Talk:Body armor

Military history: Technology / Weaponry C‑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 articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms 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.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

This article really needs split into a 'Modern' and 'Pre-Modern' pages. Theblindsage (talk) 03:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! I came here looking for information on ancient and traditional body armor and nothing in this article is relevant. 209.136.39.130 (talk) 12:02, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Historical vs Contemperary armor

Looks like a great article. I just noticed that while the article talks about many historical issues, the pictures all seem contemporary. Its probably harder to get pictures of older examples (though these may be easier to get with useful licenses), but it would seem any that can be found would help the tone of the imagery match that of the article. --Δζ (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Main explaination

"Personal armor (or personal armour) is a type of light armor used to protect police forces, private citizens and private security guards or bodyguards, whereas hard-plate reinforced vests are mainly worn by combat soldiers, police tactical units and hostage rescue teams."

--> change to: "Personal armor (or personal armour) is the whole of protecting clothing, designed to absorb and/or deflect slashing, bludgeoning, and penetrating attacks. They were historically used to protect combat soldiers, whereas today, they are also used to protect police forces, private citizens and private security guards or bodyguards. 2 types exist: regular non-plated personal armour (used by the people mentioned above) and hard-plate reinforced personal armour, which is used by combat soldiers, police tactical units and hostage rescue teams.

changed it allready, kept duplicate of change here just in case. 91.182.245.136 (talk) 12:49, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where does this shot go?

File:Japanese World War II bulletproof vest.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geofferybard (talk • contribs) 21:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note the lede should not include use of a dog it raises a POV issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geofferybard (talk • contribs) 21:32, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How is this off-topic/POV? This article is intended to cover ballistic materials that are intended to protect flesh. It is good to get an image covering non-human use of armor and this counters systemic human bias.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus Qwertyus (talk • contribs)

The Lead should reflect and summarize the main article. Dogs are not mentioned in the entire article. (Hohum ^@) 16:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Law Enforcement

The law enforcement section has pretty obvious bias and sources only from the US, whilst referring to worldwide statistics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.132.97.132 (talk) 14:26, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 January 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 11:42, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personal armor → Body armor – Primary name. Used in legislation in US, commonwealth and EU jurisdictions, used much more commonly in books, google and bing results (below). -- Callinus (talk) 07:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Google books ngram comparison [1] shows "body armor" more common, and British spelling goes back to 1800.
"personal armor" bing 34,000 google 71,000 google books 3,210
"personal armour" bing 10,000 google 24,000 google books 1,310
"body armor" "body+armor"&go=Submit bing 5.4 million google 8.1 million google books 139,000
"body armour" "body+armour"&go=Submit bing 2.1 million google 1.1 million google books 54,000

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Callinus (talk • contribs)

Support; seems a clear case of WP:COMMONNAME. InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{InsertTalkHere} 04:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom/common name. Calidum T|C 03:35, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Spelling

Hold on a second, the armour article uses the spelling with the "u". Same with vehicle armour, armoured fighting vehicle, armoured warfare etc. Does this article then not violate WP:CONSISTENCY? Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See MOS:ENGVAR. 9³ 23:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Body armor. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130730021423/http://people.stfx.ca/mnewton/westernciv7celts.pdf to http://people.stfx.ca/mnewton/westernciv7celts.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071219224034/http://www.nps.gov/archive/colo/Jthanout/HisArmur.html to http://www.nps.gov/archive/colo/Jthanout/HisArmur.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.iso-standard.org/25202.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.iso-standard.org/25203.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.iso-standard.org/25204.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120421190415/http://ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com/scopes/scopes.asp?fn=0752.html to http://ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com/scopes/scopes.asp?fn=0752.html

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

CoverMe-Seat Deployed.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:51, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

US Military Ratings

After the Mogadishu Mile the US military started a higher rating system for powerful threats. (example: loPSYWJyGjY)

MIL-IV: 7.62x54mm AP, 7.62x51mm M61, 5.45x39mm 7N22
MIL-V: 5.45x39mm 7N24, .338 Ball, 9.3x64mm Brenneke
MIL-VI: .338 AP, 7.62x54mm 7N33, 7.62x54mm 7N37, 5.45x39mm 7N39
MIL-VII: .338 SLAP
MIL-VIII: 12.7x108mm Ball
MIL-IX: 12.7x108mm APDS, 14.5x114mm Ball
MIL-X: 14.5x114mm AP LeanZambia (talk) 03:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shields

Hello, friends. I have never edited and am doing so now for the first time, but would like you all to consider removing shield from the "protected areas" section, as it doesn't really fit and seems more like equipment.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.97.194 (talk)

Subject line about laws.

On the Felony page, it mentions how felons may lose permission to possess body armor. May be useful to mention this (and other) laws surrounding the use of body armor. Holdonspirit (talk) 07:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]