Talk:Chinese submarine Changzheng 6
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chinese submarine Changzheng 6 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
Specs
editmilitary-today.com says complement of 140 and power 90 MW. Our unsourced infobox says 100 and 58. Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:53, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
The title should be "Type 092 submarine"
editThe title should be "Type 092 submarine" and keeps consistent with "Type 091 submarine". This is a submarine built and owned by China, and it is better to use the original name. See WP:NCUE and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Type_091_submarine&diff=851434651&oldid=849640024. --Lvhis (talk) 03:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
The reality for THE name XIA
editit is just an intelligence referencial for A Chinese remark about their stand for the issue of production and fission of sodium hydrid which is in absolute complication
I am pleased of being replied by US 404 or 405 by news coverage in realistic approach , I do not believe for any major Chinese chemical capability they are far behind Germany or UK or Russia . 2001:44C8:4613:4F0F:1:0:D363:3BDE (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Name change to Chinese submarine Changzheng 6
editSingle ship classes should be named after the individual ship of the class per norm, such as Japanese aircraft carrier Taihō and Chinese icebreaker Haijing 1411. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 01:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)