Talk:List of naval ship classes in service/Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:Helsinki class.jpg
Image:Helsinki class.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:55, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Not "complete" list...
Hi, a list of this kind possibly can never be "complete"... should appropriate comment be given about that issue, in the introductory paragraph? (as seen in other list articles). Regards, DPdH (talk) 01:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

How do you ADD classes to this list?
Hi, I'm trying to add two classes of ships in service with the Argentine Navy (Almirante Brown class destroyer and Espora class frigate), but I don't understand how to do it. Can anyone please help me to add them? Ideally explain how-to, and I'll add them. Thanks & kind regards, DPdH (talk) 02:50, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello. If, let's say, you wanted to add something under ==Destroyers==, go to the edit icon under that section, click it. Now you should be on the editing page. Now, notice ship classes that are already there. Try to do the same thing, but please add adequate information on each one you add. Dallas G. Spencer (talk) 18:25, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Outdated information
All classes of ships give a number of how many are in commission or active. Through research, multiple sections say that a certain number of ships are active, when in reality (If you go to that particular subject's main page) those ships are now retired or scrapped. Dallas G. Spencer (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Split this article into multiple articles
Hi,

I propose we split this article up into several articles to make it more clear and not lead to this clutter and unreadable list with different classes and types of frigates, minesweepers, destroyers and more. It makes it really hard to read. It would be better to make a List of destroyers, frigates and such then this massive list. In the list of frigates you could even make distinctions like what type of frigate it is, such as guided missiles, multi-purpose, anti-submarine or anti-aircraft. We already have this for submarines (List of submarine classes in service). I would like to know what everyone thinks about this plan. Dragnadh (talk) 20:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Amphibious warfare ships, submarines, frigate (though some are from the past), and aircraft carriers all have currents lists by country and we could simply spruce up the pages and provided links in this page. Anything else and we'd have to set up categories. --Tempest717 (talk) 20:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Funny you bring this up as I was just looking at this page earlier today and thinking it needs some kind organizing, perhaps further sub-grouping, instead of just listing every type around the world simply in alphabetical order, regardless of country, number of classes, etc. It does seem somewhat haphazard right now. Perhaps a separate page for each type, with all the different classes from each country and little extra prose added would be of benefit. Btw, we already have List of Aircraft carriers that covers every carrier around the world right now - the WOLF  child  21:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I do support the idea in principle but this would be lead to quite a few problems. With aircraft carriers and submarines the classification is not complicated since they are what they are. But when it comes to Destroyers, Frigates and Corvettes the classification gets very murky because of differing global polices of different countries. Some countries call they destroyer tonnage (>8000 tonnes) ships frigates while some countries call their corvette tonnage ships(2000-4000 tonnes) destroyers. Multiple times this has lead to problems and I suspect would lead issues where editors would try to place them in or the other list basing on "other" sources. An easy way out would be to lay down the ground rules and state that they will be classified per their countries classification and not their tonnage. But, some countries don't really label their ships into any class per se. An example here is the Littoral Combat Ships of the USN which some sources state are corvettes but some other editor/source can easily argue otherwise. How do we propose to deal with these issues? Adamgerber80 (talk) 00:27, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that the proposed split would be a good idea: this article is just too big and broad-ranging to be useful. Regarding classifications: this seems like a non-issue to me. Just classify ships under whatever their owning Navy calls them, unless the weight of reliable sources supports something else. I note that this article labels some modern air defence frigates as 'destroyers', which is classic WP:OR. Nick-D (talk) 09:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I find the existing format works fine for me, though I don't have strong feelings about keeping it. I sort of share Adamgerber80's concern that splitting it could prompt more irresolvable arguments about how to classify things, though I may still be scarred from the 3 years of arguments over what to call Gneisenau-class battlecruiser and be overly worried about that. :) The Land (talk) 14:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

By far too detailed and too many images for a list, simply condense the info similar to List of submarine classes in service --Denniss (talk)


 * I agree with Denniss, and I share the concerns expressed above about the difficulty of classification if one were to try to split the list. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:41, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I do believe this page could be seperated into smaller ones. Example: All ships of Russia in one article, another on ships of America or the United States. Dallas S12345 (talk) 16:18, 2 January 2018 (UTC) ''H oly crap! I think I just saw a flying pig outside my window... ''wolf 05:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Most nations already have lists of their active fleets, see Category:Lists of ships by country. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:41, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of this article and I'm not really sure what purpose it serves. In my view this seems like the most neutral and least contentious way to organise the information. Would that work for others? Wiki-Ed (talk) 21:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Purpose: I think we need to address this before we decide what to do with it. My assumption - others may disagree - is that the intention of compiling this list is to enable readers to compare warships of a similar 'type'. If that is true then I would suggest that it fails. The article is rather confusing and potentially misleading. A reader might assume some degree of parity between ships in the same category, but I think we can agree that a 3,000 ton 'destroyer' is highly unlikely to have the same capability as a 10,000 ton 'destroyer'. Simply reciting national navies' classification systems verbatim tells the reader very little about the intended role; conversely, trying to decide for ourselves will, as others have pointed out, lead to arguments.
 * Solution: So, moving on to what to do next: Summarising the points made by other editors I think we have three options: we delete it entirely, we leave it as it is, or we try to split it into separate articles as proposed by the OP. Deletion seems extreme, leaving as-is would be misleading for the reasons we've already addressed, so we're left with splitting it.
 * Splitting: There is already a rudimentary effort to categorise by role. I think it makes sense to try and improve this rather than listing by (e.g.) nationality (which would defeat the purpose of having the list in the first place). Some ships types have fairly well defined roles so should be easy enough to split out into separate articles (where these don't already exist). I think we could take out Aircraft carriers, Mine warfare, Amphibious warfare and Logistic support without dispute. That would leave us with Cruisers, Destroyers, Frigates, Corvettes and the various species of Patrol vessel to sort out. These are the tricky ones!
 * Proposal: I don't think we can categorise ourselves and I don't think we can rely on national navies' classification systems so coming up with a catch-all title will be challenging. Putting the article title to one side for now, I believe that, without exception, all of these classes can perform more than one military role (even the most basic gun armament could be used for anti-ship and anti-air purposes). So instead of splitting them into separate lists of (e.g.) 'destroyers' or 'frigates' we could have a single list, ordered by displacement (?), describing them as their owner does, but without making any comparison or analysis of relative capability.


 * Agree that the list is too long and has to be splitted. I support splitting it by type of ship, which is the criteria currently used in the article now and is also a crucial piece of information required in each class and ship detailed wikiarticle anyway. The current article should only contain the overall structure it has now, with links to the detailed lists splitted from it. I see its purpose as a single point of reference for ship classes "currently in service", though must be agreed the point in time defined as "currently" (which is maintenance intensive). Regards, DPdH (talk) 23:22, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Additionally, what happens with the info of a class when no longer "currently" in service? E.g.: the Clemenceau class aircraft carrier. Being a dynamic list, thst info should go to a similar list of "historic" naval ship classes... which I'm unsure it exists. Regards, DPdH (talk) 23:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

This is a long list and probably even so long it is incomplete and in time it could be improved by adding more ships and that will make this article even more longer and harder to read and find parts of articles - ships - user is specifically interested. I think this could and should be separated two ways. First is to make a list similar to cats with short description and second is to make separate articles for all ship classes. First list could have all cats like now but with headlines only not long description for ship and classes and maybe have done same division below for countries that are ship owners something like - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artillery. When user click on for example Amphibious warfare vessels type he or she should get article like it is now but only with vessels from that category. So sort this article in one shorter article with two list:

1.by type of vessel(destroyers, amphibious, etc) 2.by countries similar to example List of artillery

and then make other articles for links by separating this article into a few smaller for each ship types separately: 1. Destroyers ships in service list 2. Amphibious ships in service list etc - Loesorion (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


 * IMHO this is indeed prime for splitting as being too indiscriminate If we're going to have something similar at all (I admit I see "in service" and flinch a little, but that's mostly from the categories where that is seriously frowned upon-) it needs to be split, and I'd suggest by navy. By type opens some cans of worms (one navy's frigate is another's destroyer). - The Bushranger One ping only 02:03, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia already has by-navy lists. The purpose of this list, as I see it, is to allow comparison of active ships by type. The question is how. Wiki-Ed (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

As User:Wiki-Ed has said, the key to this is What is this article for? - not many have commented on his supposition on this, and even fewer have claimed that they do (or would, if improved) find it useful in practice (I wouldn't, but that is irrelevant as the subject is not of interest to me). If it is wanted at all, it will certainly require more maintenance interest than it has had in the past - User:Wiki-Ed's Splitting/Proposal seems the most rational way forward, assuming that the purpose is as surmised. Davidships (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Difficulties with sorting ships by class - one countries frigate is other countries destroyer could be solved with making a Displacement tonnage list.

List ships by Displacement tonnage instead of class for example:
 * 1.Ships from 0 to 500 Displacement tonnes
 * 2.Ships from 500 to 1000 Displacement tonnes
 * 3.Ships from 1000 to 1500 Displacement tonnes
 * 4.Ships from 1500 to 3000 Displacement tonnes
 * 5.Ships from 3000 to 5000 Displacement tonnes
 * 6.Ships from 5000 to 10000 Displacement tonnes
 * 7.Ships with more then 10000 Displacement tonnes

This type of classification could be used within a one or more ship class.

For example:
 * Frigates and Destroyers
 * 1.Ships from 1000 to 1500 Displacement tonnes
 * 2.Ships from 1500 to 3000 Displacement tonnes
 * 3.Ships from 3000 to 5000 Displacement tonnes


 * Frigates and Destroyers
 * 1.Ships from 1500 to 3000 Displacement tonnes
 * 2.Ships from 3000 to 5000 Displacement tonnes
 * 3.Ships from 5000 to 10000 Displacement tonnes

For example:
 * Corvette and Frigates
 * 1.Ships from 0 to 500 Displacement tonnes
 * 2.Ships from 500 to 1000 Displacement tonnes
 * 3.Ships from 1000 to 1500 Displacement tonnes
 * 4.Ships from 1500 to 3000 Displacement tonnes

For example:
 * Landing Craft's & Ship's
 * 1.Ships from 0 to 500 Displacement tonnes
 * 2.Ships from 500 to 1000 Displacement tonnes
 * 3.Ships from 1000 to 1500 Displacement tonnes
 * 4.Ships from 1500 to 3000 Displacement tonnes
 * 5.Ships from 3000 to 5000 Displacement tonnes

etc.

As there is no international standard about this accepted by all navies and states nothing prevents us from creation some sort of classification that will have ships sorted by displacement no matter how countries of origin has designated them and in some cases we could put two or more if needed class of ships as stated above and thus achieve all sides of medal in one article. Loesorion (talk) 19:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

This article with this name has to be corrected every year, it is why this article is unstable
In this article, "List of naval ship classes in service" included navy ships in service. Any merchant ship usually not more then 25 years in service. Any navy ship usually in service less then 20 year and after 5-10 years is old as per technology. The article under this name have to be corrected every year as any ship which will demolished has to be withdrawn from this article and any new ship has to be included. Any 5-10 years 50% of the text in this article has to be changed. I want to say that this article is unstable article. On my opinion is better to divide history and write articles "List of naval ships classes in service in ..." for every 20 years period in XX and XXI century and explain regarding which class and which country in this period has more modern and more powerful ships. For example:
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 1900-1920 years
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 1900-1940
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 1940-1945 (Due to World War II this period can be shorter)
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 1945-1960 (Due to fleets modernization after World War II this period also can be shorter)
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 1960-1980
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 1980-2000
 * List of naval ships classes in service in 2000-2020

History periods before 1900 and after 1300 can be described as 25 years historical periods. And history period earlier then 1300 year can be described as 50 or 100 years historical periods.

Every article in Wikipedia has to be stable and not changeable cardinally, an be only added. It will better if author of this article will change the name of this article or will divide this article for periods. And the main are not particulars of the ships, which have to be described in the separate articles about each ship's class/ The main in this articles list of the names and short text about comparison of capabilities and advantages of mentioned ships as per classes. And as result necessary to write which countries were more powerful during the mentioned period. Грищук ЮН (talk) 12:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what is the purpose of this list. Surely each country's Navy page should have a list of former and current classes, that would make sense. But a whole list for all classes for all navies is an overkill. For example, a current class for one country could be a former class for another (take Turkey for example). Even if you break it into multiple pages you still going to have a very long list of former and current classes all on the same page. So if you want to break it up into smaller pieces, that will probably be less messy, but I still unsure about the need for such a huge list in the first place. Crook1 (talk) 05:35, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

I pretty much agree with the previous comment; I would be unlikely to consult this list, but if it is to contnue, here are some things that I particularly dislike. First, the ships should be organized by operating countries, not builder. And I like to have dimensions included, not just tonnage. Finally, the photos show the name of the ship but not necessarily the class, so you must sometimes guess the class. As for suggestions about reorganization as to ship type, need to think hard about ship function rather than what people call it. Some classifications are pretty slippery, like frigate and cruiser. Thumbs down to classifying by tonnage. Hope this helps somewhatBusaccsb (talk) 22:27, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. Community Tech bot (talk) 08:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
 * 49KashinClassDestroyerMediterraneanJan1970.jpg

French frigate
French navy use nowadays only 3 types of frigate : Horizon class FREMM class (Aquitaine) And FLF La Fayette class.

Those i've removed before are done ans we were the only user. We have 15 frigate on line. 2 horizons, 8 FREMM and 5 FLF.

This wasn't a malicious act. An upload.

La marine française utilise désormais que 3 types de fregates. Les Horizons, les FREMM (Aquitaine) et les FLF LaFayette.

Celles que j'ai enlevée sont désarmées et seules la France utilisait ce type de navires. Nous avons 15 frégates en ligne. 2 Horizons, 8 FREMM et 5 FLF.

Ce n'était pas un acte malveillant. Une mise à jour. Nico of Ferney (talk) 16:35, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi!
Hi ! I'm Nico of Ferney. I'm French. I don't know how to answer your email. It wasn't malicious act when i removed french frigate but an upload. I let notes on the topic.

Nico Nico of Ferney (talk) 16:37, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi back. I never said your edit was "malicious". I reverted it because you removed a significant amount of content over several edits and didn't leave an explanation either via edit summary or here on the talk page. I left a notice on your talk explaining this, along with a 'welcome' template message for new users, that you should read. In the future, comments regarding article content should be posted to the article talk page, not user talk pages (hence the reason it's moved here). Also, I didn't email you, it seems you have your preferences set up to receive emails for certain actions. -  wolf  16:49, 29 March 2022 (UTC)