User talk:82.182.76.119

IBA

The image you have posted is older, of poor quality, of indeterminable copyright status and also a land warrior prototype. Why do you think it better illustrates the topic? Marcus Qwertyus 10:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Somewhat less good quality, sure. It's a picture of the first version of the Interceptor body armour, surely it must represent the system better than a picture of a experimental version? Personally I have yet to see an article about the Sherman tank, where the first picture is of an experimental version never used. And seeing as how there's only two pictures all together of the body armour I find it more important to include a picture of the basic original vest. 82.182.76.119 (talk) 12:51, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

It's more or less the same armor system procured at present. The M1 Abrams article uses a lead image with a prototype TUSK kit. Marcus Qwertyus 14:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

The thing is that that article contains 25 pictures of the subject of the article, whilst the Interceptor body armour article only contains two pictures. A compromise with both pictures/a better picture of the basic original vest wouldn't be all too horrible. 82.182.76.119 (talk) 17:00, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Narang night raid‎

Please do stop battling over tags and help to fix the article instead. The article has been edited extensively. You have to show that there is something factual inaccurate so that it can be fixed. Where? That's going on for over a month now without you actually showing us where there is still something factually inaccurate. Where? IQinn (talk) 23:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not hindering you from creating a decent article. I've written why I put the tag up there, and since it hasn't been solved yet the tag should remain. Be advised, I do check the article's talk page once or twice a day, so we can keep the discussion there where it's more relevant. 82.182.76.119 (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

---