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 articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a
WikiProject dedicated to coverage of
Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the
project page, or contribute to the
project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
The proper translations are "for fright" and (worser) "for fear". Not "for terror". Испуг means fright, страх means fear, ужас means terror.--
Nixer12:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Zaloga (1984) translates tank na ispug as 'terror tank', in the reference you deleted without explanation, along with a lot of other editing. If you have another academic reference that disagrees, then by all means lets discuss it. But don't be lazy and destroy a lot of work with a mass revert. —
MichaelZ. 2006-02-15 18:26 Z
I am a native Russian speaker and I know what does it mean. For example, look in the Lingvo dictionary:
[1]. The word на means "for".--
Nixer12:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Neither your nor Lingvo is an authority about Soviet AFVs. The convention is to
cite sources, and I'd rather go with Zaloga on what this is called in English.
And please stop removing the citation from the article without explanation. —
MichaelZ. 2006-02-16 15:38 Z
I know this is a bit late, but looks like you lost Michael. While Lingvo isn't an authority on Soviet AFVs, it is one on language, the very issue at hand. I don't know why you thought that kind of argument would fly.
2605:6000:F243:7800:E5CA:622E:D468:93B0 (
talk)
04:16, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply
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 articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a
WikiProject dedicated to coverage of
Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the
project page, or contribute to the
project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
The proper translations are "for fright" and (worser) "for fear". Not "for terror". Испуг means fright, страх means fear, ужас means terror.--
Nixer12:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Zaloga (1984) translates tank na ispug as 'terror tank', in the reference you deleted without explanation, along with a lot of other editing. If you have another academic reference that disagrees, then by all means lets discuss it. But don't be lazy and destroy a lot of work with a mass revert. —
MichaelZ. 2006-02-15 18:26 Z
I am a native Russian speaker and I know what does it mean. For example, look in the Lingvo dictionary:
[1]. The word на means "for".--
Nixer12:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Neither your nor Lingvo is an authority about Soviet AFVs. The convention is to
cite sources, and I'd rather go with Zaloga on what this is called in English.
And please stop removing the citation from the article without explanation. —
MichaelZ. 2006-02-16 15:38 Z
I know this is a bit late, but looks like you lost Michael. While Lingvo isn't an authority on Soviet AFVs, it is one on language, the very issue at hand. I don't know why you thought that kind of argument would fly.
2605:6000:F243:7800:E5CA:622E:D468:93B0 (
talk)
04:16, 12 May 2018 (UTC)reply