Talk:OG-107

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the OG-107 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: North America / United States

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 met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Pants/trousers

Ahh, this age old issue.... :-)

I've changed references from 'pants' to 'trousers' - whilst I appreciate this is basically a US oriented article, and so US spelling/terminology should apply, I thought that the use of the word 'pants' would confuse many readers outside the US. I could have just left the word in place, piping to the 'trousers' article, but the word is used too often for this to be a realistic alternative. If someone else wants to change things, I've no objections :-) CultureDrone (talk) 10:56, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this?

File:USO Show Vietnam Terrie and Jennie Frankel with guitar entertaining troops with USO 02.pdf

USO Show Vietnam Terrie and Jennie Frankel with guitar entertaining troops with USO 02

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Needs appropriate photo

The image used for this article is of a Bolivian soldier wearing a uniform that appears similar to the OG107 utilities. They may even be OG107s, but an article about a US military uniform should show that uniform as worn by US forces, with US insignia, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.29.215 (talk) 13:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Sealing in the late model pic from later in the article as a lead image. An article about a US uniform should have a US military member as the lead image. oknazevad (talk) 14:58, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jungle fatigues

Removed these pics of Jungle fatigues in color OG-107

OG-107, Class 1
OG-107 Label

--100.34.51.111 (talk) 14:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uniform shown was actually the one that was referred to by US soldiers as the "OG-107." The "pickle suit" / "janitor's wear" OG-507 utilities are what are being worn by the Bolivian soldier in the photo. I actually wore both as a soldier --- did you?

Wrong!?

It seems to me that this article is wrong, and not just wrong but completely off. According to for example U.S. Army Uniforms of the Korean War by Stanton, Shelby, Olive Green #107 or OG #107 refers to a fabric color, which replaced an earlier Olive Drab #7 color in U.S. Army uniforms.

The article here seem to be about a specific work uniform using this color.--Lasse Hillerøe Petersen (talk) 18:42, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. The uniform shown here (worn by the Bolivian soldier in the photo) was NOT referred to as the "OG-107" in American use. The uniform referred to as the "OG-107" was the olive drab jungle utility uniform, worn in southeast Asia during the Viet Nam conflict and re-authorized in the 1980s as a hot weather utility uniform. An example of which was removed by another editor who clearly has no personal experience in the US military during the time these uniforms were issued and worn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.152.156.221 (talk) 18:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have citations for that? oknazevad (talk) 14:59, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong, I wore both the OG-107's/OG-507s AND the Jungle Uniforms during my time in the army and Jungles were never referred to by anyone as OG-107's, they were always referred to a "Jungles" or "jungles fatigues". In the jungle's case the OG-107 meant the color not the designation.--Degen Earthfast (talk) 15:20, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article has got the M1951 Field Coat, The M1965 Field Jacket, and the Jungle combat uniforms confused as one single "OG-107" uniform. As mentioned above, OG-107 only referred to the color of the uniforms, not the uniforms themselves, Meaning that this article needs to be rewritten to reflect this. Huntertheediter (talk) 06:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

photo in Korea is also wrong

photo in Korea is also wrong, these fatigues are the earlier HBT from 1943 (colour is almost identical called OD7) 82.27.147.213 (talk) 20:24, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@82.27.147.213 you can actually see old OD7 how faded and contrasting it looks to the brand new m1951 jacket the tall guy wears in OG107 82.27.147.213 (talk) 20:30, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cotton-Poly Blend Issued To Women?

Basically mid-way into the article it mentions that some cotton-poly blend "no iron" OG-107 uniforms were primarily issued to women. Does anyone have a source on this, I don't see any citations for the concept nor does it expand on any possible rationales 76.84.128.207 (talk) 00:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There was a set of fatigues only issued to WACs which consisted of a blouse and trousers. The blouse had two lower and one or none upper pockets. They were more tailored for the female figure. They were phased out in 1982. Degen Earthfast (talk) 22:54, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]