This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tanque Argentino Mediano 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 |
![]() | Tanque Argentino Mediano is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 3, 2014. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph of variants: VCTM, VCPC, VCLC, VCA, VCRT be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Argentina may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Hi all, I've noticed that on 2008-08-09 this article was totally re-edited by user Catalan, with whom I believe had a productive conversation days ago. I'm happy with the "new" article and it seems to be a candidate for a "good" one, hovever I do have the following (minor) concerns:
Please let me know if anyone concurs, and maybe suggestions for further improvement of this potentially "A-class" article. I'll liaise with the (initial) editor of this version to discuss enhancements and share ideas.
Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
02:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
"It has 50 millimeters (2 in.) at 75 degrees on the glacis plate and 32 degrees on the vehicle's sides. "
this seems impossible, I look at the picture of the tank, and I think that actually a glacis plate is 32 degrees, and sides are 75 degrees.
can anyone check this?
is thickness 50 millimeters on both hull sides and glacis plate?
M., Croatia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.3.235.254 ( talk) 20:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Currently the article says
The TAM did not participate in the Falklands War, although it had entered service by the beginning of the conflict.
But how can it have entered service by the beginning of the conflict when it says that it entered service in 1983 and the falklands was 1982? Editing the article to reflect the fact that it entered service after the Falklands War, even if it was actualy in a full state of use for the army, it had not been entered in to service. User:JozorP (Talk) 15:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Currently (Oct'09) the article says:
The TAM did not participate in the Falklands War, as it had not entered service before the end of the conflict.
what solves the issue mentioned above.
AFAIK, it was said that the TAM was not deployed due to technical issues related to the soil in the Falklands being too soft (note that the AMX-13 was also not deployed, nor the Sherman), and that thanks were held in the mainland to prevent potential actions from Chile. Hence only the AML-90 Panhard was deployed in the islands.
I need to find verifiable sources to support my statements, however I'd like to know the source of the fact quoted above.
Thanks & kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
15:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
In the relevant section, the following paragraph caught my attention:
This failed when TAMSE lowered the price of the vehicles, angering the Iranian government, which subsequently canceled the offer...
Why Iran would cancel an offer if the price was lowered? Maybe ts should say raised instead?
Which is the source of this comment? Please ammend as appopriate.
Thanks & kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
15:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
IMHO this article should be rated MID importance for this WP, as the TAM was significant in modernizing Argentina's armored forces, a huge industrial effort, and placed Argentina in the (not so long) list of countries that produced their own armoured vehicles. Have rated article as such.
Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
01:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Many people ask: But why would they have a MEDIUM tank be their MBT? The answer is the Argentine geography. They needed a tank which could tread on all the different types of terrain (large plains in Patagonia, mountains in the Andes, urban cities as Córdoba or Buenos Aires, or even Chilean geography, due to political tensions). That is why almost all other types of armoured units are based on the same chassis. I haven't found sources other than YouTube videos of tank operators saying this, but I'll keep looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.51.240.43 ( talk) 20:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
TAM is being categorized as "Main battle Tank" in the right info Box, though Argentina defines them as "Tanque mediano" = medium Tank. Correction required... -- 194.203.215.254 ( talk) 12:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Should the article be moved to Tanque Argentino Mediano? – Kaihsu ( talk) 17:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
What is this snorkel we're seeing?? Why isn't it explained in the article? Opus33 ( talk) 17:49, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
The comparison table in the "variants" section lists 7 of them, but none that would be armed with a 105 mm gun. The main infobox claims that the main armament is a 105 mm gun, meaning that there 8 different vehicles. The comparison tabe should be updated to include the 105 mm gun version. GMRE ( talk) 20:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
I came to this article via a wikilink that had, as its target, a subsection heading within this article -- Tanque Argentino Mediano#Variants.
While this is common, in the [[Wikipedia:]] namespace I think it is a maintenance nightmare, in article space.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers. Readers expect every click on a wiki-link will take them to the lead paragraph of a stand-alone article. But clicking on faux links like those directed here, takes them to text without a lead section to provide the necessary context.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, as, when they suddenly find themselves somewhere unexpected, without warning their back key doesn't work, as expected. With normal wikilinks the reader only has to press their back key once to return to where they were. Invisibly, and without warning, wikilinks to subsection headings require two clicks of the back key to return to where one was.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, because it is a maintenance nightmare for contributors. Ordinary wikilinks are robust. Thanks to helpful robots, the WMF software makes sure ordinary wikilinks continue to point to the correct articles, even when those articles are renamed. This is a huge improvement over the regular world-wide-web, where links get broken all the time. But this does not work properly with wikilinks to subsection headings. Even the smallest amendment to the section heading breaks the link. Changes to the Capitalization, spelling, punctuation, or word order of section heading break links, when that section heading is the target of a wikilink.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, because it erodes the usefulness of watchlists.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, because it erodes the usefulness of the "what links here" button.
In my opinion, if a topic is significant enough to merit its own wikilink, it is very likely to merit a standalone article. I strongly urge other contributors to think twice before they employ this highly problematic technique. Geo Swan ( talk) 16:29, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tanque Argentino Mediano. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tanque Argentino Mediano 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 |
![]() | Tanque Argentino Mediano is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 3, 2014. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph of variants: VCTM, VCPC, VCLC, VCA, VCRT be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Argentina may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Hi all, I've noticed that on 2008-08-09 this article was totally re-edited by user Catalan, with whom I believe had a productive conversation days ago. I'm happy with the "new" article and it seems to be a candidate for a "good" one, hovever I do have the following (minor) concerns:
Please let me know if anyone concurs, and maybe suggestions for further improvement of this potentially "A-class" article. I'll liaise with the (initial) editor of this version to discuss enhancements and share ideas.
Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
02:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
"It has 50 millimeters (2 in.) at 75 degrees on the glacis plate and 32 degrees on the vehicle's sides. "
this seems impossible, I look at the picture of the tank, and I think that actually a glacis plate is 32 degrees, and sides are 75 degrees.
can anyone check this?
is thickness 50 millimeters on both hull sides and glacis plate?
M., Croatia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.3.235.254 ( talk) 20:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Currently the article says
The TAM did not participate in the Falklands War, although it had entered service by the beginning of the conflict.
But how can it have entered service by the beginning of the conflict when it says that it entered service in 1983 and the falklands was 1982? Editing the article to reflect the fact that it entered service after the Falklands War, even if it was actualy in a full state of use for the army, it had not been entered in to service. User:JozorP (Talk) 15:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Currently (Oct'09) the article says:
The TAM did not participate in the Falklands War, as it had not entered service before the end of the conflict.
what solves the issue mentioned above.
AFAIK, it was said that the TAM was not deployed due to technical issues related to the soil in the Falklands being too soft (note that the AMX-13 was also not deployed, nor the Sherman), and that thanks were held in the mainland to prevent potential actions from Chile. Hence only the AML-90 Panhard was deployed in the islands.
I need to find verifiable sources to support my statements, however I'd like to know the source of the fact quoted above.
Thanks & kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
15:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
In the relevant section, the following paragraph caught my attention:
This failed when TAMSE lowered the price of the vehicles, angering the Iranian government, which subsequently canceled the offer...
Why Iran would cancel an offer if the price was lowered? Maybe ts should say raised instead?
Which is the source of this comment? Please ammend as appopriate.
Thanks & kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
15:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
IMHO this article should be rated MID importance for this WP, as the TAM was significant in modernizing Argentina's armored forces, a huge industrial effort, and placed Argentina in the (not so long) list of countries that produced their own armoured vehicles. Have rated article as such.
Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk)
01:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Many people ask: But why would they have a MEDIUM tank be their MBT? The answer is the Argentine geography. They needed a tank which could tread on all the different types of terrain (large plains in Patagonia, mountains in the Andes, urban cities as Córdoba or Buenos Aires, or even Chilean geography, due to political tensions). That is why almost all other types of armoured units are based on the same chassis. I haven't found sources other than YouTube videos of tank operators saying this, but I'll keep looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.51.240.43 ( talk) 20:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
TAM is being categorized as "Main battle Tank" in the right info Box, though Argentina defines them as "Tanque mediano" = medium Tank. Correction required... -- 194.203.215.254 ( talk) 12:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Should the article be moved to Tanque Argentino Mediano? – Kaihsu ( talk) 17:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
What is this snorkel we're seeing?? Why isn't it explained in the article? Opus33 ( talk) 17:49, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
The comparison table in the "variants" section lists 7 of them, but none that would be armed with a 105 mm gun. The main infobox claims that the main armament is a 105 mm gun, meaning that there 8 different vehicles. The comparison tabe should be updated to include the 105 mm gun version. GMRE ( talk) 20:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
I came to this article via a wikilink that had, as its target, a subsection heading within this article -- Tanque Argentino Mediano#Variants.
While this is common, in the [[Wikipedia:]] namespace I think it is a maintenance nightmare, in article space.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers. Readers expect every click on a wiki-link will take them to the lead paragraph of a stand-alone article. But clicking on faux links like those directed here, takes them to text without a lead section to provide the necessary context.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, as, when they suddenly find themselves somewhere unexpected, without warning their back key doesn't work, as expected. With normal wikilinks the reader only has to press their back key once to return to where they were. Invisibly, and without warning, wikilinks to subsection headings require two clicks of the back key to return to where one was.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, because it is a maintenance nightmare for contributors. Ordinary wikilinks are robust. Thanks to helpful robots, the WMF software makes sure ordinary wikilinks continue to point to the correct articles, even when those articles are renamed. This is a huge improvement over the regular world-wide-web, where links get broken all the time. But this does not work properly with wikilinks to subsection headings. Even the smallest amendment to the section heading breaks the link. Changes to the Capitalization, spelling, punctuation, or word order of section heading break links, when that section heading is the target of a wikilink.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, because it erodes the usefulness of watchlists.
The technique is a confusing disservice to readers, because it erodes the usefulness of the "what links here" button.
In my opinion, if a topic is significant enough to merit its own wikilink, it is very likely to merit a standalone article. I strongly urge other contributors to think twice before they employ this highly problematic technique. Geo Swan ( talk) 16:29, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tanque Argentino Mediano. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)