Talk:Kanimbla-class landing platform amphibious

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Assessment[edit]

Assessed as "Start" and filled in "B-class" checklist. To meet B2, the article needs some details on what the ships have done in the "Operations" section, and a line or two on the replacement by a Canberra class landing helicopter dock and an unspecified heavy lift ship would be good. -- saberwyn 04:29, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Gday I recently added a ref and a bit on operations and thought that this might be B class now (and even put it up for reassessment). That said I now realize that many ship class articles have a "design / capabilities" section. Is this needed to get it to B class? I ask because I'm no expert on ships I was just trying to get this up to scratch for September 2014 backlog reduction drive. If it does need such a section this will be beyond my expertise so I will leave it to someone else. Thanks. Anotherclown (talk) 08:10, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
I think integrating the infobox data into the text of the article and citing would be enough to get it to B-class. Probably best to put it into the "Conversion" section, as this ship class is more of a 're'design. Will see if I can dig up appropriate sources over the weekend. -- saberwyn 09:13, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
G'day, I had a crack at this, but added it into a short section of its own. Please feel free adjust as you see fit. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:24, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
@Anotherclown: I editconflicted with you andor User:AustralianRupert, then used 'My Preferred Version'TM, which integrated it into a renamed "Conversion" section (no need for a one-paragraph section) and used the deadtree source I'm 99% sure the info came from back when I added it in 2008. Feel free to yell at me if I killed something else in the process. -- saberwyn 10:21, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Cheers gents. Good work. I've now requested reassessment for B class. Anotherclown (talk) 20:41, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Thanks, Saberwyn. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. The Bushranger One ping only 00:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)



Kanimbla class amphibious transport shipKanimbla class landing platform amphibious – Requesting that the article title reflect how the ships are referred to by the operating navy and other sources, per WP:COMMONNAME. The Royal Australian Navy calls them Landing Platform, Amphibious (singular, no option on plural) on its webpage, and uses Landing Platform Amphibious in several news articles (i.e. here (p. 7) and here (p.6, with plural "ships")), while the Australian Department of Defence uses Landing Platform Amphibious Ships (plural) here. Naval-technology.com calls them Landing platform amphibious ships. A DefenceWeb press release uses the similar but slightly less appropriate (pluralwise) Landing platforms amphibious. -- saberwyn 12:24, 19 November 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.