This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to
participate, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project, participate in
relevant discussions, and see
lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 22:17, August 1, 2024 (
JST,
Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
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:
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
Please advise what's the issue that we should be talking or fixing for with this article.
Da'jhan 02:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
There is no assertion of notability or even usability of this list. It'd be great if each vessel had an article, or at least if each class of vessels had an article. --
Emana (
talk)
03:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Wikification
As far as I could see, the need to Wikify was only some minor points, which I have done.
I have standardised the abbreviations for knots (kn) - see the first paragraph of
Knot (speed), and horsepower (hp) - see the first paragraph of
Horsepower. I noted that a couple of the power ratings were given as PS, which I presume is the same. If I have got that wrong, I apologise. I have also made a few changes on capitalisation.
I do not understand some of the terms, particularly "all geared turbine" - a link to an explanation would be a good idea, since historical material may not be understood by modern readers.
I am not clear about user Emana's point about notability or usability, because you cannot foresee how someone will use this. However, it might be a good thing to include some data about the numbers of each type. I know there is a listing at
List of ships of the Japanese Navy but a summary of numbers would give a reader an idea of the scale of the navy. What do you think?
Patche99z (
talk)
21:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)reply
"ps" is short for the German word "pferdestärke" and is known in Japan as the "metric horsepower", brought over by the French. 1ps=0.7355kw and 1hp=0.7457kw. I guess this should be noted at the top of the list? I think knot=kn should be also noted for clarification. Depending on the font size, kn could be confused with km. --
Emana (
talk)
05:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
The geared turbines were some kind of innovation pre-WWI in ship technology, where a slow rotational gear (SR gear?) was used to switch between propeller speeds. I don't know how it works exactly, but I see that there are French ships on Wikipedia with "SR gear turbine" as part of their propulsion system. --
Emana (
talk)
05:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
All good points, thank you. I have added a subhead for units and abbreviations, and reinstated my mistaken changes from ps to hp. If I have made any other mistakes, please correct them.
All geared turbines. I do not feel competent to do anything about this, so will leave it to others. It is not essential, anyway.
I think the article is quite useful - it gives readers a quick look at each type of ship. I would like to see a picture, maybe a silhouette, of each type, but maybe that is asking too much. After all, you can go on for ever in writing an article on something as complex as this.
Patche99z (
talk)
19:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Actually there are Japanese sites out there with silhouettes and stuff... suspiciously similar to the whole layout of this article - almost as if this article is a straight translation of those sites. Also, the sources on these specs should be cited. --
Emana (
talk)
20:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Displacement
The article gives a displacement for every class of ship, but since it avoids saying if that displacement is in short tons or long tons and if that displacement is the treaty displacement or for a full load, it is nearly useless.
2601:645:101:1874:94B2:2F1:9E8C:2D23 (
talk)
21:28, 20 June 2015 (UTC)reply
Hi, people. Look at the battlecruisers table; I have added a column of what I think is vital info. Should this be done for the other ship types?
Hungrydog55 (
talk)
00:52, 27 December 2022 (UTC)reply