Talk:M1126 infantry carrier vehicle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cinderella157 (talk | contribs) at 00:56, 30 March 2024 (→‎Requested move 18 March 2024: S). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Move

There is a proposal here to move this article to lowercase.--Pattont/c 12:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

M1126 Infantry Carrier Vehicle. 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.

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) 23:55, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

M1126 Infantry Carrier Vehicle. 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.

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) 09:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 May 2022

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed titles at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 06:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


– Strykers with the double V-hull upgrade have a new M-number. Otherwise use some construction like "Stryker Infantry Carrier Vehicle." Schierbecker (talk) 05:36, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, this is what redirects are for. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, sounds like a variant? Add a variants section for the double hull type & use a redirect. Referencer12 (talk) 01:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
T-54/T-55 is a similar situation. The vehicle is replacing the earlier model one for one, but there are not enough changes to justify two articles. Schierbecker (talk) 02:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the awkward proposal is unlikely for any reader to type. The new variants are upgrades. If significant portions of the inventory are upgraded and the upgraded variant becomes the WP:COMMONNAME, then rename to that (at that time). – Reidgreg (talk) 12:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not sure why these articles even exist, some are quite poorly sourced or sourced only to the US Army (primary source) and offer little encyclopedic information beyond the parent Stryker article. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 18 March 2024

– Per

WP:LOWERCASE. "When using numerical model designation, the word following the designation should be left uncapitalized (for example, 'M16 rifle' or 'M109 howitzer') unless it is a proper noun.". Also for consistency. Please note the related RMs at Talk:T1 light tank#Requested move 19 February 2024, Talk:M6 heavy tank#Requested move 21 February 2024, Talk:A7 medium tank#Requested move 22 February 2024, Talk:M1918 Ford 3-ton tank#Requested move 22 February 2024, and Talk:M1 armored car#Requested move 25 February 2024. Please note the insertion of "and" and removal of a comma in the title for the M1135 (the last one). This has a significant effect on the meaning of the vehicle description. I think the current title is basically an incorrect description. See this and this. I do see one source using the current title and another one without the "and". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Support per nom and consensus in previous RMs. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and to be
    MOS:ABBREXP.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  10:06, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I think that's a misreading of
MOS:SIGCAPS which applies to capitalisation when writing article text, as opposed to here were we are dicussing capitalization used by entities off-wiki in naming something. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:47, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]