Talk:Sovremenny-class destroyer

Untitled
Having seen the tag, i wuold ask what's the problem with this article. It seems to me quite accurate and complete, plus well described with images. Maybe it's time to take away the tag?--Stefanomencarelli (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

This article needs some serious grammatical/clarity cleanup, something I hope to take care of soon. I also take exception to some un-sourced claims (about the electronic warfare capability being 'very good', for example). Seems to be selling the ships without any verification. Dpenn89 (talk) 09:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Contradiction found
The 'History' section contradicts the 'Class Overview' side panel section. According to external link 3 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/row/rus/956.htm) there are in fact 12 active ships with the Russian Navy.

I do not have immediate access to the reference books. Are they the source of the information in the 'Class Overview' side panel? I also got the impression from external link 3, and 5 that there are multiple versions of this ship in addition to the 'Project 956EM' units purchased by the Chinese. External link 3 has 'Project 956', and 'Project 956A' while link 5 shows 'Project 956' and 'Project 956E'.

Additionally the reference link 3 (http://www.janes.com/regional_news/asia_pacific/news/jdw/jdw020108_1_n.shtml) redirects to the Janes main page (http://www.janes.com/). A search for 'Sovremenny' on the site returns no results.

"A total of 18 have been built for the Russian Navy, but currently only 5 remain in service due to lack of funds and trained personnel. Additional 3 ships are ongoing modernization and overhaul and 2 are laid-up in reserve", maybe additional ships have been decommissioned and the text needs updating because the table lists 3 in service 2 in reserve and 1 being overhauled and 11 decommissioned + 4 chinese. Two of the Chinese were supposed to be of the third version built specially for them, but all seem to have former Russian names, none of which is included in the Russian list.150.227.15.253 (talk) 15:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Range
Infobox (strange): 14,000 nmi (26,000 km; 16,000 mi) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph)

Article (realistic): The ship's maximum speed is just under 33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph). At a fuel-economic speed of 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph) the range is 3,920 nautical miles (7,260 km; 4,510 mi)

A destroyer with 26,000 km (once around the world + 10,000 km left) range, the amount of fuel would be very extreme?! So the 7,260 km at 18 knots are realistic and 26,000 km no country would build a ship like that, because I mean why a range which is very much larger than crossing the whole world?! and if such a range, than on one very large ship with the space for the fuel and food/water/ammo... Kilon22 (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Strange indeed. No conventionally powered ship in the world has that sort of range. A quick scan of the sources provides a much more realistic range of 3,920 nm at 18 kts, and 1,345 nm at 32 kts. With the infobox figures unsourced, and highly dubious, I will amend them to follow the sources. 92.12.217.145 (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Typo in name.
Hi, I noticed a typo in the name of the ship class. There shouldn't be an extra "y" after "Sovremenny". Not sure how to change the actual title. Please help!

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.129.218 (talk • contribs)


 * You have a good point. The Russian word is 'Современный', with the '-ый' ending in some transliteration systems being rendered '-yy', which is where the form 'Sovremennyy' has come from. That said, the BGN/PCGN romanization of Russian, and more to the point Romanization of Russian, simplifies '-yy' endings to just '-y' (the example it gives is "Красный = Krasny" not "Krasnyy"). Google results for '"Sovremenny" destroyer' and '"Sovremennyy" destroyer' favour the former by approximately 63,100 to 13,700 hits. Jane's in particular uses 'Sovremenny' - eg in this work. I will make an WP:RM post as I think there is a case for bringing this article title in line with the rest of wikipedia practice. 129.67.118.245 (talk) 19:56, 15 December 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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Rastoropny.jpg

Requested move 15 December 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move. Consensus is that the single-y form is the COMMONNAME in English reliable sources. (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 01:41, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Sovremennyy-class destroyer → Sovremenny-class destroyer – This came orginally from the post above - Talk:Sovremennyy-class destroyer As I replied there, it's not so much a typo, as an alternative form of transliteration of the Cyrillic word 'Современный'. To repeat what I said there for convenience - "The Russian word is 'Современный', with the '-ый' ending in some transliteration systems being rendered '-yy', which is where the form 'Sovremennyy' has come from. That said, the BGN/PCGN romanization of Russian, and more to the point Romanization of Russian, simplifies '-yy' endings to just '-y' (the example it gives is "Красный = Krasny" not "Krasnyy"). Google results for '"Sovremenny" destroyer' and '"Sovremennyy" destroyer' favour the former by approximately 63,100 to 13,700 hits. Jane's in particular uses 'Sovremenny' - eg in this work." I will also note that the article was orginally titled "Sovremenny-class destroyer" until this move in 2014 on the grounds of "ый = yy". Which is not wrong, but it is counter to standard wikipedia practice, which suggests the move should now be reverted. 129.67.118.245 (talk) 20:03, 15 December 2018 (UTC) --Relisted. –Ammarpad (talk) 04:56, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Neutral. WP:RUS says that the BGN/PCGN romanization of Russian does write "-ый" endings as "yy". It also explains the "Wikipedia Romanization of Russian," but the page only has essay status so it's unclear to me if this system of romanization is widely used. It further says that "The Wikipedia romanization of Russian is a modification of the BGN/PCGN romanization of Russian. It is used in the English Wikipedia per Naming conventions (Russia) as suitable for Anglophones." However, Naming conventions (Russia) is listed as a dormant proposal, not a naming convention, so it does not appear to be in force. As a separate question, I get 19.8K Ghits for "'Sovremenny-class destroyer' -Sovremennyy" and 11.2K for "'Sovremennyy-class destroyer' -Sovremenny". That doesn't seem all that conclusive to me. Dekimasu よ! 20:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Support - quick google books search indicates that "Sovremenny" is clearly more widely used by English language sources, therefore we can apply WP:COMMONNAME.--Staberinde (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. bd2412  T 20:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Result of move
Two years after the above move was made, the relevant individual ships listed remain unchanged, which seems odd. But I feel insufficiently familiar with Russian transliteration to boldly change things. Davidships (talk) 02:53, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
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. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * PLANS Ningbo (DDG-139).jpg

Successor
It's probably better to change it to the Lider-class destroyer, as the Udaloy is said in the article itself to be a complement. Of course, it would need clarification; "prospective replacement" would be a good one. Anthropophoca (talk) 09:25, 7 April 2022 (UTC)