![]() | BMPT Terminator was nominated as a Warfare good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 23, 2014). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
BMPT Terminator article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should this really be classified as an armoured personel carrier?
81.3.111.46 22:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Photos available there http://www.btvt.narod.ru/5/bmpt/bmpt.htm 93.92.202.139 ( talk) 13:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the project has been cancelled along with T 95. Check the T 95 page first reference for more details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.107.240.116 ( talk) 18:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
According to the "Popular Mechanics"'s source within the industry, both the BMPT and the T-95 are gone, although Kazachstan did order several vehicles as BMPT "Ramka". Also, the "BMP-T" is misleading. Hasn't encountered that dash in Russian sources. It has no relation to the BMP series.-- 46.138.187.238 ( talk) 15:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
There was a confusion in article. BMPT is not only using active protection, it's hull has additional armor, either more ERA or more normal armor. This is very easy to see by looking at the weight of the vehicle. 47 tons. Weight of T-90 is 46,5 tons. Additional active protection system complex weighs 1300 kg( http://www.kbm.ru/en/product/aps/arena-e), actual turret of the vehicle can not weigh more than 5 tons, which, assuming turret of T-90 weighs ~15 tons, leaves additional 5-10 tons of armoring that went in to hull (where else?). 99.231.50.118 ( talk) 04:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)Pavel Golikov.
I am still not 100% sure (even after looking at some of the pictures) whether this vehicle is fitted with a turret or not. The article contradicts itself on more than one occasion. I have therefore changed 'turret' to 'mount'. RASAM ( talk) 13:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
It has a proper turret sticking with gns in all directions, plus a pair of AGL mounts. - -- 46.138.187.238 ( talk) 15:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Some of the wording ("weapon complexes" and "sending units" for example) feel strange to me. I may be unfamiliar with some jargon but I rather suspect that Russian terminology is seeping into the English translation. I modified "weapon complexes" into "weapon systems" but I have trouble clarifying what a "sending units" is. Anyone ? Jean-Marc Liotier ( talk) 11:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Peacemaker67 ( talk · contribs) 10:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
Title
Lead
Design history
Mission
Description
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
|
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. |
|
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
|
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
|
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
|
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. |
|
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Given the prose issues, some indications of plagiarism, and poor reliability of a considerable proportion of the sources, this article does not meet GA criteria at present. I am happy to look at the article again once all the above issues have been addressed, but it will need to be re-nominated. |
This article reads like a brochure to sell the system to potential customers, not a sincere attempt to provide information. -- Nickdenuijl ( talk) 18:41, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
There should be no objections whatsoever. The article of the title should be the common name of the subject. All English sources mention the BMPT Terminator. I don't expect any responses in a week since this article is never busy. If you have objection to the current move, do so within a week. Khazar ( talk) 22:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
The BMPT Terminator is used in Syria. You can see the Tank on photos taken at the Khmeimim air base https://southfront.org/president-assad-visited-russian-khmeimim-air-base-in-syria-photo-report-video/ DerElektriker ( talk) 05:56, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
It's the tank type evolution of the two variants, there i already a main article about it, I'm trying to slim down a paragraph for it, while adding the Further Info to the main article.
Part of the info taken from:
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of T-15 Armata was copied or moved into BMPT Terminator on 12 March 2022. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Camp0s 12 March 2022
This is an essential piece of information, and the "Appearance in the media" section is totally insufficient in this regard, as well as problematic:
Are really both quotations Murahovskij's? Apparently from two distinct interviews? Or from one, but quoted in two separate articles? In any case, leaving him (what are his credentials?) as the only quoted specialist looks like POV, is one-sided by definition.
How do specialists in general assess the fighting capabilities of the BMPT? Is it a white elephant, or a real asset? The fact that the Russian army only has 20-30 pieces of it, and that it hasn't deployed them for the first 2.5 months of the very slow-going Ukraine invasion, might indicate that it's considered to be rather useless. Arminden ( talk) 06:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Estonia 46.131.50.174 ( talk) 04:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
This article should have an "operational history" section. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 04:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
So it's like there's a BMPT "Terminator", a BMPT "Terminator 2", a BMPT-72 (which might just be an unofficial term for the first two T-72 based vehicles) and a "Terminator 3" Armata hull vehicle (which might actually be the T-15 Armata). GMRE ( talk) 23:50, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | BMPT Terminator was nominated as a Warfare good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 23, 2014). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
BMPT Terminator article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Should this really be classified as an armoured personel carrier?
81.3.111.46 22:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Photos available there http://www.btvt.narod.ru/5/bmpt/bmpt.htm 93.92.202.139 ( talk) 13:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the project has been cancelled along with T 95. Check the T 95 page first reference for more details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.107.240.116 ( talk) 18:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
According to the "Popular Mechanics"'s source within the industry, both the BMPT and the T-95 are gone, although Kazachstan did order several vehicles as BMPT "Ramka". Also, the "BMP-T" is misleading. Hasn't encountered that dash in Russian sources. It has no relation to the BMP series.-- 46.138.187.238 ( talk) 15:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
There was a confusion in article. BMPT is not only using active protection, it's hull has additional armor, either more ERA or more normal armor. This is very easy to see by looking at the weight of the vehicle. 47 tons. Weight of T-90 is 46,5 tons. Additional active protection system complex weighs 1300 kg( http://www.kbm.ru/en/product/aps/arena-e), actual turret of the vehicle can not weigh more than 5 tons, which, assuming turret of T-90 weighs ~15 tons, leaves additional 5-10 tons of armoring that went in to hull (where else?). 99.231.50.118 ( talk) 04:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)Pavel Golikov.
I am still not 100% sure (even after looking at some of the pictures) whether this vehicle is fitted with a turret or not. The article contradicts itself on more than one occasion. I have therefore changed 'turret' to 'mount'. RASAM ( talk) 13:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
It has a proper turret sticking with gns in all directions, plus a pair of AGL mounts. - -- 46.138.187.238 ( talk) 15:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Some of the wording ("weapon complexes" and "sending units" for example) feel strange to me. I may be unfamiliar with some jargon but I rather suspect that Russian terminology is seeping into the English translation. I modified "weapon complexes" into "weapon systems" but I have trouble clarifying what a "sending units" is. Anyone ? Jean-Marc Liotier ( talk) 11:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Peacemaker67 ( talk · contribs) 10:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
Title
Lead
Design history
Mission
Description
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
|
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. |
|
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
|
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
|
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
|
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. |
|
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Given the prose issues, some indications of plagiarism, and poor reliability of a considerable proportion of the sources, this article does not meet GA criteria at present. I am happy to look at the article again once all the above issues have been addressed, but it will need to be re-nominated. |
This article reads like a brochure to sell the system to potential customers, not a sincere attempt to provide information. -- Nickdenuijl ( talk) 18:41, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
There should be no objections whatsoever. The article of the title should be the common name of the subject. All English sources mention the BMPT Terminator. I don't expect any responses in a week since this article is never busy. If you have objection to the current move, do so within a week. Khazar ( talk) 22:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
The BMPT Terminator is used in Syria. You can see the Tank on photos taken at the Khmeimim air base https://southfront.org/president-assad-visited-russian-khmeimim-air-base-in-syria-photo-report-video/ DerElektriker ( talk) 05:56, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
It's the tank type evolution of the two variants, there i already a main article about it, I'm trying to slim down a paragraph for it, while adding the Further Info to the main article.
Part of the info taken from:
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of T-15 Armata was copied or moved into BMPT Terminator on 12 March 2022. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Camp0s 12 March 2022
This is an essential piece of information, and the "Appearance in the media" section is totally insufficient in this regard, as well as problematic:
Are really both quotations Murahovskij's? Apparently from two distinct interviews? Or from one, but quoted in two separate articles? In any case, leaving him (what are his credentials?) as the only quoted specialist looks like POV, is one-sided by definition.
How do specialists in general assess the fighting capabilities of the BMPT? Is it a white elephant, or a real asset? The fact that the Russian army only has 20-30 pieces of it, and that it hasn't deployed them for the first 2.5 months of the very slow-going Ukraine invasion, might indicate that it's considered to be rather useless. Arminden ( talk) 06:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Estonia 46.131.50.174 ( talk) 04:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
This article should have an "operational history" section. RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk) 04:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
So it's like there's a BMPT "Terminator", a BMPT "Terminator 2", a BMPT-72 (which might just be an unofficial term for the first two T-72 based vehicles) and a "Terminator 3" Armata hull vehicle (which might actually be the T-15 Armata). GMRE ( talk) 23:50, 11 February 2023 (UTC)