Talk:Procedure word

message: The section on This Is seems pretty absolutist.  I've worked with law enforcement and SAR on the west coast who have it in their procedures to reverse the order from what's described.  If it's "Never" allowed, it should specify by whom. JeffreyBeckman (talk) 05:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: This Is

message: I changed the word 'pass' to 'send me'.  "Pass" is ambiguous, and could also mean its opposite, either I 'pass' or decline the rest of the message, or 'please send the message on to someone else'. --Boldklub-PJs (talk) 14:59, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Send 

message: I read this article when I was revising for my VHF licence exam, and updated it from my course notes to contain the prowords SAY AGAIN and STATION CALLING, which are used in cases of poor reception. I also added prowords for distress, urgency and safety calls in a separate section as they are important calls. Tuesday 09/04/07 1438 UTC.
I noticed the omission of READ BACK FOR CHECK, I READ BACK and CORRECT. These have been added under a new section 86.143.162.224 19:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omissions 

message: When I initially started this page I'd done it from the perspective of the radio communications doctrine of the US Army.  But now with the additions of other editors I now see that there is an wide variety of different prowords from all different places (maritime, aviation, military, Ham, etc.).  The article looks really sloppy now, and I'm thinking that perhaps to straighten it out we should create different sections (Maritime, Aviation, Military, Ham, etc.) in the article so the prowords will be organized by their respective uses.  The problem arises that many prowords are universal like "Roger", "Over", and "Out".  Perhaps a "Universal Prowords" section could also be created.  I'd like to hear the input of other editors before beginning this undertaking.  Ultratone85 20:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, agree with you there. For example, in the example of the proword REPEAT, this means different things in maritime radio and military fire discipline parlance. Editus Reloaded 20:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I split Universals from MVHF prowords; we really need a CB or Ham enthusiast to fill in civilian uses, and the rest is up to you - you're the soldier here. Editus Reloaded 20:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reformating

message: I added IPA pronunciations to PAN PAN and SECURITE. I made my best effort to sound them out and pick the right characters but no guarantee that I got it exactly right. Rsduhamel (talk) 07:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about PAN-PAN, but SEELONCE, MAYDAY, PRU-DONCE, and FEENEE are English respellings of French silence (silence), m'aidez (help me), prudence (prudence, cautiousness, discretion), and fini (finished, done), respectively. MAYDAY from m'aidez is well known, but I'm not familiar with the others. Such respelling makes sense in a code/regulation intended for English-speakers. Please  me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 03:31, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of PAN PAN and SECURITE 

message: Just a comment.. I was bitched out by my CO for saying "Roger out" over the radio during a training exercise. Ether my CO was wrong or this is wrong..—Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎159.247.3.210 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roger out 

message: I'm a bit confused by the use of spellings like "SEELONCE FEENEE" in this article. Surely this is just the French words "SILENCE FINI", and the entry below should give pronunciation advice, as with the "SÉCURITÉ" entry. -- The Anome (talk) 09:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:   SEELONCE FEENEE etc. 

message: Any good reason why WP:ALLCAPS doesn't apply?
: The only reason I see is that radio procedure words normally are written in all capitals. --Vbakke (talk) 22:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Which, really, is a mediocre reason at best.  The question should be, What is helpful to our readers?  Putting everything in caps is less helpful than parsing out emphatic syllables, I think.  A loose necktie (talk) 01:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting 

message: Hi, "collate" is a term I've seen listed (but never used myself); IIRC it is used to announce or request a checking of numbers transmitted, e.g. for positions. 
Wrt. "over and out", I was taught that "over" was a remains from the days when only one person could talk at the time ("single sideband transmission" ...?), and it was useful and polite to indicate that your transmission was over, allowing the other party to reply. I guess modern (post-1970 ...) radio technology ("Dual" or "Double sideband"....?) made this requirement superfluous. All this in a military setting, btw. T 46.212.185.190 (talk) 01:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This would be useful if referenced. Single- and double-sideband has nothing to do with the interaction of conversing parties - perhaps you are thinking of "simplex", "full duplex" and "half duplex" ; the chances that these are explained properly on Wikipedia are ever-variable. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, thx. Sorry, my mil. clearances expired in the previous millennium, no access to those signal books ... and I can't find "collate" online; for the same meaning I now see "I Verify". March of time, perhaps; best to wait until ref pops up somewhere. Thx also for the simplex/duplex, that was it. Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-way_radio . I'll not pretend to be a judge of content, but seems straightforward enough. Good summer to you. Regards, T 46.212.185.190 (talk) 00:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That linked article needs work. Obviously written by someone trying to sell the latest gear to the Podunk Falls Police, Fire and Gamelaws Department. Anything that uses "architecture" twice and "legacy" at all is not sound. Sorry if this confused you even more. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, it's nearly impossible to make med more confused than I am. But then I'm no longer in radio, and was never in procurement - no harm done :)  Thx for info, KUTGW and have a good one. T 46.212.185.190 (talk) 15:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collate 

message: Is there a reason why this section is still based on ACP 125(F)? Would revision G not be a more up to date source? Pedlan (talk) 01:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ACP 125(F)