Wikipedia:Peer review/Bomb disposal/archive1

Bomb disposal

This page feels like its got potential, but it seems to be a bit stuck. Difficulty over possible systemic bias, a debate over how much info to publish on specifics of bomb disposal, and the like. If some new reviewers could come and add to it and also give some clear criteria as to what needs to be done to improve this article, it would be excellent. ManicParroT 06:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main article is too short to introduce the overall topic. It defines the term rather providing an overview to the subject. Needs more footnotes. Needs context. You jump into the history too quickly before I really know what it is all about. I think it is fine to leave out the specific how-to's... Glenn4pr 09:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A quick glance:
- "Fuze" -> "fuse". At least, for 90% of all people. Especially seeing as the opening section is on Britain.
- External links need to be turned into footnotes.
- "What Else Do EOD Operators Do?" - for one, it shouldn't all be capitalised, and secondly, it just isn't encyclopaedic in tone.

Hope these help. Seegoon 18:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Here is a prime example I gave on the page about ignorant people adding where they shouldn't. FUSE is a firing device consisting of a black powder time-delay usually functioned by ignition. FUZE is any chemical, mechanical, electro-mechanical or other firing set designed to detonate the main charge or booster in a munition.

These are NOT interchangeable.

What Else Do Bomb Technicians Do? (changed to EOD Operators, a specific type of Bomb Technician) was taken from an entry in an encyclopedia.

The article has been peer reviewed. It was written by a peer.

-Shawn High Order1

The article is pretty fine, but:

it needs three things: in-line citations, in-line citations and in-line citations. Just imagine someone putting a {{fact}} tag after every sentence and think of adding citations there, the more, the merrier. I converted the two that were the to proper format, if you're not sure how to follow that scheme you could use my User:Halibutt/REF boilerplate (these are shortened versions of the three most popular citation templates; just copy-paste within <ref name="Author"></ref> tags and fill them with info)
Besides, there's plenty of good pics there, how about moving some of them up?
What does Longest Walk mean? Is it the name of the street? Or perhaps a reference to some book?

The lead is far from comprehensive. Could do with three paras: one for general description (it's there already), one for a brief history and one for some overview of techniques used in defusing explosives. Generally the lead should offer a brief summary of the article, consider it an article on its own. One should be able to find all the basics there. //Halibu tt 14:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 14:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool your jets. Fuck's sake. "Ignorant people"? I was trying to help. Screw you. Seegoon 17:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Longest Walk

The term "The Longest Walk" or sometimes "The Lonely Walk", was a term founded at the Felix Centre and 321 EOD and used by EOD operators to describe that moment you don the suit and make a manual approach. Its a reflection on how that short distance can seem a very long way when your walking upto a suspect device. There is a book by the title written by "Peter Birchall" and it uses a very famous photograph of an ATO in Northern Ireland making a manual approach to a car bomb under a religious sign declaring "Prepare to meet thy god!" "TheNose | Talk" 17:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fuse or Fuze

Well, Fuse is used in by the majority of NATO, European, Commonwealth & African countries to describe anything from a simple burning fuse, through to a complicated VT or proximity fuse on artillery or air dropped munitions. "TheNose | Talk" 17:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found this strange as well, and a quick search lead me here. I'm changing it, now. — Zioroboco 14:32, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Just looked over the rest of this page - that'll teach me to skim-read. I still believe that fuze looks strange, and causes me to do a double-take. It seems to me that the meaning of these two words has only marginally drifted apart as technology progressed, and any real semantic difference - at least to the laity - is arguable. Still, I've looked around, and I see that both words are used. I will revert my edit. — Zioroboco 14:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Equipment

We have very little in the way of equipment, I added a short note on the invention of the wheelbarrow, but there is little else.

Perhaps Hook & Line, xray, pigsticks\ID (disruptors), these are all in the public domain a anyway and have been for about 20yrs or so.