Jump to content

Talk:USS Nimitz: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 62: Line 62:
Sailors call ships "she"- this is true. But this is an encyclopedia. An inanimate object is called an "it". [[Special:Contributions/216.166.234.203|216.166.234.203]] ([[User talk:216.166.234.203|talk]]) 21:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Sailors call ships "she"- this is true. But this is an encyclopedia. An inanimate object is called an "it". [[Special:Contributions/216.166.234.203|216.166.234.203]] ([[User talk:216.166.234.203|talk]]) 21:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:Sorry, there is an official guideline on this here, you are in the wrong. Is every single wikipedia article wrong. If you want to change this, you should bring it up at [[WT:SHIPS]] instead of unilaterally changing it because you will be reverted every time, guaranteed. -'''[[User:MBK004|MBK]]'''<sub>[[User talk:MBK004|004]]</sub> 21:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:Sorry, there is an official guideline on this here, you are in the wrong. Is every single wikipedia article wrong. If you want to change this, you should bring it up at [[WT:SHIPS]] instead of unilaterally changing it because you will be reverted every time, guaranteed. -'''[[User:MBK004|MBK]]'''<sub>[[User talk:MBK004|004]]</sub> 21:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
::Seems informal and unprofessional to me. [[Special:Contributions/216.166.234.203|216.166.234.203]] ([[User talk:216.166.234.203|talk]]) 23:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
::Seems informal and unprofessional to me. But if you feel 'she' is the proper term for a hunk of steel, that's fine.[[Special:Contributions/216.166.234.203|216.166.234.203]] ([[User talk:216.166.234.203|talk]]) 23:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:30, 19 June 2009

WikiProject iconShips C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.WikiProject icon
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Aviation / Maritime / North America / United States C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Military aviation task force
Taskforce icon
Maritime warfare task force
Taskforce icon
North American military history task force
Taskforce icon
United States military history task force

Inaccurate listing under armaments

The box lists the Nimitz as having 2 21 cell SeaRams. This is false. First of all, SeaRam is still in testing phase. Check Raytheon's homepage for more information. Second, SeaRam has 11 cells, not 21. Third, the Nimitz doesn't have SeaRam, it just has RAM.

I would change it myself but I can't seem to figure out how.

128.151.27.180 (talk) 17:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)TySixtus[reply]


This statement would be incorrect if you wikipedia RIM-116 you will notice in the pictures it has 21 cells —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.194.149.130 (talk) 20:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any more information is needed

IF this article needs anything it needs less photos. Three for the size of the article is too many.

There is never too much information. Also, does anyone have the link to the apparently removed third picture? ````Bellahdoll

Ummmm....

Ever heard of The Final Countdown? 204.52.215.107 02:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

welcome to chennai 4th of july in india shows the incresing cooperation between US and india and growing stature of india

US Naval Ensign

The US Navy uses it's national flag as it's ensign. Jacks are only used when a ship is in port or for ceremonial purposes -
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeohzt4/Seaflags/ensign/Ensign.html#top - Ensign of the United States, Jackstaff, Ensign, Maritime flag#Ensigns, Maritime flag#Jacks.

Many countries don't distinguish between these uses, and employ their standard national flag in all three contexts; such a multiuse flag is termed a national ensign. Others (like the United Kingdom, Italy, Russia, South Africa, New Zealand, and Japan) use a variant of the national flag as the naval ensign. (Such flags are often strictly regulated as usable only on warships; civilian ships, with very few exceptions, would not fly naval ensigns.) Distinct civil ensigns are also common. In rare cases a distinct design is used for the state ensign, such as the blue ensign of the United Kingdom.

The ensign of the United States refers to the flag of the United States when worn as an ensign (a type of maritime flag identifying nationality, usually flown from the stern of a ship or boat).[1] All documented U.S. vessels, and all U.S. vessels in international or foreign waters, are required to display this ensign between 08:00 and sunset. Other U.S. vessels may use this ensign at their option.

The jack is flown on the bow (front) of a ship and the ensign is flown on the stern (rear) of a ship when anchored or moored. Once underway, the ensign is flown from the main mast.

This seems extremelly weak for what is claimed inside but reported into the article. Ceedjee (talk) 12:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PBS Show

PBS will have the Nimitz featured in the show "Carrier" spring 2008 http://www.pbs.org/weta/carrier/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.168.132.235 (talk) 21:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Displacment

The article states the ship displaces 101,000 to 104,000 tons full load, however the info page on navy.mil list "about 95,000 tons" [1]. Should the article be corrected? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.46.171.51 (talk) 19:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that link doesn't work any more, put looking at the Welcome Aboard Pamphlet, it places its full-load displacement as "97,000 tons." A further correction needs to be made, as being a pamphlet about a ship, information given is in LONG tons, not SHORT tons, and hence the metric displacement should be a LARGER number than the imperial measurement. It's understandable for those used to metric-only would readily confuse how the US uses a mix of different systems depending on the circumstance. (after all, The Royal Navy made the same error themselves) However, that doesn't stop it from it needing to be fixed.
Likewise, as far as the different sources, there isn't exactly a set "full load" displacement for ships, especially ones as re-configurable as an aircraft carrier. The full load could change by a few tons even simply by the weight of those on board, let alone the particular makeup of the Carrier Air Wing, etc. However, I THINK the 104,000-ton figure was actually not accurate for the USS Nimitz, and instead refers to perhaps other members of the class. Nottheking (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A6 Crash 26 May 1981

The description of this incident seems to be written to defend the position of some of those involved in the accident. On two occasions the deaths and injuries are attributed to the impact, yet the paragraph also states that the deaths occurred after the initial fire was extinguished dure to the subsequent explosion of some ordinance. Frankly, this paragraph reads as a rant. Nick Thorne talk 23:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A6 Crash NPOV

The description of this incident seems to be written to defend the position of some of those involved in the accident. Frankly, this paragraph reads as a rant and does not comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Nick Thorne talk 00:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A6 Crash Original Research

The description of this incident appears to contain a number of statements that are original reasearch. This has resulted in a paragraph that is self contradictory and way too long for its context. On two occasions the deaths and injuries are attributed to the impact, yet the paragraph also states that the deaths occurred after the initial fire was extinguished due to the subsequent explosion of some ordinance. The whole section needs to be properly referenced and abbreviated. Nick Thorne talk 00:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to the Nimitz as "she"

Sailors call ships "she"- this is true. But this is an encyclopedia. An inanimate object is called an "it". 216.166.234.203 (talk) 21:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there is an official guideline on this here, you are in the wrong. Is every single wikipedia article wrong. If you want to change this, you should bring it up at WT:SHIPS instead of unilaterally changing it because you will be reverted every time, guaranteed. -MBK004 21:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems informal and unprofessional to me. But if you feel 'she' is the proper term for a hunk of steel, that's fine.216.166.234.203 (talk) 23:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]