Talk:Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov 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

Archives: 1

Russia: Technology & engineering / Military High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the technology and engineering in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

Soviet Union

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ukraine

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine 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.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Aviation

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

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

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / Russian & Soviet

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

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:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) 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.

Gender

The article currently uses a mix of feminine and neutral gender, even in the lead. I believe the article has used feminine gender (she, her) for most of its history. However, this has been a little controversial, as Russian ships are generally referred to by masculine gender (he, his), especially when named after a man. Therefore, I am requesting that the article use neutral gender (it, its) from this point on, as this will be less confusing to some readers. This is inline with the WP:SHIPPRONOUN guideline, which states the gender used in the article can be changed by consensus if there is substantial reason to do so, which I have stated. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 21:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support - better to have one than both and neutral is better here to respect both sides. Llammakey (talk) 12:18, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done BilCat (talk) 02:47, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested grammatical correction and clarification of a previous edit

I can't currently edit the article due to its semi-protected status, and I pretty much guarantee I'll forget about this by the time the protection expires or my account is confirmed (I'm hoping I remember, but I wouldn't count on it), so would anyone with access be willing to correct this edit that happened during all the vandalism? (https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Russian_aircraft_carrier_Admiral_Kuznetsov&diff=prev&oldid=1128961806) I don't know what's considered a reliable source for confirming that it was preparing to leave dry dock (the source that's cited itself cites TASS, which is of questionable reliability, per WP:RSPSOURCES; this might fall under the exception for statements by the Russian state, however), so I suppose that's a question that's up for discussion, but at the very least, this edit is grammatically incorrect, unless I've missed some significant differences in British English.

Instead of "In December 2022, the carrier was being preparing to leave dry dock" I believe it should be reverted to "In December 2022, the carrier was reported to be preparing to leave dry dock"

While "being prepared" is a possibility, and I think that's what RightPushFTW intended (and I'd like to say that I appreciate their intent to make things more concise, but the difference between confirmed facts and media reports that all seem to come back to a single source of questionable reliability is important, and the "reported to be" leaves some allowance for that question), that's perhaps something that would require more discussion. I would attach the edit semi-protected template here, but I'm afraid I might be toeing the line a bit here on what's considered a "controversial" edit. At the very least, a grammatical correction to "being prepared" would seem appropriate. Keeping the "reported to be" language would seem to be the appropriate course of action overall, however, unless we're going to get into a broader discussion of whether any reference to the preparations for leaving dry dock should be included at all.

It's a silly little detail, but there's also the question of whether there should be a comma after "leave dry dock." I'm not terribly familiar with comma usage in British English.

Thank you! Eagle2526 (talk) 12:58, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The ship's name is transliterated as "Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Kuznetsov" but the G in "Sovuetskogo" is pronounced as a v

As above, I'd suggest changing it to "Sovetskovo" as the letter Г here is, functionally, a V. It's transcriptions like this that lead to a lot of words getting mispronounced when read in Latin characters.

Henners91 (talk) 14:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]