Talk:History of the tank

message: Shouldn't we add Leonardo da Vinci as the remote inventor of the tank? there's concise evidence that
he conceived the idea......
(Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:DaVinciTankAtAmboise.jpeg )
- Manuel
:: No, not in my opion. Leonardo merely came up with an idea, as did many others, but it was not practical. Might as well credit him with the invention of the airplane and helicopter too, except those designs also wouldn't work. DMorpheus 01:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: People always underestimate Leonardo... working full scale models of both his glider and tank have been built. Jmackaerospace 20:48, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Leonardo was certainly far ahead of his time in these and many other notional inventions, but few of his non-built concepts had any effect on subsequent historical developments because his notebooks remained unpublished, and moreover were largely incomprehensible even to those with access to the original MSS because of his habit of mirror-writing. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Da Vinci creator of the tank 

message: I have added and changed the text in the "The prehistory of the tank" section, to include the origins of the catterpillar tracks for tanks, and changed some of the first sentence of the next papragraph to make sense with my addition.
If anybody has a problem with my adjustments please take it up with me before doing any deleting or major editing of it, and we can come to a suitable comprimise. Thankyou, Liam Carson (talk) 18:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  One problem is that your edit conflicts with the US track patent described a few paragraphs below your new edit. I have no idea what is correct but the inconsistency needs to be resolved or explained in some way. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 15:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Several people developed caterpillar tracks at around the same time. If you go to Bovington you can see a Hornsby tractor with its track system. Seeing the James Hill patent, it is a form of track too.GraemeLeggett (talk) 16:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's Bovington on the Hornsby Evolution and this puts Roberts Hornsby track at 1904. GraemeLeggett (talk) 16:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  Interesting; the caterpillar track and tracked vehicle articles say there were quite a few 'inventors'. I think the latter article does a better job of it without coming to a firm conclusion (which is unnecessary anyway). Why favor just one in this article? Perhaps we should simply have a link to the other article? DMorpheus (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The clashing paragraph has already been dealt with.GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: The article states that the T-34 was the "easily the best" pre-war tank.  I know some authors state this, but I also know some contradict this, preferring some other favorite tank.  It's not for Wikipedia to list only some of the widely accepted claims.  Besides, as it stands, separated from it's evidence, "easily" sounds like a weasel word; it cheapens the perceived quality of the article.  I'd prefer something more NPOV, such as "often considered best".  Comments?  --A D Monroe III (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  T-34 "easily best"? 

message: The article currently includes the following:
This tracked, armoured, and armed vehicle became the tank. This was because the British designer of the tank thought that it was such a simple name that it would catch on and be popular.
This runs contrary to every other explanation for the tank's name that I've seen (including that provided on the main wikipedia "tank" article. Are there any citations to support the notion that the tank's name originated in this unlikely way?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.122.8 (talk) 02:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for pointing this out. It is of course a case of vandalism that will be removed.--MWAK (talk) 12:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology? 

message: Does anybody think the name of this article is a little weird? Perhaps it should be named "History of tank warfare". I don't know just a thought.
:There's a whole article for that - Armoured warfare - but there will be elements that cross-over between them else neither makes as much sense.GraemeLeggett (talk) 06:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: Not worth going and looking I'm afraid, unless you want or enjoy a nasty surprise. Must be a failure of their categorisation.  GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I should add that if there was to be traffic between that article and this one as suggested by the template, at this moment in time it would be one-way from this one.GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:51, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article on Esperanto WP 

message: In the "British development" section, following mention of the British choosing Fosters instead of Holt as the basis for their new vehicle, there's an odd quote from Admiral Halsey about Holt tractors in the 1940s Pacific War. Not really in the right place is it? There is also the claim about Holt being the inspiration for British tank development - the sources quoted are a biography of Mr Holt and Holt's website - hardly impartial.Alansplodge (talk) 18:37, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please feel free to add better sources and rearrange the text to make it better.  Stepho  talk  04:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  British development and Holt tractor 

message: "In June 1914, Major Glasfurd, who was fighting in France, proposed an idea for a pedrail machine which could attack enemy lines."
Firstly: the War didn't start until August, 1914, so I don't know who he was fighting.
Secondly: the article links to Duncan John Glasfurd (1873-1916), who was in the Middle East with the Australian Imperial Force until transferring to France in June 1916, and was KIA in November of that year. Ernest Swinton refers to Alexander Inglis Robertson Glasfurd (1870-1928), of the Indian Army. I don't know whether either of these officers could have been in a position to make recommendations to Swinton. He might be mistaken. Am looking into it.
 Hengistmate (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Glasfurd 

message: The references to Bramah J. Diplock's inventions and their role in the development of the tank are not clear. The Pedrail Wheel was a footed, sprung wheel. The imaginary machines that H.G. Wells describes in "The Land Ironclads" move on Pedrail Wheels. Diplock abandoned the idea and went on to design a type of endless track, resembling what would later be called the caterpillar track. A version of it was demonstrated to Winston Churchill, and it was this, not the Pedrail Wheel, that was incorporated in the Pedrail Machine. Hengistmate (talk) 09:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pedrail Confusion. 

message: As explained at the top of the article. Have corrected a few. The Vezdekhod wasn't amphibious; Holt tractors inspired Swinton, but did not play a direct part in British tank development; Swinton coined the name 'tank,' on Dec 24, 1915; Swinton wasn't a war correspondent in July, 1914 - there wasn't a war; experiments were conducted not with the Pedrail Wheel but the later Pedrail Chaintrack; et cetera. Much remains to be done. Hengistmate (talk) 16:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many Issues. 

message: A short paragraph on da Vinci's "tank" has recently been removed.  I agree that da Vinci didn't invent the tank, and likely didn't influence its invention in any way.  But, many people commonly think there is a connection.  Such readers will expect we say something about it.  I want da Vinci added back, if we add a disclaimer ("wasn't practical" or some such), so we don't imply a direct connection to inventing the tank.  Does anyone have a source for that?  --A D Monroe III (talk) 22:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  da Vinci's "tank" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on History of the tank. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091204121517/http://www.historicroadways.co.uk:80/s-007.htm to http://www.historicroadways.co.uk/s-007.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091204121517/http://www.historicroadways.co.uk:80/s-007.htm to http://www.historicroadways.co.uk/s-007.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:55, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Which was the first tank (prototype and production) capable of performing a neutral turn?  This requires a drivetrain with some differential action between sides, more than just braking one track. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:31, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral turns? 

message: Currently, the History section of the Tank article has some pre-WWI details that aren't in this article.  That section is supposed to be a summary of this article, not the other way around.  I'd like to move those details (where properly sourced) from there to here.  Comments?  --A D Monroe III (talk) 17:23, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose merge of some history from [[Tank#History]] to here 

message: Already dealt with here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:A7V#.22Moving_Fortress.22.3F Hengistmate (talk) 06:49, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Moving Fortress" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of the tank. 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/20121017162514/http://www.kipnotes.com/AgriculturalMachinery.htm to http://www.kipnotes.com/AgriculturalMachinery.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091104113151/http://www.techdirections.com/Holt.pdf to http://www.techdirections.com/Holt.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of the tank. 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/20120803071138/http://www.wastehandling.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=47C5DE563581487B9E4394B939909F9E&tier=4 to http://www.wastehandling.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&id=47C5DE563581487B9E4394B939909F9E&tier=4
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090210052939/http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/4195198 to http://ndpbeta.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/4195198
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:43, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion