit i didnt mean that i was not going to provide the necessary citations,within 6 hours i will put necessary citations for all my claims ,consider it as a rookie mistake and thank you for your guidance :)
Nicky mathew
@
Antiochus the Great, thank you for your support :).i am happy to a part of wikipedia community.
Nicky mathew — Preceding
undated comment added 15:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
@ Nicky mathew: Carriers are just metal boxes, little more than targets, without their airwing, for any article e.g. Future of the Royal Navy, covering future military planning of a carrier operating navy, future aircraft should be covered not just ships. There is no such myopia in the lead which includes mention "long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft" and "unmanned aerial vehicles such as the IAI Heron-1". I don't see any where that says aircraft should not be covered, if thats the case this article is misnamed and should be moved to Future ships of the Indian Navy.-- KTo288 ( talk) 11:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
@ KTo288: I agree with you When this page was created in 2014, the name given to this page was Future ships of the Indian Navy but later it was changed to future of the indian navy. Indian Naval Air Arm already have a future aircraft section so if we add future aircraft here some editors might not see the need to do that and might not agree with us. actually i don't have any problem if we add aircrafts to this page and i support that addition :) Nicky mathew ( talk) 15:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
@ KTo288: Air arm forms a major part of the Navy. Since the article is titled Future of Indian Navy, I wish the Future of naval air arm reference also to be included. I don't think that it may cause any confusion. M.srihari ( talk) 00:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)Srihari
india is negotiating a deal for 3 to 4 additional talwar class frigate they should also be mentioned in this list and in the air arms column 16 s70 asw helicopters should also be added
india is negotiating a deal for 3 to 4 additional talwar class frigate they should also be mentioned in this list and in the air arms column 16 s70 asw helicopters should also be added
@ Rishabhanand33: created a new section called missiles in the article in good-faith. It is a good-idea to have a section about future missiles but won't this make the article very long if we use the table format. It is better if these missiles are mentioned in a paragraph with the concerned wikilinks instead of the table. standardengineer ( talk) 04:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Rishabhanand33: I don't think a missiles section is even needed there. There are lot more missiles in the works like Barak-8, Brahmos-II, Maitri(VL-MICA) etc. Even if we keep the section I recommend removing the picture, speed and range column as missiles do different jobs and their characteristics are detailed on their specific wikipages and there is no need to describe them in the table here. standardengineer ( talk) 04:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Future of the Indian Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Future of the Indian Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
@
Adamgerber80: We need to have a clear criteria for inclusion into the page that is compliant with
WP:CBALL. RFIs are meant to gather information which eventually shapes procurement. A mere issuance of RFI does not necessarily mean that a procurement is underway. Quoting from
DPP-2016 of MoD, The issue of RFI is not a commitment for procurement
. It would be speculation to treat RFI as start of procurement.
I propose using Acceptance of Necessity from CCS/MoD or issuance of a RFP as criteria for inclusion. The first one signals the start of procurement as MoD has accepted that the item in question is needed, while the latter is the actual start of procurement. There also needs to be two exceptions (a) Items that are developed rather than just procured, like INS Vishal (b) Government to government procurement; as they don't go through the RFI-RFP process and their mere existence proves that a procurement is under way. This would result in removal of about 5 entries in the page, which is less than 15% of the content. Gazoth ( talk) 03:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Please stop attempting to put the "Project 18 Destroyer" on this page. It originates from a fictional defense project on a geopolitics roleplay subreddit.
StSeanSpicer ( talk) 16:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:07, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Have these aircraft carriers been decommissioned or is there another reason for omitting them? Sooku ( talk) 00:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)