Talk:Military technology and equipment

This redirect 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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Technology

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Missing links

There arn't linKs for EVERY millitary item on Wikipedia... someone correct this?

Trying, trying. In some places, it's probably more appropriate to delete what is here and replace it with a link to an already-existing or newly-created list.

Deleting variant links

I deleted links to various weapon variants underneath Small arms and firearms and replaced them with links to various lists. Feel free to revert back and leave a note why on this page, but I feel that by having links to lists instead of variants we only need to maintain a single page (the list page) instead of this page and the list page. If we're only including variants at all, we should be including every variant. Surgo 19:47, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Which reminds me, here's my way of dealing with lists and proper alphabetization. Lists should go first, and then alphabetize normally. Example:

base
- List of base
- some variant
  - List of some variant
  - something underneath variant
- some variant2

...etc

It seems good to me. Comments? Surgo 20:12, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Major edit.

I made a fairly major edit to this article as it was all over the place and fairly unclear. Please discuss grievances and complaints here before going about with a revert war. Thanks. Midster 17:48, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

It seems to me that the section "Military tactics, Military strategy and Military doctrine" at the end of this article has little to do with "Military technology and equipment" --Philip Baird Shearer 11:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military technology

It seems to me this is a bit of a confusing article. Military technology is that which is distinctly not civilian in application. Militaries make use of a lot of equipment, from toilet paper to commercial jets, which is not uniquely military, so the 'equipment' part really belongs in its own articles that deal with specific application/use of this equipment. Military technologies that were distinctly military in application were (off the top of my head):
Combat armouring
Sail and masting
Gunnery
Rocket science
Automatic fire
Turreted naval guns
Indirect fire ranging
Submarines
Mining (land and naval)
Aircraft bombing (as opposed to thrown bombs)
Vehicle armouring (tanks and APCs)
Missile guidance
Logistic standardisation
GPS guidance
In other words any technology that has no commercial application or that would be considered inefficient, never mind dangerous, in civilian application.--Mrg3105 03:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

split, into seven

I would propose that this article is a list that is not really clear on what it is about. In fact it contains seven lists

List of combat skills
List of military concepts
List of military methods
List of military sciences
List of military technologies
List of military weapon system types
List of military equipment types

The list area is a bit confusing at the moment, to me anyway--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addition To Military technology and equipment Request

Gentlemen, in our effort to play by the rules and to respect the ongoing work of all the contributors to this section we are formally requesting inclusion to this section "Military Technology & Equipment" under the "See Also" section. We are a non-commercial Press Release organization that works on behalf of most of the leading weapons and equipment manufacturers INCONUS. Essentially when there is new weapons, equipment or gear being released within the industry (MILSPEC and Other) we are contacted to release the information to the general public. It is our desire to be listed as:

Tactical Gear News: The latest tactical gear news covering weapons,training, clothing and tactical equipment.

The site is located at: www.TacticalGearNews.com

Milspecnews (talk)milspecnews —Preceding undated comment added 11:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Since there is no existing article on your organization in Wikipedia, it would be incorrect to list you under See also. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE _{GOOD WORKS} 12:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We will try to clarify and resolve this with you in good faith until an impasse is reached. We are an official press release media liason with the military and most manufacturers of technology, gear, and other equipment that is emerging or in development. I will wait until you reply, and if the reply is slanted we will have a liason contact Wikipedia direct with our credentials, something seems a little odd with your reply.

Milspecnews (talk)milspecnews —Preceding undated comment added 14:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I see your point, and agree now that I further understand your statement. We are going to try to put a request into the Wiki Presscorp number, and see how they recommend we handle this as we a legitamite tool for Wikipedia. It may be that we list under a new section (like the other listings) "External Links". I will post a follow up after we are done.

Milspecnews (talk)milspecnews —Preceding undated comment added 15:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]