Talk:Visakhapatnam-class destroyer

(I ame shears (talk) 02:05, 26 May 2021 (UTC)) To add about the INS Porbandar. Please add the table .

Mentioning a blog as unreliable..

Hello @Origamite:, you have reverted an edit in the article stating " That's a blog and therefore fails WP:RS.". Blogs are allowed as sources in Wikipedia as long as they are maintained by recognized authority. Point number 11 of WP:ELNO mentions that. Adding to that, Links normally to be avoided doesn't mean that the links mentioned 'shouldn't' be included. They (reliable sources such as livefistdefence.com) are acceptable when sources are scarce. livefistdefence.com can be accepted as a source as per point 11 of WP:ELNO as the author of the page is Shiv Aroor, who is a leading journalist in Headlines Today, and previously worked with Indian Express.. He excels in Defense related news. And I hardly doubt about the reliability of the news website. But to be exactly sure, lets wait for some more sources to pop about the change in name... But stating the source as unreliable is completely unacceptable! --†ããrøn95^® 12:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Jaaron95: That's external links, not references; anyway, the guideline you cite says that recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people. Aroor doesn't have an article and although I can find him in bylines and account names, I'm not sure he meets WP:BIO. WP:V says that These [blogs] may be acceptable sources if the writers are professionals, but use them with caution because the blog may not be subject to the news organization's normal fact-checking process. Is that source enough to support a full-on name change? Thank you for contacting me. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 12:26, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Origamite:, you did revert the edit mentioning it didn't meet WP:RS, didn't you ? I think the news wasn't covered by other sources because it did not have the required importance. Shiv Aroor is well connected with Military Officials.. He was the one to come with INS Vikramaditya on behalf of Headlines Today during it's run to home and I can bet, he is a professional. Also, I don't think the name change of a class of destroyer needs to be exaggerated to meet WP:EXCEPTIONAL, after all it's not a BLP name change... So, his news are reliable... 'Not reliable' is something I'd never agree on. In fact you can go through his blog to search for any misinformation... As sources are scarce for this name change, I for now trust this info. But, for being completely clear, I also suggest that the existing information remain in the article until we have enough sources. Regards --†ããrøn95^® 12:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Origamite:, livefistdefence is considered as India's best defence news website, its reports are more accurate than times of india.it is one the oldest and active dedicated India defence website.we always use livefistdefence articles as references in Wikipedia hence it is a reliable source. why do you have to mention WP:BIO here, nobody is talking about writing an article about him or anything of that sort. Shiv Aroor and livefistdefence is very well known among people who are interested Indian defence sector. 1 month ago times of india mistakenly reported that india is buying 24 rafale from France, they probably misunderstood international news floating around about a possible sale of 24 rafale to Egypt so that's the kind of "normal fact-checking process" that goes on some very well-established news site now. anyway we will wait untill someone else report about project 15B :).Nicky mathew (talk) 13:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I'll take the blog as is, under the condition that you look for better sources for the information. BIO is relevant if we're discussing linking to that blog in the WP:EL, but I don't think we are. Also, the considered best thing is most definitely your opinion, and even the New York Times has a corrections section. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 15:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Rename to Visakhapatnam class

The name is Visakhapatnam class. VandeMataram (talk) 02:03, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Elbit EW systems

Hi Gazoth I agree with your assessment that it might be a possible circular reference since it also mentions Nagin. Most of the systems in the info box currently have been carried over from the Kolkata class page (when the page was created) since both are almost identical classes. Most reliable references on the class do not mention anything about the engines used or the EW counter measures. One way to approach this would be to remove all the information for which we do not have a reference or keep it identical to the Kolkata class specifications albeit with sourced changes like the 127mm gun. Thoughts? Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:00, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: I agree, we should remove everything that cannot be reliably sourced. However, if we can find a reliable source for EW systems fitted on Kolkata-class it'd be a different matter. In that case, since we have reliable sources for the differences we can keep the rest. Gazoth (talk) 05:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Gazoth One source from Diplomat mentions this Elbit Systems Deseaver MK II on the Kolkata class. It can be accessed here ([1]). Other references like ([2]) mention it but also contain Nagin making it a possible circular reference. The official MoD release states "an indigenous Electronic Warfare system" which could mean anything since there other systems also mentioned which are Indian in origin. ([3]) Adamgerber80 (talk) 05:35, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: I think The Diplomat just has outdated information. This Domain-B [4] article from 2009 mentions Deseaver as the EW suite, but it also mentions a combination of Barak-2 and Barak-1 missiles for air defence, of which the latter didn't make the final cut. This NDTV [5] article mentions Ellora as the EW suite, which matches well with the PIB releases for INS Kochi and Kolkata that mention an indigenous EW system.

@Gazoth: Okay. This makes sense. In this case, we can definitely update the Kolkata class article to reflect this. The questions still remains is it safe to assume that Visakhapatnam-class will also use this or should we leave it blank for now. Adamgerber80 (talk) 06:03, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: Leaving it blank is the safer choice. Gazoth (talk) 06:09, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Adamgerber80: Get it cleared first: Deseaver mk II is not an EW system. It is a decoy control system. As Gazoth has said the articles mentioning deseaver mk are old and hence unreliable. Articles like this are more reliable which were written after kolkata class was launched.

http://www.financialexpress.com/photos/business-gallery/451252/ins-chennai-indian-navy-largest-ever-made-in-india-guided-missile-destroyer-commissioned-10-special-facts/2/

So , deseaver mk 2 decoy system used on P15A and P15B is completely wrong information. Kavach decoy system is the one which is used on P15A ships. You can spot it's launchers in various pics and the link above. As Gazoth has mentioned the kolkata class has an indigenous system which is BEL Ajanta. Ellora ESM is a part of it which confirms it's existence. I hope this is the end of our edit war and hopefully it will add to your knowledge on indian navy's equipments.

Adding BEL Aparna radar

@Adamgerber80: BEL Aparna is the target acquisition radar for Brahmos. It is on all IN ships equipped with Brahmos. You can spot it in this picture EL/M-2248 MF-STAR . Here's a closer look http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B_xE5VUG80E/TliEZCXJDZI/AAAAAAAAB0E/fDvIv4uqY1c/s1600/satpura4.jpg You can spot this radar right below the mast on all kolkata class ships. I had one more reference but unfortunately that site was hacked. Hope this is enough Diligentemu (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

That is not a valid reference. Please wait until we have some sources and we can add them. This will probably be next year when the ship is commissioned. Adamgerber80 (talk) 23:15, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

@Diligentemu: This is an example of original research, which is explicity prohibited on Wikipedia. Please read WP:OR and WP:V. Gazoth (talk) 02:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Commencement of Construction is not keel laid

@Shashpant: I have removed the keel laid date from the table. The reference clearly states that construction has commenced which is not the same as the ship keel being laid. These ships are being constructed in a modular fashion and steel cutting and block building happens months before the keel is laid. There is a specific keel laying ceremony which will occur and that will be the date for the keel being laid not this one. Adamgerber80 (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Full load displacement?

Vishakhapatnam should be same or even a bit heavier than Kolkata class full load displacement. But is that data available? And is 7300 tonnes standard? SReader21 (talk) 14:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

What is the information about this class and successor class???

Some sources claiming that successor class will more powerful than this class and will cater more weaponry I ame shears (talk) 02:08, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Plans for BAE Mk45 gun changed

Per newer reports, the navy is no longer considering the BAE Mk45 gun due to cost, and will proceed with Make in India 76 mm guns while a plan for 127 mm guns fructifies. And will replace the 76 mm gun at that time

Barath s (talk) 12:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

References

Copyright violence

This page contain lot of copyright contents from the sources. There are sources and you all can find the information on the page without any changes. Just copy and paste edits

• [6]

A full paragraph is copy edited from this source

• [7] Contains copyright edits from this also in two paragraphs
• [8] from the very first paragraph only you all can find
• [9] Weaponry manufacturers are from here

The text falls under Db-g12 under criteria for speedy deletion. All the copyright text should be removed.I ame Shears (talk) 04:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kishore Editing:

Please also explain about the weapon Systems which also contain the same thing.