Template talk:WMD
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm reverting your edit for three reasons, one, you broke a lot of formatting by throwing it to the left side. Two, this will conflict with existing see also / related changes sections in articles. Three, let's talk about it first. ;)
-~-Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:46, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
Jiang is correct that this is technically not a series, since the articles are only loosely connected. However, if you do want to format it as a series, the box should at least be in the top right corner of the respective article, not at the bottom right (e.g. American Civil War).--Eloquence* 23:46, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
- Ah, I looked over the series page and didn't notice that... any tips on format, or is it all there? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:53, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
This is not a series and should therefore not be made one. IF you insist on keeping this, then at least make it into a footer. This, being placed at the bottom in vertical format, created extra white space on the left side of the page due to vertical expansion. But how is this different from an ordinary "see also" list? --Jiang 00:15, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I didn't realize that the "top" of a series was supposed to be an overview. I'm in the process of creating such an overview page that would be appropriate to such a series. I have no preference as to a sidebar or a footer, I just stole the code from an existing "series" article. Votes on whether footer or sidebar is better? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:26, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Taiwan
Taiwan's government makes large weapons purchases from the United States and there is an article about its weapons program, including discussion of the PRC's assertion that it would invade if it thought Taiwan were developing or trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Whatever one's opinions about its legal status, one must admit that people in Taiwan claiming to be its government are buying large quantities of weapons under their own auspices, not those of the People's Liberation Army. It would be rather silly to change the article about that phenomenon (Taiwan and weapons of mass destruction) to "Taiwan (part of China) and weapons of mass destruction," wouldn't it? Yes, it would -- and it looks silly on the template, so I'm changing it back. --Jpbrenna 03:54, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Explosives
As of 2005, the Dept of Homeland Security is adding explosives to the Weapons of Mass Destruction curriculum that is being taught to emergency personnel. I added it to this list. If something else makes a better link (I couldn't find anything in the explosives article that dealth with weapons), please change it. But the category is now considered a type of WMD. Rt66lt 01:04, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think we are just using DHS's definitions of these things. I don't think that is a standard definition of WMD. Anyway, the U.S. military uses explosives every day but nobody generally considers those WMDs. People use explosives for all sorts of civilian purposes as well and those aren't WMDs. Just because explosives are part of the training course doesn't mean they are part of the definition of WMD. --Fastfission 02:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Italy should be added
After all, Italy used poison gas against Ethiopia in the Second Italo-Abyssinian War. A2Kafir 00:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] PRC and ROC
I think that People's Republic of China and the Republic of China (Taiwan) should be kept simply as "China (PRC)" and "Taiwan (ROC)" on this list. These are by far correlate with what English-speaking readers will recognize in an abbreviated form, and take up a lot less room that "People's Rep. of China" and "Rep. of China (Taiwan)". The latter approach doesn't seem to clarify anything to me and takes up a lot more horizontal room, making an already-big template even bigger. Just my two cents. --Fastfission 01:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nuclear weapons
I removed the "nuclear weaponry" subsection, and created a separate template based on it ({{nuclear weapons}}). The reasoning was thus: not all WMDs are nuclear, of course, and there's no need to have a link to "nuclear weapons design" and other nuclear-specific articles from most of the WMD articles. Those that could use such links can use the new template. Simple as that, and makes the WMD template a much more manageable size. --Fastfission 00:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why is Korea listed?
Like...why should it be on that list.
- I should think the answer to this should be fairly obvious. You might have to try being a little more articulate if you want to suggest that it shouldn't be listed on this list. --Fastfission 18:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Libya and Egypt
Both have chemical weapons to my knowledge, should they be added? raptor 09:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
