| Revision as of 01:54, 28 July 2007 editHpdswat (talk | contribs)6 edits →Digital Camo← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 05:47, 6 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,872,424 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion | ||
| (127 intermediate revisions by 33 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{talk page header}} | |||
| {{WPMILHIST|class = Start}} | |||
| {{Article history|action1=GAN | |||
| |action1date=08:04, 27 January 2013 | |||
| |action1link=Talk:Military camouflage/GA1 | |||
| |action1result=listed | |||
| |action1oldid=535128229 | |||
| |currentstatus=GA | |||
| |topic=war | |||
| }} | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA| | |||
| {{WikiProject Military history|class = GA | |||
| <!-- B-Class 5-criteria checklist --> | |||
| <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> | |||
| |B1=yes | |||
| <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> | |||
| |B2=yes | |||
| <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> | |||
| |B3=yes | |||
| <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> | |||
| |B4=yes | |||
| <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> | |||
| |B5=yes | |||
| |Science=yes | |||
| }} | |||
| }} | |||
| {{summary in|camouflage}} | |||
| {{British English}} | |||
| == And Now For Something Completely Different (or is it?) == | |||
| ==French Pre-Cammo Photo== | |||
| ] | |||
| The use of camouflage in fashion and art has a section to itself, but might it be worth discussing military camouflage in popular culture more generally? The ']' sketch from ] and at the beginning of ] may be silly, but before devolving into explosions, it illustrates well some important concepts (such as no matter how well-camouflaged you are, you're going to stick out if you're camouflaged as something obvious). I'm sure that there must be other instances outside of fashion and art where camouflage techniques are the main topic of examination. — ] (]) 16:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| I shold have noted in edit remarks, but removed ''Image:Musee-de-lArmee-IMG 0981.jpg'' as it does not illustrate any species of camouflage, and is as innapropriate to the article as any other image of military uniforms worn before the concept of camouflage was applied (such as the red tunics of British Army regiments of foot). A photograph of the first French attempt at a general- or limited-issue camouflage (a field-blue, as I recall) would be appropriate. | |||
| ⚫ | == Digital camouflage == | ||
| ] 06:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I came to the page (redirected, actually) looking for information on the so-called digital camouflage patterns that have been in vogue for a while now, and while I assume that the shift to such patterns is done for a good reason, I would like to be informed of what those reasons are, because to my eyes (especially when applied to vehicles in large, blocky patches) they seem to be all the more conspicuous. They say "nature abhors a vacuum", but nature also tends to abhor perfectly straight lines and right angles, at least when it comes to vegetation. I realize, perhaps, that AFV camouflage might not be designed to fool the human eye at all, so that could be at least a partial explanation. Nevertheless, seeing as I was redirected to this article after clicking on a link that explicitly said "digital camouflage", I feel some description of it is warranted. Apologies, though, if I just missed the relevant portions of a rather large article.--] (]) 00:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| :: See ]. It is a bit of a mouthful. ] (]) 11:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC) | |||
| Hi. I am the guy who added the picture. Well, the text mentions this uniform: | |||
| ::: The digital camouflage section is quite long, and it is argumentative (reflecting an ongoing argument within camouflage profession). as it os now, I agree with IP above that it is not very informative. It does not discuss the different ways the term is used, and it uses a lot of space on only scratching the surface of the science (or lack thereof) behind it. I suggest the section is cut back to a summary, and a separate article is made. I believe it is a topic of enough interest to warrant an article of its own. ] (]) 21:02, 16 April 2014 (UTC) | |||
| :''At the beginning of World War I, the French retained red (garance) trousers as part of their uniform.'' | |||
| :::: Yes, it should certainly be a sub-article (and an entry in the navbox). It will need (many) more citations, and should stick closely to the facts. I have created a new article more or less unaltered from here (added a lead); it awaits extension and improvement. ] (]) 04:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC) | |||
| My rationale is that a specially bad (camouflage wise) uniform is worth showing, just as a counterpoint. | |||
| == Camouflage face paint == | |||
| But, yes, you have a point. I suggest to add the text I added in the picture (above) to make clear that uniform was pre-camouflage. | |||
| Camouflage face paint is, all things considered, rather a minor aspect of camouflage compared, say, to hiding squadrons of main battle tanks. It is probably not worth mentioning in the lead section of the article, whose job is to summarize the main points of the rest of the article, not to introduce new concepts. The topic is in fact already mentioned and suitably referenced to a non-commercial source (a supplier's website is not the sort of site we should normally be linking to, and in general supplier pages change quickly within a few months or years), so there is no obvious need for additional coverage. If anyone wishes to create a new article on the topic, with suitable ], that would be fine, and we could wikilink it from the main article. ] (]) 15:57, 26 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
| Any suggestions? ] 07:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== External links modified == | ||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| I was surprised to find that there are so few links on camouflage. The Rangermade link may have the best camouflage ever devised--but there are no pictures of this camouflage anywhere on that page, and it seems to me that a link from a camouflage article should contain samples of camouflage, not articles with no pictures. I've got nothing against articles, but military camouflage is a very visual subject. | |||
| I've removed this link and replaced it with an article on ghillie suits. This seems to be what the Rangermade page is describing. | |||
| ] 00:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I have just modified 2 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| == USA camo == | |||
| *Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://www.thezimbabwean.co/news/16077/dj-squilasustained-serious-head-injuries.html | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121123230614/http://www.museomadre.it/opere.cfm?id=471 to http://www.museomadre.it/opere.cfm?id=471 | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120831104046/http://defense.aol.com/2012/06/25/army-drops-universal-camouflage-after-spending-billions/ to http://defense.aol.com/2012/06/25/army-drops-universal-camouflage-after-spending-billions | |||
| *Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://www3.fitnyc.edu/museum/loveandwar/galliano.htm | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
| The section entitled "United States" is mostly '''not''' about the US. In fact, only one sentence is. If somebody could remedy that, that would be great.--] 20:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
| ⚫ | == Digital |
||
| The photo in the Digital Camo section has nothing to do with Digital Camo. ] 13:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 19:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
| : No, it doesn't it looks like normal camo (unless he is so hidden we can't find him) ] 22:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == External links modified == | ||
| yea the picture is a picture of digital desert camo if you look real close. | |||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| ⚫ | == External |
||
| I have just modified 3 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| "See Also" contains links outside of the Misplaced Pages network, an "External Links" section should be created underneath the SA section for the...external links. | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426011729/http://emmalundgren.com/camouflage/ to http://emmalundgren.com/camouflage/ | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120614042717/http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/04/14/camouflaging-airports-and-plants-during-wwii/ to http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/04/14/camouflaging-airports-and-plants-during-wwii/ | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125100420/http://camotest.de/ to http://www.camotest.de/ | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 23:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == External links modified (January 2018) == | |||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| I have just modified 4 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426011721/http://www.thisgreedypig.com/art/the-re-appropriation-of-camouflage-from-military-use-into-civilian-clothing/ to http://www.thisgreedypig.com/art/the-re-appropriation-of-camouflage-from-military-use-into-civilian-clothing/ | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111126055931/http://www.veruschka.net/ to http://www.veruschka.net/ | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121130142620/http://www.strikehold.net/2010/04/04/making-sense-of-digital-camouflage/ to http://www.strikehold.net/2010/04/04/making-sense-of-digital-camouflage/ | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125100420/http://camotest.de/ to http://www.camotest.de/ | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 05:45, 31 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == Assessment == | |||
| This article contains at least one <nowiki>{{citation needed}}</nowiki> tag. It, therefore, does not meet the criteria for B1 (referencing). That would make it a C Class, rather than a Good article. I'll leave to someone more qualified in the area to find an appropriate reference or reassess the article. ] (]) 20:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:47, 6 February 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Military camouflage article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
 | Military camouflage has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| A summary of this article appears in camouflage. |
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
And Now For Something Completely Different (or is it?)
The use of camouflage in fashion and art has a section to itself, but might it be worth discussing military camouflage in popular culture more generally? The 'How Not to Be Seen' sketch from Monty Python's Flying Circus and at the beginning of And Now for Something Completely Different may be silly, but before devolving into explosions, it illustrates well some important concepts (such as no matter how well-camouflaged you are, you're going to stick out if you're camouflaged as something obvious). I'm sure that there must be other instances outside of fashion and art where camouflage techniques are the main topic of examination. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Digital camouflage
I came to the page (redirected, actually) looking for information on the so-called digital camouflage patterns that have been in vogue for a while now, and while I assume that the shift to such patterns is done for a good reason, I would like to be informed of what those reasons are, because to my eyes (especially when applied to vehicles in large, blocky patches) they seem to be all the more conspicuous. They say "nature abhors a vacuum", but nature also tends to abhor perfectly straight lines and right angles, at least when it comes to vegetation. I realize, perhaps, that AFV camouflage might not be designed to fool the human eye at all, so that could be at least a partial explanation. Nevertheless, seeing as I was redirected to this article after clicking on a link that explicitly said "digital camouflage", I feel some description of it is warranted. Apologies, though, if I just missed the relevant portions of a rather large article.--172.129.55.131 (talk) 00:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- See Military camouflage#Pattern scale and digitization. It is a bit of a mouthful. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- The digital camouflage section is quite long, and it is argumentative (reflecting an ongoing argument within camouflage profession). as it os now, I agree with IP above that it is not very informative. It does not discuss the different ways the term is used, and it uses a lot of space on only scratching the surface of the science (or lack thereof) behind it. I suggest the section is cut back to a summary, and a separate article is made. I believe it is a topic of enough interest to warrant an article of its own. Thimbleweed (talk) 21:02, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, it should certainly be a sub-article (and an entry in the navbox). It will need (many) more citations, and should stick closely to the facts. I have created a new article more or less unaltered from here (added a lead); it awaits extension and improvement. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Camouflage face paint
Camouflage face paint is, all things considered, rather a minor aspect of camouflage compared, say, to hiding squadrons of main battle tanks. It is probably not worth mentioning in the lead section of the article, whose job is to summarize the main points of the rest of the article, not to introduce new concepts. The topic is in fact already mentioned and suitably referenced to a non-commercial source (a supplier's website is not the sort of site we should normally be linking to, and in general supplier pages change quickly within a few months or years), so there is no obvious need for additional coverage. If anyone wishes to create a new article on the topic, with suitable reliable sources, that would be fine, and we could wikilink it from the main article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:57, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Military camouflage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added
{{dead link}}tag to http://www.thezimbabwean.co/news/16077/dj-squilasustained-serious-head-injuries.html - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121123230614/http://www.museomadre.it/opere.cfm?id=471 to http://www.museomadre.it/opere.cfm?id=471
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120831104046/http://defense.aol.com/2012/06/25/army-drops-universal-camouflage-after-spending-billions/ to http://defense.aol.com/2012/06/25/army-drops-universal-camouflage-after-spending-billions
- Added
{{dead link}}tag to http://www3.fitnyc.edu/museum/loveandwar/galliano.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Military camouflage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426011729/http://emmalundgren.com/camouflage/ to http://emmalundgren.com/camouflage/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120614042717/http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/04/14/camouflaging-airports-and-plants-during-wwii/ to http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/04/14/camouflaging-airports-and-plants-during-wwii/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125100420/http://camotest.de/ to http://www.camotest.de/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Military camouflage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426011721/http://www.thisgreedypig.com/art/the-re-appropriation-of-camouflage-from-military-use-into-civilian-clothing/ to http://www.thisgreedypig.com/art/the-re-appropriation-of-camouflage-from-military-use-into-civilian-clothing/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111126055931/http://www.veruschka.net/ to http://www.veruschka.net/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121130142620/http://www.strikehold.net/2010/04/04/making-sense-of-digital-camouflage/ to http://www.strikehold.net/2010/04/04/making-sense-of-digital-camouflage/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125100420/http://camotest.de/ to http://www.camotest.de/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:45, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Assessment
This article contains at least one {{citation needed}} tag. It, therefore, does not meet the criteria for B1 (referencing). That would make it a C Class, rather than a Good article. I'll leave to someone more qualified in the area to find an appropriate reference or reassess the article. Lineagegeek (talk) 20:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Categories: