Talk:Panther tank

Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2021

Remove the “dubious” tag after the THREE sources provided for frontal armor under the “Armor” subheading on the page for the Panther tank. 70 year old information that has been well documented and archived and even cited in the article is not “dubious”, it’s obvious. 2601:541:4302:8BD0:954C:EF75:5962:2DBF (talk) 23:06, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:51, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't know if I buy it that the 90 mm M3 could go though the Panthers UFP. Fi you have a link to a firing test or something? BobMcGeoff (talk) 04:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

About Granular Delete

I made a new section for the Final drive, GraemeLeggett made it shorter, I accepted it. But why are those sections are got deleted, not shortened, what are were already accepted in august? And I told on my talk page to GraemeLeggett: "If many ppl are interested in the WW2 vehicles like me, why the wiki should not show them every detiails, when me or others do the research instead of the wiki? It's free for the wiki, and who want to know more, have the benefits from it. 2.Why I should not use the original WW2 reports? o.O Every historian using them for their books."

It shakes my nerves, all my spent hours in august just got deleted with 1 click.....Szolnok95 (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Encyclopedia entries are necessarily overviews of their subject. Including *every* detail would require the length of several books. WP:TOOMUCH explains this well.

WP:PRIMARY explains how original reports should be treated. Most sources used should be WP:SECONDARY.

I realise it is discouraging to have your work reverted. Try not to let it curb your enthusiasm for the subject. We're not disagreeing with you to spite you. This discussion is to try and find a way forward using consensus. (Hohum ^@) 09:38, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Then I would like to ask you or Legget (As I did ask him when I made the Sherman reliability section) to not just delete it, but also make it shorter. Thank you!Szolnok95 (talk) 11:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC) PS: And as I said, he did make shorter the Final Drive section and I accepted it, but still not understand, why those sections got deleted, what are were already accepted it august. And you should understand 1 another important thing: wikipedia has a good reputation, gratitude for the good moderator/admin/organizer team. Therefore many youtuber/novice researcher use the wikipedia as a main source for the start. Thus if the wikipedia glide over important things, the youtuber/novice researcher will also glide over and then thousands of viewers/readers will don't know about that or get misinformed. Good example for this: the Panther engine problem in late 1943. It was new for me aswell, but what the youtubers said in their videos? "The reason was the final drive!!"... And this is the short story, how myths are created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szolnok95 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Any intermediate proposal ? Szolnok95 (talk) 18:39, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Panther naming

The last sentence of the head section "The naming of Panther production variants did not, unlike most German tanks, follow alphabetical order: the initial variant, Panther "D" (Ausf. D), was followed by "A" and "G" variants.: " is not entirley correct. German military used lower case for pre-production versions (a,b,c,d) and upper case (A;B;C) for production versions.

Proposal to change the wording to: "The naming of Panther variants was a deviation from the standard practice of the Wehrmacht naming following alphabetical order, as the pre production variant, Ausf. "d", was used in the field before the production variants Ausf. "A" and "G". Usually, pre production vehicles were marked by lower case variant designation and would not see frontline service. The Panther d was an exception to this." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.191.84 (talk) 12:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

What on earth was a Panther 'd' ? There was only a Panther 'D' followed by A,G,F (going backwards again with 'F'). --Denniss (talk) 14:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

New "Panther" tank

Rheinmetall has just released a new tank, KF51 Panther. I don't know what its marketing department was thinking (if anything), but we may need a new article soon. See e.g. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/06/13/rheinmetall-pitches-panther-battle-tank-as-heir-to-the-leopard/. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

The article was created earlier today at Panther KF51 GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Proposal to move "Panther tank" to "Panzer V Panther" (and vice versa) for clarity and consistency:

All other pages concerning the numbered German tanks of WWII have the name format "Panzer <Roman numeral> <name, if available>" from the Panzer I all the way up to the proposed designs of the Panzer IX and Panzer X so moving this page would make it consistent with the rest.

Furthermore renaming this page to "Panzer V Panther" would remove any possible confusion with the Panther KF51, the latest MBT design of Rheinmetall Landsysteme and Krauss-Maffei Wegmann which was publicly unveiled in 2022, and would thus increase clarity.

EU-DE-NRW-SI (talk) 10:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)