Talk:1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier

message: An exeptionally unclear article. I have tidied it a bit, however, I am no expert on the Royal Navy, and can only do so much. Have we any knowledgeable fans of Her Majesties fleet on hand?Crocodilicus 23:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a go yourself! Be bold! The info is thin, but if it's unclear to you, then you don't need to be an expert to clarify it. Folks at 137 17:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk page posts

message: Copied from User talk:Fry1989
You have been placing Royal Navy ensigns against the Majestic class carrier article info boxes.  Please stop this.  None of the Majestics were ever commissioned into the Royal Navy. - Nick Thorne talk 00:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Majestic Class Carier, yes that class actually HAS been commissioned by the Royal Navy. Second, you do realize the Royal Navy's white ensign was used by the Australian, Canadian, New Zealand and Indian Navies until the 60s right? So even if the ship wasn't in the UK navy, if it was in one of the navies above, it used the white ensign. Third, I go by the "Ship Career" section of the infobox when I add an ensign, so I don't make mistakes. If it says the ship was used by a certain navy at a certain period of time, I add the correct ensign. If you can find a mistake, feel free to list it here, and I will correct it. Fry1989 eh?  00:27, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Re-read that article.  It quite clearly states than none of the Majestics saw service in the Royal Navy.  The ships in that article that were commissioned into the RN were all Colossus class.  Adding the Royal Navy's ensign to these articles is misleading. - Nick Thorne talk 00:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If the Ship's article says "Career (United Kingdom)" in the infobox of that ship, then either it was in the Royal Navy despite what you say, or that's a mistake with the article itself, not me. I go by what the infobox says. Fry1989 eh?  00:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: But none of the Majestic ships' articles have a "Career (United Kingom)" section in their info boxes because none of them had a career in the RN. - Nick Thorne talk 00:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Either we are not looking at the same "Majestic Class", or you're wrong. This is a list of ships in that class. Looking at their articles, HMS Venerable served 3 years in the Royal Navy, HMS Theseus served two, and several others on that list also appear to have served the Royal Navy. The only other "Majestic Class" I can find on Wikipedia is the Majestic Class battleship, but that class also served the Royal Navy. Fry1989 eh?  00:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Fry, I request that you take the time to read the articles you are flagging andor referring to. Also, please do not assume that all ships within a ship class saw service in the same navy. In this instance, the class article you are referring to is 1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier. This design incorporated two classes, the Colossus class, and the slightly upgraded Majestic class (as stated in the lead, the "Design and construction" section, and the list of ships). All of the Colossus class ships served in the Royal Navy. None of the Majestic class did. -- saberwyn 01:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

text: (Edit conflict) Both Venerable and Theseus were Colossus class.  If you actually had a look at their articles, as you put it, you would see this.  If you don't know anything about a subject you might be better advised to learn a little before you start making edits to it. - Nick Thorne talk 01:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As I already said, I go by the infobox on the individual ship's article. I do not group all ships in a class together, nor am I going through these ships class by class. If the individual ship's article says that the ship in question served in a particular navy, either it did, or that is a mistake with the article. So far, neither of you have pointed out a specific ship where I added the white ensign, that did not serve the Royal Navy (or the Australian, Canadian or New Zealand Navies before the 60s when they also used the white ensign of the United Kingdom). Do that, and we'll talk. Fry1989 eh?  01:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Nick Thorne, since you want to act like I'm editing something I know nothing about, let me now educate you. I added the white ensign to the HMAS Sydney (which was Majestic-class). You removed that white ensign under the edit summary "Sydney never commissioned into the RN". What you clearly didn't pay attention to was that the HMAS Sydney was commissioned by the Royal Australian Navy in 1948, and again in 1962. From 1911 to 1967, the Royal Australin Navy used the White Ensign of the United Kingdom. Not until 1968 did Australia adopt a unique white ensign based on the Australian national flag. So since the ship served from 1948 to 1958, and then 1962 to 1973, it flew under first the UK White Ensign and then the Australian White Ensign, and I was right in adding the UK white ensign. So educate yourself before you try and claim IDK what I'm doing. Fry1989 eh?  01:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

text: Exactly, it was identical to (and therefore there was no distinction) the Royal Navy's white ensign. Infact, the Admiralty was the one that initially forced the RAN, RCN and RNZN to use the White Ensign of the Royal Navy, with only the naval jack (being the national flag) as distinction between the four Navies. So these ships didn't have to serve the Royal Navy to fly the white ensign, they simply had to serve the Australian, Canadian or New Zealand navies before the 60s. As for your understanding of the policy to only include the most recently flown ensign, I've not read that, and I've seen many ship infoboxes which did not follow this, such as the SAS Somerset. So far, I'm completely vindicated in adding the UK white ensign to the Sydney and the Melbourne. Fry1989 eh?  01:35, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

text: This doesn't need to be discussed on Talk:1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier, the fact is that if a ship served the RAN, RCN or RNZN before the late 1960s, they used the UK white Ensign, that is a fact. Now, if you want to discuss showing both ensigns, or if only the most-recently flown ensign should be used in the infobox, that's a discussion that can be had, but you, Nick Thorne, came to my talk page and assumed bad faith, and also accused me of adding an ensign to a ship that didn't serve the Royal Navy, ignorant of the fact that even if that ship wasn't in the Royal Navy but rather the Royal Australian Navy, it still would have used the Royal Navy's white ensign between 1911 and 1967. You told me I should read about a subject before editing it like I know nothing about it, when it turns out you didn't know about the ensigns. The Sydney and the Melbourne both served the RAN before 1968, which means that they used the Royal Navy's white ensign as well as the Australian White Ensign after it was adopted in 1967. Fry1989 eh?  01:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Prior to around the 1950s-60s, all the empire and commonwealth navies - RAN, RCN, RNZN, RIN, etc., used the same White Ensign as the RN for their naval vessels. Before the colonies gained greater independence post-WW II, all of these navies would have been internationally regarded as 'British' and so the use of the White Ensign was wholly appropriate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 13:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ensigns in info boxes 

message: There's a recently created substub at INS Vikram (R13) claiming that Leviathan was to be sold to the Indian Navy and completed to match Hercules/INS Vikrant. Does anyone have anything that can confirm or deny this? Either way, what should be done about the article? (personally in favour of merge redirect here like the Leviathan article unless there's enough sourced content to support a standalone article, which should be under the Leviathan name). -- saberwyn 14:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: And as nothing has been found in the six months (minus change) since this request was made, I have marked the Vikram article for proposed deletion. -- saberwyn 07:50, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leviathan = INS Vikram? 

message: I was curious as to why you tagged the article for Canadian English? Per WP:TIES, the topic is clearly British, in my opinion, as they designed the ships, and used more than any other user. Was this a mistake, or did you have a particular reason, such as something in the article's history? I didn't want to change it without asking first. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 22:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It appeared in my list thanks to being in the category . I have no trouble reverting - please feel free to do so if you run into a similar issue elsewhere. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 22:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, ok, I understand. I'll change it to British English. BilCat (talk) 23:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Canadian English?