Talk:T-26 variants

Edit points:

Abbreviated the factory names but understand the problem with the date order (part of name). Factories are mentioned repeatedly and if there is a formal but shorter name it would be better for the second mention.

I completely agree with you. It would be better to mention the full factory name for the first time (for example, Factory No. 185 named after S.M. Kirov) but then use only short name for it in the article text - Factory No. 185. Regards, --Vladimir Historian (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

"Ground contamination" - This is not a term in western literature. I guess it referred to persistent mustard agent contamination (ie. chemical tank). Interwar there was much interest in chemical weapons: Area Denial Weapons#NBC agents - edit, see is now "chemical contamination" - ok.

Well, I found the term "ground contamination" in my computer vocabulary. "Chemical contamination" is the best term for this I believe. Flame-throwing tanks were called as chemical tanks in the USSR in 1930s because those universal vehicles intended initially not only for flame-throwing but also for smoke screening, use of chemical weapon (chemical contamination by poison gas) or decontamination. A tank could be filled with inflammable mixture, mixture for smoke screen, poison chemical agent or decontamination solution depending on aim. Such flame-throwing tanks (chemical tanks according to the classification in 1930s) were used by special chemical tank units (renamed later as flame-throwing tank units). Regards, --Vladimir Historian (talk) 23:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Formatting dates as "18 April 1945" and omitting the date suffix - this started when some book writer(s?) originally read a military report (where simple date formats are used) then lazily reused the formats in the military literature (or did as parts of quotes, or possibly because they are used to writing military reports but unlikely), - so now it has gone into wikipedia and people revert attempts to change to proper English and wave a badly written book in your face. So I don't change all of those even though they rankle. Similar to this is the high point name, it is a reference to the height of the fortified hill in meters. I was trying to remove what I consider "military jargon".Corella (talk) 02:15, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

As for date format - when I started to write articles in Wikipedia I believe that the most correct format in American English was "April 18^th, 1945" and I tried to use this for a long time, but then I noticed that the most common format in almost all Wikiarticles is either "18 April 1945" or "18 April, 1945".......Well, the usual names of high points on Soviet military topographic maps such as High Point 65.5, High Point 97.8 etc. specify the corresponding height of these high points/hills/mountains in meters indeed but the word "meter" is usually omitted and such name became official in the Russian military literature. I corrected it a little bit in the text. Thank you very much for you grammar work with the article! Regards, --Vladimir Historian (talk) 15:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Contents

   * 1 Flame-throwing (chemical) tanks
   * 2 Combat engineer vehicles - completed
   * 3 Remotely-controlled tanks
   * 4 Self-propelled guns
   * 5 Armoured transport vehicles
   * 6 Reconnaissance vehicles - completed
   * 7 Artillery tractors - completed
   * 8 Series production
   * 9 Vehicle-mounted engineer equipment
   * 10 Notes
   * 11 References
         11.1 Published sources
         11.2 Websites

Regards, --Vladimir Historian (talk) 19:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)