Jump to content

Talk:List of military clothing camouflage patterns/Archive 1

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

Needs more pictures

[edit]

I believe that more of the camo patterns listed here should be linked to articles with pictures of that camo pattern. --Redlock 14:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely! I started the page in the first place to consolodate all the patterns in a central place so that users can see which patterns have pages and which don't and understand the concept better. I also created a category and wikilinked many of teh camo pattern pages together. I then proceeded to create several pages for specific patterns (where I could find information or public domain pics). It's up to the users to expand it as much as possible... that is the idea/joy of Wikipedia :-) --Deon Steyn 07:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Divide by continents

[edit]

The list is growing nicely! I think we should keep the continental sub-division, because listing the patterns alphabetically is of limited use, if you know pattern name you can do a "find", but more likely you know the country or region and having like patterns together makes more sense? Deon Steyn 06:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I now have the continent further divided into country, this greatly helps reduce duplications and make the list far more useful.Deon Steyn 11:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current issue

[edit]

If possible I think we need to highlight or at least note the current issue camouflage patterns for each country. And also where known, the service dates. Deon Steyn 11:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have this data, go ahead. As I'm sure you know, solid dating is quite difficult with camouflage, Creation, trials, official vs. partial issues, and naming are often additional clouding factors. 81.104.47.20 20:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication

[edit]

Some countries like Vietnam, Thailand, Iraq, Libya (and more) show up way too often to be realistic. I think we should only list a country if the specific camouflage pattern was actually standard issue for a length of time as opposed to it being used by some party in that country.Deon Steyn 11:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Color versus Colour

[edit]

According to the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidelines on alternate spelling due to the national varieties of English (Wikipedia:MOS#National varieties of English) the spelling on this page should be 1) consistently of one variety and 2) of the British English variety, because the article is not tied to one specific country and it was started using British English. I appreciate that this case is borderline, but these are the only guidelines we have to go by and we can't have some instances of the "color" and some of "colour" on the same page. Please see these guidelines and make a case for abandoning them or interpreting them differently on this talk page before reverting again. --Deon Steyn 09:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

" the spelling on this page should be 1) consistently of one variety and 2) of the British English variety" - if they are direct quotes or proper names, they should not be changed. I'd argue that the names of the camouflage constitute proper names and should not be edited. On a page about armoured divisions, it would be acceptable to have "US 2d Armored Division" and "British 2nd Armoured Division", I feel this applies here with the names of the camouflage.Michael Dorosh 13:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

what would make reading this article easier (at least for me!) would be a grid of camouflage patterns, something like the discography pages for the bigger bands, where one just clicks on the image and is diverted to the relevant page. This would also allow comparisons between patterns from the one page. If I knew how to do it I would offer to help, but I'm not that good. What do other people think? Stephenjh 17:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

[edit]

I think this article should be renamed to "List of military camouflage patterns" or it should include other camouflage patterns (hunting etc).

Conversion of all sections to table format: completed!

[edit]

At last! I've completed conversion of all sections to table format! What do you think of my job guys?? --Henrickson User talk | Contribs 08:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job! This now opens up the possibility of sticking in some thumbnail images somewhere in the table instead of interruping the tables? Maybe in an existing column (since table is already wide), perhaps name or notes... like so?
 Germany (past and present)
Country/Timeline Camouflage pattern Used by Notes Other user(s) Years used
 West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany) Flecktarn
 Current issue of the German Armed Forces Albania, Austria, Belgium, Romania
or
 Germany (past and present)
Country/Timeline Camouflage pattern Used by Notes Other user(s) Years used
 West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany) Flecktarn Current issue of the German Armed Forces Albania, Austria, Belgium, Romania
— Deon Steyn (talk) 10:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, actually, I was planning to do it like this:
 Germany (past and present)
Country/Timeline Camouflage pattern Used by Notes Other user(s) Years used
 West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany)
Flecktarn
Place the pattern's name under the thumbnail 		Current issue of the German Armed Forces Albania, Austria, Belgium, Romania
Adding an extra column requires much more work (every section would need to be edited).
The next challenge will be to obtain pictures for patterns without pictures. I know a few websites where I can get those pictures and trace them in Adobe Illustrator, like I did for the M81 and M90. But first of all, I'll integrate the existing ones into the table. I think 50-60 px is a good thumbnail size. --Henrickson User talk | Contribs 00:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

other users

[edit]

Does this refer to current users, or anyone who has ever used it? --AtTheAbyss (talk) 14:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The column "Other user(s)" lists countries other than the one under "Country" which both uses the pattern currently or has used it in the past. There are a lot of missing entries, and listing them all for each pattern would take a lot of time. This is where I count on you guys to do it for us! --Henrickson User talk | Contribs 18:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got a correction to make. The pattern used by Malaysian forces are locally known as Harimau Belang, or in English as tiger stripes. So I'm taking the liberty to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amlisk (talk • contribs) 04:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CCU?

[edit]

While using the Wikipedia Cleaner to eliminate links to disambiguation pages, I came across "CCU". I searched and searched and could not find any use of that acronym that pertains to the article or the context. Maybe it was a mistake. At any rate, I removed the link for now, until this can be cleared up. Does anyone know what this is supposed to link to? —sdream93 (talk) 09:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ACU

[edit]

The Georgian Army also uses ACUPAT and MULTICAM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.74.229 (talk) 23:28, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Georgian Military not only uses DIGIT WOODLAND, but also MARPAT ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMightyGeneral (talk • contribs) 10:29, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ACU and Turkey

[edit]

Incorrect info,The new camo isnt same as ACU,even it's not digital,please remove acu pic. from turkey section.

Regards, ILGAR 212.253.228.33 (talk) 15:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited, added and removed some content related to current issue uniform pattern. To summarize; Azerbaijan and Turkey are currently issuing this pattern, It has not a specific name, so edited it as "Turkish Pattern", It is not digital or pixel based, so edited out any mentions, It has three variants for temperate, lush and winter climates, added, Some production and textile related info was unrelated to pattern, removed, Some info was plain bullshit, removed, İssued since '08, added.

Heruamarth (talk) 21:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you're right, but this like most other facts in the list is missing a source (reference). We should really have at least one source for every pattern here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. The problem is, there is really no official sources on this, I'll keep an eye out though.Heruamarth (talk) 18:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bundesgrenzschutz

[edit]

There is a mistake. The Bundesgrenzschutz belongs to the Federeal Republic of Germany, not to the German democratic Republic. Its now called "Bundespolizei". And I miss Libya. Cheers, --JJ20714 (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New title - use of word "clothing'

[edit]

In addition to the suggestion above that this article be title "list of military camouflage patterns", it should also be mentioned that this is about military 'clothing' camouflage patterns. There were patterns of camouflage for things like Gas Capes, rain capes, etc. The very first camouflage items that many countries had on inventory were actually equipment, not clothing - the zeltbahn comes to mind, the British anti-gas cape, etc. Not to mention AFV camouflage patterns, the aircraft of the First World War, even stahlhelm painting patterns, not to mention naval camouflage. These are all technically "camouflage patterns." The use of the word "clothing" would be most appropriate since that's what the article seems to be about, anyway.139.48.25.60 (talk) 21:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct. Since nobody has objected in nearly 2 years, let's go ahead and make that change. There should be other lists for equipment, both textiles and hard surfaces. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of military clothing camouflage patterns. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing, repetition

[edit]

This article has suffered from serious problems of inadequate sourcing and extensive repetition since at least 2012. Some potential sources are listed at the end but it is quite unclear which facts if any are in fact cited in them. The numerous claims about what different armed forces are up to (or were at some unspecified time, with weasel words like "present") are impossible to verify, so many of the claims may be inaccurate or simply wrong. To bring this article to a reasonable standard, like the main camouflage articles in the template, much of this will need to be deleted and rewritten.

The things that we appear to be able to source are the patterns themselves. I therefore suggest we make a list, as the title suggests, of patterns, each row to be cited, and each claim of use of the pattern in that row also to be cited.Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

[edit]
I've decided to make an attempt at the kind of rewrite I proposed above. The list puts patterns first, thus listing each pattern exactly once, and indeed listing its users exactly once, which I hope everyone can agree is a clear improvement on the previous list. I've listed only patterns which appear to be notable, and for which I was able to find sources. Similarly, I have listed only user nations for which I had written evidence. In nearly every case, there is an article and a bluelink for the name of the pattern - it would be desirable to make that 100% shortly. Obviously this is a more compact list than the previous one, but it contains much harder evidence, and all the patterns listed in the Camouflage template, which is clearly more satisfactory.
Therefore, if anyone wants to add a pattern, they should
a) create and cite an article on that pattern, preferably with a Commons photograph;
b) add it to the template;
c) add it to the list, complete with at least one reliable source as a reference.
Similarly, to add a user nation for a pattern, a reference is required.
Words like "current" and "now" have been avoided: please name the year of introduction if at all possible.
I am sorry if any work you did has been hidden; of course it is not lost, as it is in the article history, and if you can find a source for such a hidden fact, feel free to add it back to the article with that as a reference. Otherwise, we must assume that the claim was hearsay, and as such not verifiable.
It may well be that some patterns like Lizard would benefit from a more detailed treatment, with multiple rows or other additional structure; if so, we should structure each additional entry with sufficient reliable sources as references. However, it seems to me that a single entry with a bluelink is not a bad structure for such cases. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:12, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pattern "families"

[edit]

Camopedia identifies the following families of patterns:

* Leaf pattern - US M1948 ERDL derivatives - same as Woodland pattern

Not quite

[edit]

The U.S. M1948 EDRL "Leaf Pattern" (Ripstop Nylon) was created BEFORE the Woodland Pattern (Brown, Black, Green); therefore it is the other way around, as Woodland "same as Leaf Pattern", not Leaf Pattern "same as Woodland pattern". I still have mine from Vietnam; the Wikipedia article picture does not show just how much light green (leaf green) was used. The Leaf Pattern M1948 was used for a longer time (1967 to 1981) than the Tiger Stripe (that I also wore at Vietnam for a short time (issued for only about a couple years; unofficially some units were having locally made Tiger Stripe fatigues from their issued O.D. Green Fatigues and O.D. Green Jungle Fatigues as the Vietnamese "Cottage Industry" of painting the "Tiger Stripe" Pattern on O.D. Green Fatigues using lead based paints "acquired" from the U.S. Army), as a U.S. Army Special Forces Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol and U.S. Army Airborne Ranger). After the Vietnam War everybody wanted to forget the Vietnam War and got rid of all reminders of the Vietnam War including the U.S. M1948 EDRL "Leaf Pattern" Uniform, including the Entire U.S. Military switching back to the Korean War Era O.D. Green Fatigues with an O.D. Green "Baseball" Cap (Cover); ONLY per U.S. D.O.D. Directives U.S. Military Special Warfare Forces and U.S. Army Rangers were Authorized to wear the U.S. M1948 ERDL "Leaf Pattern", with the U.S. Airborne Divisions of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) and the 82nd Airborne Division "Unofficially" wearing the U.S. M1948 ERDL "Leaf Pattern". The U.S. Marine Corps then "adopted" the U.S. M1948 "Leaf Pattern" from the surplus Vietnam U.S. Army M1948 ERDL "Leaf Pattern" Uniforms as the New U.S.M.C. Standard Issued "Utilities"; the Uniform supplier then had to rapidly produce U.S.M.C. "Utilities (Uniform) Covers (Hats)", stenciling the U.S.M.C. logo on the left upper pocket and on the "Utilities Covers".

M1948 Leaf Pattern as mostly leaf green as not like the later "Woodland" Battle Dress Uniform of dark green, brown, black. [1]

Eventually, all Opposition was defeated and the U.S. Army Battle Dress Uniform of the Woodland was created from the last versions of the U.S. M1948 ERDL "Leaf Pattern" in two versions the Temperate Ripstop Nylon and the Winter Cotton Polyester; as issued 4 Temperate Ripstop Nylon and 4 Winter Cotton Polyester (Requiring Unit Personnel to change to and from Temperate to Winter per Theater Commander Policies based on specific Day and Month.).

It was also U.S. Military Policy to never wear "Combat Uniforms", "Utilities" off from U.S. Military Installations, Facilities, etc. for the longest time as to why most Civilians or those not directly involved were unaware of what was happening. Authorized wear "Off Duty", "Off Base", "Off Post" was Civilian Clothing, Dress Uniforms (Class A or Class B); this was later relaxed to brief stops at "Convenience Stores" to briefly refuel a vehicle.

I wrote the same information to U.S. Army Times Publication.

Also missing is the U.S. Three Color Desert Pattern (Mostly tan, small amounts of very light brown and very light green) used since before the 1990 "First Gulf War" (U.S. Military Special Warfare sent to Iran Iraq Wars and CIA Operation Cyclone) till current (U.S. Military Special Warfare Forces since 2001 CIA Operation Neptune Spear; the 2001 U.S. Military Special Warfare Mission to Overthrow the Afghan Taliban Government to currently 2016 as U.S. Military Training and Assistance Teams Afghanistan) as the "Six Pattern" also known is also known as the "Bird Shit Uniform" due to the small white spots in the larger black spots does not match the terrain anywhere.

2001 Horse Soldiers of 9/11 Photo, Three Color Desert Pattern. [2]

Three Color Desert Pattern still in use 1980s to 2016 photos. [3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7] 

Nakamuradavid (talk) 17:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps all of these should be articles; and perhaps we should have a "Pattern Family" column in the list. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:03, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I do like your addition of patterns, one of the major benefits of this artical is that it shows the more obscure patterns used by counties that don't have an artical (ie Afghanistan), and do not believe that such a massive removed is warranted. In addition camopedia is like Wikipedia, and can be edited by anyone. I strongly recommend that both sections are kept, yours as a general summer, and the main artical for the detail that this is known so well for. 24.192.250.124 (talk) 15:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Then we need to be very careful not to rely too heavily on Camopedia, as it may technically be considered unreliable, just as we are not allowed to rely on other Wikipedia articles but must add reliable sources throughout. I have tried hard to preserve the sources from the previous version, which was in large part uncited, and thus free to be deleted by anyone at any time. The current version is far more defensible, but I'll be the first to say there is much more to do. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:48, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutly. I think the most critical thing to preserve from the previous one is which nations use which patterns. I know it's unsourced, but is there a way to preserve that? (Camopedia may help with some citations on this, they seemed pretty detailed) 24.192.250.124 (talk) 15:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Only with suitable sources, I'm afraid. I agree, we may be able to "harvest" sources from Camopedia, that would be the best thing to do. Please read my comments in earlier sections about the lack of structure and the massive repetition of the earlier version: for example as I noted there, the same patterns and the same lists of countries using those patterns are repeated (many times) in the structure, which is really not satisfactory, leaving aside the paucity of sources for such claims. I suggest we add facts back one at a time, each with a reference. People rely on Wikipedia, and that means we must have evidence for what we say. Thanks for your understanding. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:55, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.us-army.cz/files/LRRP_ok2_small.jpg
  2. ^ "Horse Soldiers".
  3. ^ "Why Green Berets are the smartest, most lethal fighters in the world". 2018-04-25.
  4. ^ "Why Green Berets are the smartest, most lethal fighters in the world". 2018-04-25.
  5. ^ "Why Green Berets are the smartest, most lethal fighters in the world". 2018-04-25.
  6. ^ "Why Green Berets are the smartest, most lethal fighters in the world". 2018-04-25.
  7. ^ "Why Green Berets are the smartest, most lethal fighters in the world". 2018-04-25.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of military clothing camouflage patterns. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of military clothing camouflage patterns. 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).

  • 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) 10:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of military clothing camouflage patterns. 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).

  • 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) 05:55, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of military clothing camouflage patterns. 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).

  • 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) 05:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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) 17:37, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_military_clothing_camouflage_patterns/Archive_1&oldid=1142342066"