Talk:United States hand grenades

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

are there grenades that kill/ harm you without the use of fragments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.83.12.5 (talk • contribs) .

There are a number of different types of grenades. A Concussion grenade (called various "assault"/"offensive"/"blast") grenade typically only using explosives and produces few fragments. See the Hand grenade article for more. Megapixie 11:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Can someone possibly reassess and see if we can move this up from "start" class? -- Thatguy96 01:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Reassessed and still think it should be start. While it is decently referenced the article does not make clear it is comprehensive (ie complete). Furhtermore, the article is more an expanded list than anything else. There should be at least some introduction about the history of the hand grenade in the US.

It is also not clear why WWII is taken to start the modern era (in Europe we would start the modern era by about 1600 ;-); why does this article not give a complete overview of all US hand grenades????

In brief: Many open questions as to the context and the completeness of this article that have to be adressed in the prose before a better level can be awarded. Arnoutf 22:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Appropriate title?

As according to Wikipedia guidelines WP:NAME and my own personal opinion, the use of "Survey" in the article title is redundant and excessively complicates it. Furthermore, it misleads the reader, as naming this article "Survey of ..." gives the impression that this article is about an official survey carried out by the US Armed Forces or something like that. Hence, I advocate a move to Modern United States hand grenades. Ariedartin JECJY ^Talk 06:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

There's still the issue brought up about the use of the word "modern" as well, which I agree with needing to be modified (either in name or in content of this page). I am still not entirely sure how its redundant and complicated either. The idea behind using the word "survey" when I created this article (and the one on 40mm grenades and aircraft gun pods), was that this page would not necessarily provide a definitive amount of information on any one of the systems mentioned. That being said, I am largely indifferent to a name change, though I feel it should incorporate to other issues raised. -- Thatguy96 10:42, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, most articles start off as stubs anyway, so there shouldn't be the intention of keeping the information brief. Just the subject of the article is enough - unless its a list, there is no need to create an excessively long title. I'm just doing my rounds standardizing the articles according to the WP:MoS. Granted, since "modern" might be a wee bit subjective, I suggest something else. How about Hand grenades used by the United States? =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariedartin (talk • contribs) 15:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hand Grenades of the United States or United States hand grenades (Which allows for the inclusion of a section dealing with pre-WWI hand grenades) is probably the best. That way all concerned parties are happy. I think taking out "survey of modern" from the title, leaving "United States hand grenades," presents the shortest and most accurate title. Feel free to make a similar change to Survey of modern US 40 mm grenades and Survey of U.S. Aircraft Gun Pods. -- Thatguy96 15:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)