Talk:List of active Royal New Zealand Navy ships
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of active Royal New Zealand Navy ships article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in New Zealand English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse, centre, fiord) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Auxiliary Vessels
[edit]I have been trying to add auxiliary vessels that contribute directly to the RNZN operational outputs. They have been removed on the basis that they are "NOT SHIPS" - with all due respect if we are going to strictly refer to "SHIPS" then the Inshore Patrol Craft must be removed. I would like feedback from other contributors on the issue. In my view excluding the Auxiliary craft distorts the overall picture that the page is seeking to portray which is the overall operational capability of the RNZN.
Cheers MightyMoa (talk) 08:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- It's a matter of balance. You seem to be nitpicking. The vessels that are listed are significant commissioned vessels that have their own Wikipedia articles. I doubt any other navy would want little 7 tonne launches listed on Wikipedia as part of their fleet, so it makes the New Zealand navy appear a bit ridiculous. The next step would be to add lifeboats and dinghies. --Epipelagic (talk) 08:44, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- I understand where you are coming from a bit better now. However your last comments regarding life boats are ridiculous and misses the point I was trying to emphasize "contribution to operational capability" which is different for a small navy like the RNZN, than say the US Navy or even the Danish Navy. While you refer to 7 tonne vessels you forgot the 2 x 55 tonne landing craft. As for the point that it makes the RNZN look ridiculous then I suggest the Royal Netherlands Navy, Belgium Navy Wikipedia Pages don't make them look that great either. I'm not going to bother adding the craft back in unless other users support it. MightyMoa (talk) 08:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
HMNZS Manawanui III & HMNZS Aotearoa
[edit]Not sure how to add her, as she is now commissioned https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNZS_Manawanui_(2019) She is class as a DHV a "Dive and Hydrographic Vessel"
HMNZS Aotearoa will be commissioned next year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNZS_Aotearoa_(A12) some will need to remember to add her as well... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.94.38.207 (talk) 22:46, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- List-Class List articles
- Low-importance List articles
- WikiProject Lists articles
- List-Class Ships articles
- All WikiProject Ships pages
- List-Class military history articles
- List-Class maritime warfare articles
- Maritime warfare task force articles
- List-Class Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history articles
- Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force articles
- List-Class New Zealand articles
- Mid-importance New Zealand articles
- WikiProject New Zealand articles
- Wikipedia articles that use New Zealand English