Talk:Nasal helmet

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

untitled

I moved the page from "Nasal Helm" to "Nasal helm". I don't believe it's a proper name, so the second word should be lower case.--Tabun1015 16:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name change?

Nasal helm is not necaserrely the common name for this type of helm (there are pictorial examples of this style that do not have nasals. I believe the more common term is 'conical' helmet. Suggest a name change and redirect Nasal helm to that (to ensure consistency). Nathandbeal (talk) 22:27, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

bulbous helmet image

The helmet image on the left isn't very historically accurate. The helmet is far too tall and bulbous and is from a pretty old source that isn't up to date. I think an archaeological image or a contemporary pictorial image would be better. Master z0b (talk) 02:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you find something suitable then please replace it. At present it usefully illustrates a point made in the text, and is better than nothing. Urselius (talk) 07:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]