Talk:HMS Protector (A173)

Cut and paste move

This is called a cut and paste move, and it is forbidden because it breaks the page history and loses the associated talk page. I have reverted it. If you wish to move MV Polarbjørn to HMS Protector (A173), see Wikipedia:Requested moves for guidance on how to do so. Shem (talk) 16:07, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

MV Polarbjørn → HMS Protector (A173) –The ship is no longer called Polarbjørn but has been commissioned into the Royal Navy as HMS Protector for at least three years; the article needs to be renamed, with a redirect tofrom MV Polarbjørn until such time as the ship's situation changes Hammersfan (talk) 10:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

• Comment She is a charter vessel, on contract, not an RN owned vessel, though... 70.49.125.226 (talk) 05:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
• Weak oppose: no strong feeling, but suggest leaving as Polarbjørn unless sold to RN; otherwise we could be moving back in 3 years. The redirect will find the article in either case. Finavon (talk) 07:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
• Weak oppose: I don't feel strongly about it either, but there's no deadline, and if the RN eventually buy it, then we should move it. Otherwise we'll be moving it back again. In the meantime the redirect takes care of it well enough. Shem (talk) 16:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

IMO number

I changed the IMO number for Protector, showing a source. The earlier number is stated at the start of the Digital-seas page, but not in the "History of AIS Records" section towards the end. On searching, Digital-seas also show that same IMO number for several other ships. I understood that an IMO number stays with a hull and would not change on the charter to RN. Finavon (talk) 07:22, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Pennant number

Is there any explanation of why Protector has an "A" pennant number number (normally for auxiliaries), yet is commissioned into the RN rather than RFA, carries fixed (though lightish) armaments and is described as a patrol vessel? Davidships (talk) 20:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on HMS Protector (A173). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724181601/http://www.multi-maritime.no/Portals/87/filer/polarbjorn.pdf to http://www.multi-maritime.no/Portals/87/filer/polarbjorn.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710132604/http://www.discoverpetroleum.com/int/news-archive/petromarker-electromagnetic-em-campaign to http://www.discoverpetroleum.com/int/news-archive/petromarker-electromagnetic-em-campaign

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 11:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)