User talk:BurtReynoldsMoustache: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 19:03, 7 May 2011

Ok, now that I've fixed all that

You've got it backwards; you shouldn't just call it the Type 69 and should add RPG to the end (also, you shouldn't remove the note that the calibre is 40mm). This is because Norinco have several things called Type 69 that they manufacture, including the Type 69 rocket propelled grenade launcher, the Type 69 Main Battle Tank, and I believe there's also a Type 69 landmine. It's no more wrong to call it a "Type 69 RPG" than it is to use the term "M4 Carbine" to describe the M4; it gives the weapon's type, and distinguishes it from the many other things also called M4 (eg the SITES Spectre M4).

Really, we should call it the "RPG-7 RPG" since in that case the first RPG is actually in Russian and means something slightly different to the usual Western acronym (it's "handheld anti-tank grenade launcher"), but we don't do that because it's rather redundant; people tend to just assume that the first "RPG" stands for "rocket propelled grenade." Certainly, it's correct to use it as the type of weapon and / or the name of the projectiles it fires. Evil Tim 02:25, 13 April 2011 (CDT)

Not true: RPG is an acronym with two different meanings depending on who's using it. In Russian it stands for Ruchnoy Protivotankovyy Granatomyot, in English it stands for Rocket Propelled Grenade. It only has the Russian meaning when specifically used to reference Russian launchers that use that prefix; otherwise it's assumed to have the English meaning. RPG is a generic term used to describe devices that launch rocket propelled grenades and the projectiles they launch; it's not an incorrect use, just a different one. Evil Tim 22:31, 13 April 2011 (CDT)

- The US military would beg to differ; they use RPG to describe launchers and projectiles, and really "RPG" is in English a generic term to describe unguided infantry rocket weapons. Seriously, have you never seen Black Hawk Down? Another good one: here's BAE Systems describing their LROD cage armour: "The LROD system provides lightweight, low-cost RPG protection that is easily adapted to virtually any armored vehicle." So, the defence industry calls them that too. Another: here's one of Wikipedia's sources, the Historical Dictionary of the US Army (granted, that has an error in saying the Panzerfaust was an RPG, they've confused it with the Panzershreck). You're saying BAE systems and the US Army are wrong and you're right? It might be a backronym, but it's been used so extensively as to become a fully correct term in it's own right, and we're not here to try to undo history. Evil Tim 01:54, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - No, it's not even technically incorrect when technical descriptions use it. BAE are hardly going to be wrong about what term they choose to use for the weapon. This is no longer something incorrect but widely used, it is something that has become correct and is used as a proper name. You are not in a position to overrule people who manufacture and operate weapons professionally on what they are correctly called. It's a Type 69, class RPG, so it is as correct to call it that as it is to call an M4 an "M4 carbine" in a caption. We're here to use terms correctly, not alter them to how you wish they were used. Evil Tim 04:46, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - Let me reiterate: defence industry contractors use the term in official press releases. English-speaking armies use the term. This can be sourced, your opinion on the subject cannot be sourced as coming from anyone but you. We are here to use the correct terms, not tell everyone terms used by authorities on the subject are wrong because we wish they weren't right. Evil Tim 18:35, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - - And you are wrong. It might once have been correct to argue as you're arguing, but it is now technically correct. It can be sourced to official literature as a correct term rather than just being confined to general use. It is used in technical literature to describe this class of weapons and their warheads. It doesn't matter where the term came from, what matters is how it is used now, and now it is a fully correct term. As I've said, it's as correct to label it Type 69 RPG as it is to call an M4 an M4 carbine or an M16 an M16 assault rifle, and nobody would remove the latter for being wrong. Evil Tim 19:08, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - - I don't need a source from Norinco or the PRC to prove the general use of the term "RPG" to describe a class of weapons that includes the Type 69. You are not in a position to overrule the defence industry and the army on what "RPG" means, it really is that simple. Evil Tim 19:37, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - - This wiki is in English. Of course the Chinese aren't going to use an English term for RPG to name their RPG, but that's irrelevant to the discussion; it's correct for us to refer to any RPG weapon as an RPG, and that includes the Type 69. You might as well argue that we can't say "MG42 machine gun" because there's no way any German would use the English term "machine gun." Evil Tim 19:52, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - - Right, so you're saying we should change every mention of "MG42 machine gun" to "MG42 machine rifle" since that's what the manufacturers called it? I've heard this argument over calling the King Tiger a King Tiger (it should be "Bengal Tiger"), and the same applies here; it might once have been wrong, but is now so commonly used by authoritive sources that those arguing it is wrong are the ones who are incorrect. As far as I can see, nobody has yet agreed with you that RPG is not a correct term to use to describe a class of weapons that includes the Type 69. It might be superfluous to call it "Type 69 RPG" all the time, but that does not fit your idea that it is wrong; nobody has agreed on that point. Evil Tim 20:17, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

It doesn't matter where the term comes from; again, like "King Tiger" as a name for the Tiger II, it's a mistranslation which has become accepted as a technically correct name in authoritive, published literature; I bought that up because it is another example of such a thing happening. RPG now means two things; either the original Russian meaning, or the modern version of "rocket propelled grenade" which is used as the label for a class of weapons and their warheads. Common usage in technical description and by the military does in fact make a term correct; it would only be wrong if it was commonly used by laymen but not used by people working in the relevant field (here, the military and the defence industry), and this is clearly not the case in the slightest. Evil Tim 20:43, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- The point of the "King Tiger" / "Bengal Tiger" is that a name can become technically correct through adoption by experts on the subject; it's no more irrelevant than you bringing up colours as an example; in fact, less so, since there is such a thing as a military expert but last I checked there is no such thing as a colour expert. It's the same in this case; experts (military professionals and defence industry professionals) have decided to adopt "RPG" as a term meaning "rocket propelled grenade" to describe a class of weapons and their warheads. It therefore doesn't matter that it was originally wrong, their use and adoption of it has made it right. Languages are not static; proper terminology changes all the time. Evil Tim 20:59, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - Well, you're wrong about the translation of Königstiger (it is not correct to translate it from German as King Tiger, and here is someone doing what you're doing here by rejecting that it can ever possibly be correct). You're wrong about authoritive sources using a phrase not meaning it is an accepted and correct use (much as that guy is). You're wrong about it being informal, since it is used in formal literature such as press releases and dictionaries of terminology. You are trying to place your word higher than actual authorities on this subject, and you are giving nobody any reason to accept that you are right and the experts on the issue are wrong. Evil Tim 23:47, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - What it means and what it can be translated as are not the same thing. "Königstiger" is only a word for the Bengal Tiger, and should never be translated literally; I have this on the authority of a friend who actually happens to be German, so I'll believe him rather than you, thank you. As for the actual point; you continue to ignore that if professionals use a term officially, like it or not, it has become an official term. We use the term "bazooka" on this site despite it not being an official name, so clearly we have accepted that terms can move from incorrect to correct. Same applies to RPG. Please stop wasting my time. Evil Tim 00:55, 15 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - - My argument, no matter how much you feel like misrepresenting it, is that official sources with authority use the term RPG to describe a class of weapons. They overrule you, a random voice on the internet. That is the beginning, middle and end of this. They are right and you are wrong. Evil Tim 03:10, 15 April 2011 (CDT)

- - - - As I've said, experts on the subject agree with me while you are the only person who agrees with you. That is the bottom line here. Evil Tim 04:18, 15 April 2011 (CDT)

Type 69

Please refrain from making any more corrections to the "Type 69" launcher entries until this is sorted out with the other mods. Also, when you make such a drastic change across the board without making any indication to any of the mods, this is bound to catch the attention of the moderators and might be cause for further action. --Ben41 17:03, 14 April 2011 (CDT)

Demonstration that RPG is a term in official use

Ok, here we go with a list on this:

Dictionaries say RPG is a term. Here's Merriam-Webster, Oxford English, Thefreedictionary.com quoting Collins, Encarta and Wikitionary.

Manufacturers use it. Here's the term on Israel Military Industries' site, here's a search for the term on Raytheon's, here's General Dynamics defining it as something the Stryker can be protected against, Rhinemetall, Boeing, BAE Systems Krauss-Maffei Wegmann and Nexter.

Respectable publications use the term. Here's Defense-update, Guns & Ammo, Jane's, Globalsecurity, the Army Times and FAS.

Government agencies use it. Here's the US Department of Defense, British Ministry of Defence, and the Bundeswehr (using the English abbreviation in German, no less).

Airtronic USA actually manufacture the RPG-7 and advertise it as "RPG-7 (USA) 40mm rocket propelled grenade launcher" on their site.

I'm sorry, but when everything from movies and videogames to an official speech by the President of the United States says one thing and a random voice on the internet says another, the random voice on the internet is wrong. Evil Tim 02:55, 17 April 2011 (CDT)

Ok, since you apparently think Sinodefence.com is an authority on this, here's them calling it a Type 69 rocket propelled grenade launcher, here's them doing it again, and for a bonus here's the PRC Ministry of Defense's website using the term. So even they agree with me. Evil Tim 00:46, 18 April 2011 (CDT)

- I think I've well and truly demonstrated that regardless of origin, everyone from laymen to professionals to people writing in an entirely different language understands that RPG is a term meaning rocket propelled grenade that describes a type of weapon, or in the case of several of the articles I linked, a level of armour protection for vehicles based on the understanding that an RPG is a weapon with defined qualities; hardly just "simple language." Maybe that type is loosely defined, but then so is "battle rifle" (especially whether a battle rifle has to be produced in a selective fire version; I've heard that both ways from various sources) and I don't see you arguing we shouldn't use that. Incidentally, can you tell me where you found good evidence that RPG is actually a backronym rather than the match being simple coincidence? Other than "everyone says so?" See, here's an issue of Popular Mechanics from 1945, four years before the RPG-2, and they're calling bazooka rounds "rocket grenades." Under the heading "propelled hollow charges."
  
  And, yes, I would revert that. It's a pointless alteration that doesn't make articles better; whether the writer chooses to say "M4," "Colt M4," "Colt M4 carbine" or "M4 carbine" is really entirely up to them. M4 carbine is actually more correct in that case, since it is, after all, a "model 4 carbine," not just a "model 4." Same with the RPG; the way the Chinese system works is it's a 19XX year-type whatever it is, so "Type 69 RPG" ("1969 year-type RPG") is far more correct than just "Type 69." Similarly, you could say Type 69, Type 69 RPG, or Type 69 rocket launcher; all are right.
  
  In fact, per your objection on the basis that RPG rounds don't have to be rocket propelled; RPG is just as technically right as "antitank grenade launcher," given the RPG-7 and knockoffs therein can fire anti-personnel rounds. Indeed, RPG is more correct in English since a self-propelled projectile would not normally be described as just "grenade." Remember, the Wiki uses American terminology, so if Norinco type-classified it as the Type 69 Glorious Revolutionary People's Sausage Projector, we'd still call it a Type 69 RPG since RPG is the Western term for weapons of this type. It's the same reason you wouldn't call a mortar projectile for a British mortar a bomb (the correct British term, but not correct in US English) and wouldn't call a German mortar a grenade launcher ("grenade" tends to have a much broader meaning in other languages, I've noticed).
  
  Bottom line: there's no need to change it if it doesn't say something, but it's more accurate if it does and certainly nothing that should be altered as if it's not right. Evil Tim 01:45, 18 April 2011 (CDT)

MP5 tables

Thanks for converting the MP5 page entries into the table format. In the future, please place the year of the film or series at the end of the table (in keeping the format established) and please arrange earliest year first. You did a lot of work on it already, so don't worry about the ones you've done so far. --Ben41 18:22, 21 April 2011 (CDT)

Zombie Killer 1995

So I just change the size then it's ok yeah.

Ok am confused wikicode what the heck is that, and what do you mean by signing my messages.

Ok I kind of get you, so your saying I have to get the images from this website and add my signature to the photo --Zombie Killer 1995 13:19, 7 May 2011 (CDT) <-- this thing here so it's like this ---> --Zombie Killer 1995 so like that.

But I'm still a bit iffy on the how thing is there some sort of video I can watch or you could but on youtube for me so I can under stand better.--Zombie Killer 1995 13:22, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

Ok what's with that box thing in my last message is that the signature thing. --Zombie Killer 1995 13:26, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

Also do a video so I understand better. --Zombie Killer 1995 13:26, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

Ok thank's edit the Beretta 92fs please. --Zombie Killer 1995 13:42, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

Ok now you've lost me again look I'm going to continue with what I intended to do in the first place, come back in 2 hours and check that I've done it right if not edit the way you do it if that's all right. --Zombie Killer 1995 13:50, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

But that's the thing I don't understand it well bits of it I do, Look I don't mean to be rude but check back on my page in a couple of hours and edit it right please. Sorry if I have cause you and others distress. --Zombie Killer 1995 14:03, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

@@ Line 54: / Line 54: @@
 *Ok, since you apparently think Sinodefence.com is an authority on this, [http://www.sinodefence.com/army/artillery/type83sp_152mm.asp here's them calling it a Type 69 rocket propelled grenade launcher], [http://www.sinodefence.com/organisation/ground-forces/pap.asp here's them doing it again], and for a bonus [http://eng.mod.gov.cn/IntlMilitary/2011-04/03/content_4235795.htm here's the PRC Ministry of Defense's website using the term]. So even they agree with me. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:46, 18 April 2011 (CDT)
+**I think I've well and truly demonstrated that regardless of origin, everyone from laymen to professionals to people writing in an entirely different language understands that RPG is a term meaning rocket propelled grenade that describes a type of weapon, or in the case of several of the articles I linked, a ''level of armour protection'' for vehicles based on the understanding that an RPG is a weapon with defined qualities; hardly just "simple language." Maybe that type is loosely defined, but then so is "battle rifle" (especially whether a battle rifle has to be produced in a selective fire version; I've heard that both ways from various sources) and I don't see you arguing we shouldn't use that. Incidentally, can you tell me ''where'' you found good evidence that RPG is actually a backronym rather than the match being simple coincidence? Other than "everyone says so?" See, [http://www.popsci.com/archive-viewer?id=AyEDAAAAMBAJ&pg=65&query=rocket here's] an issue of ''Popular Mechanics'' from 1945, four years before the RPG-2, and they're calling bazooka rounds "rocket grenades." Under the heading "propelled hollow charges."<br><br> And, yes, I would revert that. It's a pointless alteration that doesn't make articles better; whether the writer chooses to say "M4," "Colt M4," "Colt M4 carbine" or "M4 carbine" is really entirely up to them. M4 carbine is actually ''more'' correct in that case, since it is, after all, a "model 4 carbine," not just a "model 4." Same with the RPG; the way the Chinese system works is it's a 19XX year-type whatever it is, so "Type 69 RPG" ("1969 year-type RPG") is far more correct than just "Type 69." Similarly, you could say Type 69, Type 69 RPG, or Type 69 rocket launcher; all are right.<br><br>In fact, per your objection on the basis that RPG rounds don't have to be rocket propelled; RPG is just as ''technically'' right as "antitank grenade launcher," given the RPG-7 and knockoffs therein can fire anti-personnel rounds. Indeed, RPG is ''more'' correct in English since a self-propelled projectile would not normally be described as just "grenade." Remember, the Wiki uses American terminology, so if Norinco type-classified it as the Type 69 Glorious Revolutionary People's Sausage Projector, we'd still call it a Type 69 RPG since RPG is the Western term for weapons of this type. It's the same reason you wouldn't call a mortar projectile for a British mortar a bomb (the correct British term, but not correct in US English) and wouldn't call a German mortar a grenade launcher ("grenade" tends to have a much broader meaning in other languages, I've noticed).<br><br>Bottom line: there's no need to change it if it ''doesn't'' say something, but it's more accurate if it does and certainly nothing that should be altered as if it's not right. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:45, 18 April 2011 (CDT)
+== MP5 tables ==
+Thanks for converting the MP5 page entries into the table format.  In the future, please place the year of the film or series at the end of the table (in keeping the format established) and please arrange earliest year first.   You did a lot of work on it already, so don't worry about the ones you've done so far.    --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 18:22, 21 April 2011 (CDT)
+== Zombie Killer 1995 ==
+So I just change the size then it's ok yeah.
+Ok am confused wikicode what the heck is that, and what do you mean by signing my messages.
+Ok I kind of get you, so your saying I have to get the images from this website and add my signature to the photo --[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 13:19, 7 May 2011 (CDT) <-- this thing here so it's like this --->   --[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] so like that.
+ But I'm still a bit iffy on the how thing is there some sort of video I can watch or you could but on youtube for me so I can under stand better.--[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 13:22, 7 May 2011 (CDT)
+Ok what's with that box thing in my last message is that the signature thing. --[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 13:26, 7 May 2011 (CDT)
+Also do a video so I understand better.
+--[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 13:26, 7 May 2011 (CDT)
+Ok thank's edit the Beretta 92fs please. --[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 13:42, 7 May 2011 (CDT)
+Ok now you've lost me again look I'm going to continue with what I intended to do in the first place, come back in 2 hours and check that I've done it right if not edit the way you do it if that's all right. --[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 13:50, 7 May 2011 (CDT)
+But that's the thing I don't understand it well bits of it I do, Look I don't mean to be rude but check back on my page in a couple of hours and edit it right please. Sorry if I have cause you and others distress. --[[User:Zombie Killer 1995|Zombie Killer 1995]] 14:03, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

User talk:BurtReynoldsMoustache: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 19:03, 7 May 2011

Contents

Ok, now that I've fixed all that

Type 69

Demonstration that RPG is a term in official use

MP5 tables

Zombie Killer 1995

Navigation menu

User talk:BurtReynoldsMoustache: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 19:03, 7 May 2011

Ok, now that I've fixed all that

Type 69

Demonstration that RPG is a term in official use

MP5 tables

Zombie Killer 1995

Navigation menu

Search