Talk:Royal Navy

See https://www.naval-review.com/book-reviews/uncommon-courage-the-yachtsmen-volunteers-of-world-war-ii/ Buckshot06 (talk) 22:15, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I had doubts about the claim on this page that in 1939 the navy had 1400 vessels. Looking at the navy lists for Sept 1939, page 249, which is on pdf page 283, at https://deriv.nls.uk/dcn23/9271/92714949.23.pdf I can count Battleships 12 Battle Cruises 3 Cruisers 61 Anti-aircraft ships 4 Aircraft carriers 7 Seaplane carriers 2 Flotilla leaders 17 Destroyers 162 Minelayers 11 Escort vessels 36 Patrol vessels 7 Minesweepers 43 Submarines 59 Surveying ships 10 River gunboats 20 Tugs 11 Trawlers 54 Drifters 21 Seagoing Depot ships 10 Netlayers 2 Yacht 1 Misc small craft 8 Motor topedo boats 25 Repair ship 1 TOTAL: 358 Destroyer or larger plus submarines Total of all: 617 I don't know about other navies since I know nothing about this topic. Does this still make it the largest? I am reluctant to mess with the page without more context but the 1400 number seems to be way off. Summerdoor (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I would like to lead this paragraph off with the Sovereign is *titular* commander-in-chief of the British Armed Forces, and reword the fact that the title Lord High Admiral is in the Monarch's gift; then mention the Prime Minister and Minister of Defence; then mention the 1SL/CNS. Thoughts? Buckshot06 (talk) 13:55, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Dormskirk (talk) 15:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

How long should we let this wait? You follow this article more closely than me.. Any particular people we should alert? Buckshot06 (talk) 19:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

I would go ahead: you can always revert if anyone has a problem. Best. Dormskirk (talk) 19:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Dormskirk whoops - the RN does not swear allegiance. See https://www.royal.uk/the-royal-family-and-the-armed-forces#:~:text=Members%20of%20the%20Royal%20Navy,Kingdom%20and%20in%20the%20Commonwealth. I will change the wording to "hold their commissions from the Monarch." Buckshot06 (talk) 09:06, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

OK. Great. Thanks, Dormskirk (talk) 10:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I do support flagicons in infoboxes, even if MOS:INFOBOXFLAG says they "Generally.....should not be used in infoboxes", as they can be more informative. For this article and the RAF article however, I say only the Union Jack flagicon be in the infobox, no other ones. Pinging J.Weir3 who added them and I invite other editors to state their opinions. Light&Salvation (talk) 00:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

The argument to date is that it helps to easily distinguish civilian roles (HM The King and Defence Secretary) from military roles, with clearly different flag types as seen on the RAF and RN pages. It also helps to distinguish WORN and WORAF as other ranks. J.Weir3 (talk) 14:07, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

@J.Weir3 So do you agree with the UK flagicon only or not? Light (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

I think that all current flags in the infobox are fine; both the UK and British Armed Forces flagicons, and the rank flags too. J.Weir3 (talk) 21:08, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

@J.Weir3 I think they're fine too. They make the infobox more entertaining than just text and links. They shall stay and have unanimous consensus to stay. Light (talk) 05:01, 17 December 2025 (UTC)