Talk:List of battlecruisers of Russia

Kirov info
You've done some good work on the Kirov section, but note that the other sections of this list lack detailed information on their design histories, so leave the stuff that you keep adding on the Kirov class page where it belongs. The fact that you're hiding it from immediate view is irrelevant to the fact that it simply doesn't belong. Right now the Kirov section is dominating the list and may need further reduction to conform to the rest of the list.

I've also deleted the "See also" section as ship articles and lists don't generally use them as they're generally redundant to the navboxes and categories at the bottom. That said, we are missing one for battlecruisers in general, so I'll be building one shortly and will add it when ready. When I've done so, I'll be eliminating all the other See also sections from the other battlecruiser lists as well.

There's another problem with your changes in that sometimes they do not conform with the Manual of Style and could cause the list to lose its featured status. The biggest problem, however, is that most all of your web references are not "highly-reliable" sources, which is a requirement for featured status. They need to be replaced by more reliable ones like editions of Jane's Fighting Ships and the like. And there are more minor problems is that you need to change your cites to books match the existing format. So move the actual book info down to the bibliography and change the cite itself to the format of the other cites. And change the "x" used in the table to the multiplication sign found in the wikimarkup at the bottom of the editing page.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:43, 11 December 2016 (UTC)