Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:59, 28 June 2007

Military history Start‑class

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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: | b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> | b2<!--Coverage and accuracy   --> = <yes/no> | b3<!--Structure               --> = <yes/no> | b4<!--Grammar and style       --> = <yes/no> | b5<!--Supporting materials    --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion. Additional information: /  This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

French Pre-Cammo Photo

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.

Aodhdubh 06:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I am the guy who added the picture. Well, the text mentions this uniform:

At the beginning of World War I, the French retained red (garance) trousers as part of their uniform.

My rationale is that a specially bad (camouflage wise) uniform is worth showing, just as a counterpoint.

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.

Any suggestions? Randroide 07:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Better links?

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. 128.123.86.26 00:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

USA camo

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.--Nashaii 20:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Digital Camo

The photo in the Digital Camo section has nothing to do with Digital Camo. Tmaull 13:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't it looks like normal camo (unless he is so hidden we can't find him) 24.196.115.179 22:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

External Links

"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.

• Start-Class military history articles