Talk:Tsar Tank

message: A model of the Tsar tank in "October; Ten days that shook the World"? No, Its an artillery piece.
And is there any actual evidence that those things in Star Wars are based on it?
Also, it seems that originally, it was named "Lebedenko", rather than "Tsar Tank".
Yes, the supposed Lebedenko in the film is actually a large, heavy gun. I have removed the reference.
Hengistmate (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "portrayal in media/name"

message: The article says it was developed 1916-1917.  It then goes on to say that it was a fiasco at a demonstration in August 1915.  Can someone who knows something about this contraption fix the date discrepancy?  Thanks. Larry Dunn (talk) 19:32, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Inconsistency in text

message: i read that the IG-227 Hailfire-class droid tank from star wars [ http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/IG-227_Hailfire-class_droid_tank ] was based off this. could we add this to the media section?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.19.158 (talk) 20:34, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if we get sources for this. FWIW, it might just as well have been the Kugelpanzer, which looks much more similar in design. Then again, who cares? -- DevSolar (talk) 13:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: star wars?

message: I dont know about other tanks, but he scraped info about Lebedenko tank from various websites, uncritically. Evidence:
* wrong tank name I've seen on one website
* funny thing: he (or someone else he ripped off) scraped some info from a very old version of this article, where I inserted a piece of "original research"; I deleted it later when wikipedia rules became much more stringent in this respect. Basically, I removed an instance of wrong "citogenesis".
Not to say that "The History Press" publisher is far from being of academic quality. Therefore I removed this book as a ref. - Altenmann >talk 20:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: He's probably not getting it from wikipedia.  Google books has the name making it into a couple of other books  and the jump may have happened via https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.php?armor_id=827#specifications . However the Russian version of the name can be traced back to 1947 and also appears in this book in 2002. So we can't draw conclusions on the reliability since it could have been pulled from the russian although in practice I suspect that by 2017 the name was just generaly floating around.©Geni (talk) 22:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

text: Ok having done some further digging I can trace "танк Лебеденко" back further than Царь-танк. However I'm starting to suspect that both names are well post war. For example this 1943 source goes with just Нетопырь.©Geni (talk) 23:02, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for a piece sloppiness, I was not specific which name: it was "Nepotir". No big difference for a non-Russian :-) Sorry for extra work you've just done. By the way, now that we are at it, the explanation of "tsar Tank" was highly dubious. AFAIK the "tsar" name popped up when the Soviets started over-hypeing Russian technical contributions and named it in an analogy with Tsar Cannon, Tsar Bell, etc, for its monnstrous size, kinda "the father of all tanks". Clearly, the contemporaries knew better to call a failure "tsar". - Altenmann >talk 00:42, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Soviet propaganda pushed Porokhovschikov's work as the father of all tanks. The Vezdekhod. Tsar Tank name was probably just due to size. The Nepotir name probably comes via http://www.landships.info/landships/tank_articles/Lebedenko.html (Moore lists landships as a source which has been using the name since at least Nov 2003 if you are referring to the origin of the bat name that had already made it into Russia at War: From the Mongol Conquest to Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Beyond. Pretty much everything about this tank is a very long game of telephone. That said Moore's area of expertise is the location of WW1 tanks that still exist so its understandable that he may not be particularly reliable in this area.©Geni (talk) 03:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nepotir is corrupted Netopyr (just to be 100% clear), the latter name for the machine is well-known. Yes, the origin of "bat name" is my speculation, coming from a vivid imagination :-) It does fit, doesn't it? So far no serious evidence for my guess. In 50 more year it will harden in truthiness :-) - Altenmann >talk 03:32, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Craig Moore ref removed as unreliable