Talk:INS Vikrant (1961)

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 40 mm, use 40 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 40 mm.[?]
*This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.[?]
*Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honour (B) (American: honor), armor (A) (British: armour), armour (B) (American: armor), harbor (A) (British: harbour), ization (A) (British: isation).
*This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with THE FOOTNOTE. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References�? or “Footnotes�?, add .[?]
*The article will need references. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information.[?]
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mal 09:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Auto peer review

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: This article is similar word by word to http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/r-vikrant.htm Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation 

message: List of British WW-II carriers is here.
*HMS Indomitable (92) - Scrapped
*HMS Eagle (1918) - Sunk
*HMS Hermes (95) - Sunk
*HMS Ark Royal (1914) - Scrapped
*HMS Implacable (R86) - Scrapped
*HMS Indefatigable (R10) - Scrapped
*HMS Unicorn (I72) - Scrapped
*Illustrious class aircraft carriers - All scrapped
*Audacious class aircraft carriers - Cancelled, sunk
*Colossus class aircraft carriers - All broken up
*Centaur class aircraft carriers - All scrapped, EXCEPT for INS Viraat, formerly , also being run by the Indian Navy. However, she wasn't a WW-II era carrier as she wasn't commissioned till 1959.
Among the Majestic class aircraft carriers, Vikrant is the only one to still be in her original shape (The Majestic is said to have been taken apart and her deck is being used to train Chinese pilots). 
SO.... This statement is accurate as per the data on Wikipedia.
:Well, Viraat was laid down on 21 June 1944 and although she certainly did not serve during WWII, the design was largely that of a WWII carrier.  I would put it in much the same category as  which also was modified during the completion of construction after the war and did not enter service until 1955.  She was always regarded nevertheless as a WWII era carrier and I think it is at least arguable that Viraat is one too, unless one takes a very narrow view of what a "WWII era" carrier is.  Also, remember that Vikrant herself was incomplete at the end of the war and was also modified during completion and not commissioned until 1961.  In fact if we are to consider Vikrant to be a WWII era ship then surely must we consider Viraat to be one also.  Of course if India breaks Viraat up after she ends her long service life, then the claim stands, but until then I think not.  However, she is the only WWII era British carrier to be preserved as a museum, since Viraat is still in service, so I have modified the article to reflect that. - Nick Thorne talk 10:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  World War II Carrier Comment 

message: Hercules and Vikrant both are masculine/manly names and not feminine. request you to change the pronoun from "She" to  " It " from wikipedia pages.
Regards
Vikrant Uprit  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.199.104.130 (talk) 07:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In English ships are usually referred as feminine, regardless of their name. Hence the use of "she". Regards, DPdH (talk) 10:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender change 

message: The article contradicts itself; in the introductory paragraph says that it is preserved as a museum ship, however in the relevant section says it has been put for auction and was sold for scrapping. Can anyone please confirm which is the fate of this ship, and amend the article accordingly? Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 10:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Museum ship or scrapped? 

message: I am not aware of WP Belfast, but WP:INDIA considers "A-class". Back in time, the project used to assign A-class by an internal peer view, similar to MILHIS's A-class review. Though the internal review is now inactive, the class is still considered to be valid in the project. See List of India A-class articles. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:32, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I didn't think that they had an A-class system at all.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Shall I update the class now? Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:45, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-class assesment 

message: [...] propeller revolutions to 120 RPM at the bow [...]
The ship had propellers at the bow? I seriously doubt that. -- 217.248.24.182 (talk) 11:21, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing out, corrected. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unconventional Ship 

message: INS Vikrant (R11) was modified quite extensively several times, including, as noted in the article, even before it was commissioned into Indian Navy service.  As far as I'm aware, the specifications shown are based on the original wartime design.  I am curious how the specifications were affected by the various modernization programs:  I would imagine that the displacement remained at 16,000t standard even after the addition of the angled flight deck, for example.  The modernization programs in 1979 and 1987 probably changed a lot of things (I seem to remember Indian navy people opposing the ship's retirement because of all the costly changes made in late 1980s).  More details on what these programs involved would be very helpful!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.93.91.225 (talk) 17:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Specifications after modernization programs?

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
*  ()
*  ()
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:56, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion