Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/General weaponry discussion

This Military history WikiProject page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest.

It has come to my attention that this WikiProject uses the same color as astronomical objects (e.g. planets) in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomical Objects taxobox. I would like to suggest changing it (even to a different shade of pink) so that each color is used in only one table. Since I think there are more astronomical object tables than weapon tables, it would be easier to change these than those. I will do the change myself if no one else wants to (though tell me what color you want, or I'll just pick one). See Wikipedia:Taxobox. Tuf-Kat 03:38, Feb 5, 2004 (UTC)

I don't really think the project is ready for this. The weaponry pages don't have any sense of order or particular style. Each and every one has a different style. Once a particular system has been cemented, I could see this happening, just not now. Maclyn611 04:40, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Still active?

I've moved Wikipedia:WikiProject Weaponry to the Inactive section of the WikiProject page, as it hasn't been edited since Nov 1st; I wanted to let you all know, and ask if you're still working on it. If so, feel free to move it back up into the active section. JesseW 08:22, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Use of tables

I'm a big fan of tables myself, but I wondered what others thought. I contributed a table to wikiproject:aircraft and found that they are quite anti-tables in general, what do people feel are the benefits of tables? GraemeLeggett 29 June 2005 09:38 (UTC)

I'll jsut start by adding that one of my thoughts is that it cuts the width of text of the article down making it easier to scan. GraemeLeggett 29 June 2005 09:38 (UTC)

What I like about infobox tables is that it puts all the basic information about the subject in a central location, at the top of the article. I recently needed to know the weight of an AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, and it would have been a lot easier to find if the info had been at the top of the article. --Carnildo 29 June 2005 18:00 (UTC)

Article Naming (Foreign Weapons)

Are there any opinions on how to give "English" names to weapons from non-English speaking nations? The subject has come up with the Polish anti-tank rifle of WW2. GraemeLeggett 14:16, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

would a caliber designation followed by a model number be okay? such as: 25mm Pol-55 Anti Tank? ...a stretch, I think, but there aren't many elegant solutions to the problem. Avriette 07:02, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

The article Napoleonic Wars has been listed to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. You can add your vote there if you would like to support the article.--Fenice 06:42, 4 August 2005 (UTC)Fenice 06:29, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review of T-34

The article "T-34" about the famous tank from Kharkov is up for peer review, with the intention of nominating it for a featured article. Please comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/T-34/archive1. Thanks. —Michael Z. 2005-12-20 06:34 Z

Lebanese unload

I've looked for pages to link to this stublet Lebanese unload. This popular Middle-Eastern pastime may be relevant. JFW | T@lk 00:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

F-34 tank gun nominated for DYK

I've nominated F-34 tank gun for WP:DYK. Feel free to improve the wording of the submission, at template talk:Did you know#January 19. —Michael Z. 2006-01-24 07:16 Z

Inactivity

I have been working with a few others on some changes to the ammunition pages. I'd like to know if anyone is presently active on this project. Avriette 16:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The project has been pretty inactive, but I try and check in. I've been busy with WP:Ships for the most parts, but its only a stone's throw away. Is there a project associated with ammo? If not, it would be a good thing to have that be included here. Josh 21:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I keep an eye on it. Most of the recent discussion related to this has been tanks on Talk:Tank. --Carnildo 07:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New article: aerosan

New artice aerosan; I'll submit it to DYK shortly. —Michael Z. 2006-02-02 06:19 Z

Merging with the Military history WikiProject?

We at the Military history WikiProject have recently formed a Weaponry task force; given that this project doesn't seem to be active (and the new task force is), I wonder if there would be significant objections to merging the project into the task force. This way, it could make use of WP:MILHIST's somewhat more developed infrastructure and editor recruitment processes. Kirill Lokshin 23:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a good idea. --Carnildo 02:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support that, too. —Michael Z. 2006-06-26 04:15 Z

I can see no reason why not. Oberiko 16:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]