Talk:HMS Ark Royal (R07)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Photos

Photos a bit dark SouthEastLad 15:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Post a better one then. -- Rogerborg 11:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Will hopefully fix this tomorrow upon her return to Portsmouth following her refit, will be there to take photos JonEastham 21:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Done JonEastham 12:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Some of the pictures have filenames containing the name of Ark Royal's sister ship Illustrious. Not sure wether the files are misnamed or attached to the wrong article though, and I can't discern any markings / numbers on the pictured carrier's hull. Is anyone here familiar enough with these vessels to be able to recognise either? -- MiG (talk) 14:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Rumours about deployment

Have no place in Wikipedia, particularly when unsourced. Let's try to keep it factual, and write for posterity. -- Rogerborg 11:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Source on LPH

I have a source [1] for Ark Royal's use in the LPH role. I'm unsure how to cite this; any help would be appreciated. --BillCJ 22:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Having read the source youve stated, I wouldnt personally say that "commando carrier" is specifically an LPH. I will add this source and alter the text to reflect this. JonEastham 23:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --BillCJ 01:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Gallery

I went ahead and removed as per policy and also on the basis that most of the images were such poor quality. Any comments let me know. raseaC^{talk to me} 17:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Retirement

The BBC has reported that HMS Ark Royal is to be "decommissioned almost immediately" BBC News 18 October 2010 80.176.88.21 (talk) 21:11, 18 October 2010 (UTC) Yes true, someone best edit the article, it does confirm on the news that it's going to be scrapped from the defense review109.154.17.141 (talk) 21:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Use of emotive language

I have reverted the use of the unreferenced "affectionately" and "famous" for this article. Not language that one normally associates with a encyclopedia. MickMacNee reverted this change with the edit summary "nonsense". Perhaps he could explain here and also include some references? Bjmullan (talk) 23:25, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

You could have found the references yourself in a shorter time than it took to type this rubbish (and I found one in in a shorter time than it is taking to type this reply to it too). If you don't like such 'emotive' language (which you originally called "fansite" info - which is as I quite rightly said, total "nonsense"), then I suggest you take it up with WP:SHIPS, as iirc it is used on at least one other ship article that I know of, and probably several more. MickMacNee (talk) 03:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

My main point is regarding the use of WP:Peacock language whether it is referenced or not. It would be interesting to get the views of other editors. Bjmullan (talk) 10:05, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:PEACOCK concerns unattributed usage of such terms, whereas you are now attempting to remove a term which is sourced from the article. Did you actually intend to solicit other opinions on this, or was your plan just to wait a while and return? Do not edit war, that's your first, and only warning. Another revert will cause me to report this behaviour to the AN3 board. MickMacNee (talk) 02:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

If people are happy that the article uses the style of the Sunday Sun then who am I to argue with them. I will not be surprised to learn that the article ARA General Belgrano (1896) has been renamed "Gotcha" in the near future. Bjmullan (talk) 09:54, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Dates

Article gives both 7 and 14 December 1978 as the date of the start of construction. Someone check this. Drutt (talk) 11:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on HMS Ark Royal (R07). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110209025047/http://www.seawaves.com:80/portvisits.asp to http://www.seawaves.com/portvisits.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090704012241/http://www.rncom.mod.uk:80/uploadedFiles/RN/Reference_Library/20090227_bridge_card.pdf to http://www.rncom.mod.uk/uploadedFiles/RN/Reference_Library/20090227_bridge_card.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110701200614/http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk:80/LatestNews/news/New-Away-Kit-Available-To-Pre-Order-2262.aspx to http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/LatestNews/news/New-Away-Kit-Available-To-Pre-Order-2262.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on HMS Ark Royal (R07). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/surface-fleet/aircraft-carriers/hms-ark-royal/news/hms_ark_royal_makes_.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/might-hms-ark-royals-final-1422976/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080821040059/http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.13504/changeNav/6568 to http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.13504/changeNav/6568
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101204100247/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23902799-ark-royal-could-be-turned-into-a-museum-moored-in-docklands.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23902799-ark-royal-could-be-turned-into-a-museum-moored-in-docklands.do
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120310152719/http://www.navynews.co.uk/news/1128-bids-sought-to-buy-ark-royal.aspx to http://www.navynews.co.uk/news/1128-bids-sought-to-buy-ark-royal.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101209023545/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23904279-ex-army-chief-backs-plan-for-ark-royal-on-thames.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23904279-ex-army-chief-backs-plan-for-ark-royal-on-thames.do
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110223215908/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23925060-sas-unit-could-use-ark-royal-as-pool-of-london-base.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23925060-sas-unit-could-use-ark-royal-as-pool-of-london-base.do
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110528093624/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23946437-boris-johnsons-team-scuppering-ark-royal-heliport-plan.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23946437-boris-johnsons-team-scuppering-ark-royal-heliport-plan.do

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:21, 27 October 2017 (UTC)