Talk:IRIS Kharg

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IRIS Kharg article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

IRIS Kharg was nominated as a Warfare good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 30, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

A news item involving IRIS Kharg was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 2 June 2021.

Wikipedia

Iran Mid‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Maritime

This 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.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force

Ships

This 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.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Shipwrecks Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

GA review?

Pahlevun has not edited since November.[1] (t · c) buidhe 03:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:IRIS Kharg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Willbb234 (talk · contribs) 13:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review this article. kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 13:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:LEADLENGTH, the lead section is too short. I recommend including some details about the service history and locations of the ship and some details about the ship and its function.
You need to say what 'IRIS' means. you don't mention it in the article.
of Iran in terms of tonnage can be changed to ...by tonnage

Design

would have a beam of... why do you say 'would have' why not just 'has'.
The image captioned 'vertical view of Kharg' is actually an 'aerial view'.
Her original navigation radar was manufactured by Decca Radar, a Decca 1229 model working on I-band needs copyediting. Saying Decca twice like this sounds a bit clunky.
Wikilink to Helicopter deck.
Her crew totals 248 officers and men. I don't know too much about ships, but surely the number of crew is subject to change? Is this considered the maximum capacity?
You later mention a helipad, but you previously mentioned a helo deck. This might need reordering. Also, it would be more accurate to describe it as a helo deck rather than a helipad, right?

Operational capabilities

International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) needs a 'the' in front of it.
You don't explain what AORH means.
classifies Kharg as AORH, i.e. fleet replenishment oiler with replenishment at sea (RAS) capability and hangar. I don't understand what is being said here. The end of the sentence especially is grammatically problematic.
You need to introduce Cordesman.

@Pahlevun: hi there. I've realised you're inactive now. Please let me know when you are back so I can continue this review. Kind regards, Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 15:13, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Willbb234, they haven't edited since November so it may be time to close the review. (t · c) buidhe 13:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: thanks for the reminder. I'll close now. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 17:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article improvement and updating in the wake of ship’s sinking

Greetings all. In view of the ship's sinking, I've been working on updating the article using reliable sources per WP:RS, and am starting a Talk page discussion here regarding that topic. At least one of my additions, regarding the description of the sinking by the Jerusalem Post as "another humiliating disaster" for Iran, has been reverted by an IP, terming the sourced information "unencylopedic," and the same IP editor has also seen fit to create a text block out of what were three separate paragraphs. I shan't be edit warring per WP:BRD, and, again, am here to create a discussion regarding these and other future changes. Any other views will be welcome, thanks. Jusdafax (talk) 17:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's natural that Israel would rejoice in a disaster that befalls Iran. If the boot was on the other foot much the same would happen. I restored the ref to the text left unreferenced. AFAIK, JP is a RS. Even RSs are biased. We just need to recognise where biases may lie and work around them. Mjroots (talk) 18:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jusdafax - stick to the facts! Just because a bias or opinion is in print, doesn't mean it needs to be in Wikipedia. Thanks! Billyshiverstick (talk) 22:36, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Billyshiverstick, all sources should comply with WP:RS as well as WP:NPOV. Even if a source comes from a reliable source, if it is overly bias, it would be grounds to strike the citation to the source. Jurisdicta (talk) 02:33, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jurisdicta: - sources do not have to comply with WP:NPOV. See WP:BIASED: reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject ... Bias may make in-text attribution appropriate. Now, my comment is purely on Wikipedia policy. I take no position on this specific addition or this specific source. starship .paint (exalt) 03:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

The infobox labels what occurred on Jun 2 as resulting in the vessel being "Out of service." Should this be changed to sunk? Personnongratia (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox is working how it is set up to work. The out of service date is 2 June 2021 and the fate field gives the reason why. Mjroots (talk) 18:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How much oil spilled?

I can't find her operational or storage fuel capacity in the article. How much fuel could she carry? How much was spilled? Billyshiverstick (talk) 22:34, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any information would need a reliable source. If you can find a reliable source containing this information, feel free to add it to the article or suggest it on the talk page here. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makran (port ship)

The Makran (port ship) was bigger.--Falkmart (talk) 08:14, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Time zones

The "Sinking" section needs time zones attached to the times of day. They are not present in the cited sources, though. 2600:8800:1880:68:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 16:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is confusing, different sources report in different time zones and aren't always clear about when they report what.TotallyAbrupt (talk) 09:18, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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:

آغاز رزمایش بزرگ دریایی ولایت ۹۷ (8).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]