Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Weaponry task force/Archive 2

message: Here what need to be changed:
*builder → designer
*caption → caption
*ceiling → has to be created
*date → design_date
*diameter → diameter
*era → remove, silly field
*guidance → has to be created
*image → image
*length → length
*name → name
*nation → origin
*num_built → number
*operators → used_by
*platform → has to be created
*prod_date → production_date
*propulsion → engine (has to be created)
*range → range
*serv_date → service
*spec_type → ???
*steering → ???
*target → remove, silly field
*type → type
*variant → variants
*velocity → velocity
*warhead → yield?
*wars → wars
*weight → weight
*wingspan → width?
It is just a proposal, I'm not sure about some fields
Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 21:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that the only missile infobox, or are there others?  I recall there was some confusion with missiles/rockets/etc. and their infoboxes. Kirill Lokshin 21:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not the best person to ask. :( -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 21:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  and . Bukvoed 18:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacing {{tl|Weapon-missile}} with {{tl|Infobox Weapon}} 

message: I was interested in starting some articles on British naval guns, so took a quick inventory of what is already out there. So far we have;
* 15 inch (381 mm) /42 calibre Mark I naval gun
* 13.5 inch (343 mm) /45 calibre naval gun
* 4.5 inch (114 mm) gun
* 2-pounder gun
Obviously, there seems to be no systematic method for naming articles. The official designation of these guns is;
* BL 15 inch Mark I
* BL 13.5 inch (various marks)
* QF 4.5 inch (various marks), until 1950s, when surviving guns became simply 4.5 inch Mark 5, Mark 6, Mark 8.
* QF 2 pounder (various marks)
I would like to propose some agreed method to name the articles. There is already a fairly systematic naming system for (British) Army guns, e.g Ordnance QF 2 pounder and Ordnance QF 6 pounder, this simply follows the official designation (but drops the gun weight in hundredweights). The Royal Navy designation system is unique as far as I know, I therefore do not think that titles need disambiguated with the word "British".  I also think including the mark is over-specific, as apart from the 15 inch and 16 inch guns, most guns went through a large number of marks. For this reason, and the fact that the Royal Navy does not include it in the official designation, I also do not think the calibre should be included; there are, for instance, L/55 and L/45 guns on the page 4.5 inch (114 mm) gun, which should we use? I personally amn't keen either on including millimetres in the title. These guns were never reported with a metric equivalent, or known by such (the sole exception being the foreign Oerlikon 20 mm (QF 20 mm) and Bofors 40 mm (QF 40 mm)). We do not have a page Oerlikon 20 mm (0.79 inch) cannon, likewise we do not include millimetre and inches in the title of the 2 pounder gun article. It also just makes the title that bit more complicated than it really needs to be. 
My preferred choice for a titling system would therefore be designation, calibre in inches / shell weight in pounds, naval gun, e.g. BL 15 inch naval gun. The only shortcoming I can see with this system is where we have a case where a modern, unrelated weapon, is added into a page for historic guns due to a shared calibre - this is the case with the 4.5 inch (114 mm) gun page. However it would be my intention to move this to a page of it's own anyway.
Your thoughts would be appreciated, please do pick holes in my case as there is probably a lot I have missed. Emoscopes Talk 13:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do all the guns have an acceptable preceeding designation?  Or are there cases where using it would be inappropriate? Kirill Lokshin 13:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All weapons have a preceding designation, BL or QF (breech loading / quick firing). There are also historic designations such as RML (rifled muzzle loading) which are a bit out of my field of expertise. Mountings also had a separate Mark and designation (e.g. HA, CP, P, BD, UD, HA/LA). I've summarised and attempted to explain all these on the page British ordnance terms in order that I can pipe the abbreviations to the appropriate anchor in there. Emoscopes Talk 13:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I'm inclined to go on a systematic system based on official designations. For instance, if we had a page QF 4 inch naval gun and anchors within that e.g #Mark XVI you could pipe a link in to the correct gun, e.g. QF 4 inch Mark XVI. This would work in all cases for British naval guns, as far as I know. Emoscopes Talk 14:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that that name gets zero google hits, it seems an unlikely contender for the "common name", and so is inconsistent with existing naming guidelines (unless you have better sources on the commonness of that reference than that admittedly crude measure).  You should really either a) pick the most commonly used name (probably "4 inch naval gun", I'm guessing), b) pick the most commonly used name that's not ambiguous (dunno in this case), or c), my least favoured option, propose a naming convention (and I mean an actual naming convention, not just a wikiproject style note) to fix a particular conventions that instantiates and/or overrides NC(CN).  (Probably this is my least favourite option because of the horrendous mess the "US roads" people have just made of such an exercise.)  Alai 02:01, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Copied to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships#Gun_article_names to merge with an ongoing discussion, please comment there. Emoscopes Talk 02:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomenclature for British naval guns

message: Anyone available to give a hand with the Type 97 Chi-Ha tank. I feel I am losing the battle against a contributor who seems to translate information and just drop it in, no matter that its a repeat of something already present in the article. I'm doing what I can to turn it into English (mostly BE, I'm afraid) but I I don't want to risk losing pertinent info in trying to get whats there into the correct grammar.GraemeLeggett 14:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help on Japanese tank article 

message: Hi, I started List of infantry weapons and equipment of the Canadian military and I was hoping folks here could take a look. Thanks!Mike McGregor (Can) 10:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for input 

message: Tank has been nominated for Wikipedia version 0.5, and to appear on the War Portal, but it needs some serious fat-cutting.  Please vote to make it a WPMILHIST fortnightly collaboration. —Michael Z. 2006-09-26 23:04 Z
: It needs references more than fat-cutting, if you ask me. But naturally, I support... :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 23:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote to collaborate on [[tank]] 

message: There's a new peer review request for English longbow that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated. Kirill Lokshin 16:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request 

message: There's a new peer review request for Amchitka that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 11:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[Amchitka]] 

message: Tank has been selected as the project's Collaboration of the Fortnight; if anyone has some free time, contributions would be very welcome.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 00:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Tank]] as Collaboration of the Fortnight 

message: There's a new peer review request for SU-100Y Self-Propelled Gun that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 01:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review request for [[SU-100Y Self-Propelled Gun]] 

message: I've been working on this article for quite some time and have come to think it is overdue for some outside evaluation. It isn't "done", as significant information needs to be added (feel free to contribute!), and for that reason I didn't nominate it for a proper peer review. Still, I'd love to have some people give it a look over and drop some comments off in the talk page - all criticism is open, constructive preferred. Thanks! --Xiliquiern 03:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mini-peer review request for [[Waster]] 

message: Does our scope include hardware relating to weapons (eg., Ballistic Missile Early Warning System)? I'm assuming yes, until someone tells me otherwise... Jakew 18:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think so, as it's clearly within the overall topic of "weaponry", even if it's not a weapon per se.  We include things like weapons testing sites, for example. Kirill Lokshin 18:23, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My thoughts exactly. And my, do we have a lot to do... :-| Jakew 13:50, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Weapons-related hardware

message: (I'm not 100% sure if this is the right place for discussing this, but after navigation around in the huge tree of pages in this project, I'll just post it here before I get totally lost in the project page jungle... --Wernher)
There's a request to merge the two lists mentioned above. I guess that would be a sensible thing to do. The "country list" is maybe the best of the two in terms of easy look-up, as it lists each country in alphabetical order, while the "nation list" goes by region. In any case, the region is listed in parentheses after the country name in the "country list" items, so we don't lose that info if the "nation list" has to go. Please comment. --Wernher 15:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems perfectly sensible.  The organization of the list is up to the editors, but there's no reason to maintain two separate lists in any case. Kirill Lokshin 15:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. I don't see distinction between countries and nations to be needed here. So - let's merge it to "by country" list. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 17:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. Askari Mark Talk 18:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging the List of missiles by country with the List of missiles by nation

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 21:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: I created the McMillan TAC-50 article, which could obviously use a lot of expansion. Could you guys help get any relevant information on the weapon? Also, what would be the copyright on this image? - KingRaptor 23:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gawd, that wiki's broken.  The contact info for the image's author is listed as madorosh@shaw.ca, after some digging.  I would suggest emailing him and asking him if he would upload it to the main  commons.mediawiki.org site?  Georgewilliamherbert 00:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with [[McMillan TAC-50]] 

message: There's a new request for A-Class status for T-26 that may be of interest to editors here; any input there would be appreciated.  Thanks! Kirill Lokshin 16:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Class review for [[T-26]] 

message: There's a discussion going on at Talk:Fuse (explosives) about what difference, if any, exists between the usage of "fuse" and "fuze" in a military context; any input from people with knowledge of the topic would be very welcome! Kirill Lokshin 23:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fuses and fuzes 

message: Talk:Depleted uranium#Comparison of the two versions contains a comparison of the current version of Depleted uranium with a recent major revision which replaced a lot of what some people had been taking out of it over the past several months -- including information about birth defects and other genetics problems.  LossIsNotMore 11:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Depleted uranium and birth defects 

message: Can you help us expand the articles on African weapons?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:African_swords
Wandalstouring 00:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  help for African military history 

message: http://www.teutatesnet.de/Waffenschmiede/waffenschmiede.html
Stefan Fromm is a professional smith recreating knifes, swords, lances and axes from the Classic to the Early Middle Ages. His main focus is on the Celts. He can easily take images of his historically accurate artcraft (he was recommended for his work) and make the pictures available on wikicommons. The problem in such cases is that someone must ask him for it to avoid advertising. The email adress for contacting him is down on the page. You can write in English or ask me or any other German speaker to translate for you. Wandalstouring 22:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  medieval weapons 

message: The requested articles departement gets reorganized. The requests get moved to the specific taskforce. In case of error move it to a concerning task force.
*STRATUS IVY
*Dead Hand www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1690756
*Bronekater Soviet Armored Motorboat Soviet riverine vessel used during the second world war. See here
*TOS-1 Russian Army multiple rocket launcher with FAE warheads was used in the Second Chechen War. Global Security article
*60 mm M19 CAN Light Mortar
*USS Stalwart - Not the current redirect page
Wandalstouring 11:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to open task template. Kirill Lokshin 13:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested articles