Talk:Barding

message: From my copy of Ffoulkes's Armourer and his craft, I see "peytral" listed as a term for a specific piece of barding, not referring to the concept of horse armour as a whole (as is indicated in the article). I intend to change this as soon as I return from vacation (with the appropriate reference), unless there are any differing opinions. --Eyrian 22:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peytral as term for barding 

message: There are currently individual articles for each of the main pieces of horse armour:Champron,Criniere, Croupiere, Flanchard, Peytral.  My reasons for merging them together onto this page are twofold. 1. each of the articles are stubs, and it is hard to know how much more information can be added (that is not applicable to some other or all pieces). 2. If some one is seeking to understand how the armour works, it is easier to see them all together (and compare) than to try and jump from page to page. Gwinva 19:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there have been no objections, I will go ahead with the merge.Gwinva 15:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

text: This was a good idea. Jason Quinn (talk) 14:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you notice this was done seven years ago?  ;-)  Montanabw(talk) 01:05, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. The editor deserved praise for this even if it was slow in coming. Plus, as there was no comment to his actions, there was no data about its reception. One of Wikipedia's design flaws is the way it asks users not to modify archived discussions. Discussion should always be open to new ideas. As a general habit, I consider responding to old threads as a good one so long as it still adds something of value. Jason Quinn (talk) 02:27, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge all barding together

message: Would be nice to have a section that evaluates the effectiveness of barding, since I'm mighty curious about it myself 68.62.233.226 (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Effeciveness

message: In most books on armour I've seen it spelled "chanfron", in most dictionaries it's either "chanfron" or "chamfron". If you do a Google search looking for this sort of horse armour you have to use either of those two to get any useful results. I say the main spelling should be changed to Chanfron since that's how it's referred to in most of the reference books I have with me and on most of the commercial sites where these items are advertised. OzoneO (talk) 09:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good reasoning.  WP prefers to use the most common term. Feel free to make the change.. Gwinva (talk) 21:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling of Chanpron?

message: Weren't elephants barded as well?  They date back to ancient times!  And there was this one african kingdom from the 16th century (I think) that used copper plates for barding...
My point is that I think we can use more than just european examples.  Is there any reason why heavy cavalry, that were meant for charging, used unprotected horses for most of history?  Was the point of a charge meant to be suicidal when confronted with any kind of spears?
Impfireball (talk) 05:55, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: So do some research and see what can be added.  Montanabw(talk) 05:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Elephants? 

message: The article makes it seem as if armor for steeds was introduced in the Late Middle Ages when in fact the heavily-armored cataphract dates to classical antiquity, being adopted by the late Roman empire and persisting in use by the Eastern Roman empire, all the way into the High Middle Ages. Even if the evolution in Europe was merely convergent and not directly inspired by the classical or Byzantine cataphract, mention should be made that a fully-armored horse and rider wasn't anything new. I don't know the best way to integrate this, though. 108.34.201.56 (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing this out.  This article is specific to the European knight's horse armor, but other versions do deserve a mention for context.  I added a short pargraph to the lede.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cataphracts 

message: AN editor contravened MOS:RETAIN with [this edit], and should be reverted. Eccekevin (talk) 23:59, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Contravention of [[MOS:RETAIN]]