Talk:All-purpose lightweight individual carrying equipment

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

ALICE clips

Needs to expand on the role of the loose metal clips, and why making them loose seemed like a good idea at the time. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:41, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Common term is E -Tool

Entrenching tool, not Intrenching tool 216.160.223.19 (talk) 23:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Intrenching? Entrenching?

I feel the need to point out that it would appear that intrenching is the word of choice. However, I believe that entrenching would be the better word, as according to some online articles, intrenching is an older more outdated term. Therefore, I say that we should change intrenching to entrenching due to its current relevance. 67.135.4.210 (talk) 16:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it looks like entrenching became for favored style about 100 years ago. I'm fine if it changes, but don't see it as important. Dicklyon (talk) 03:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Sentence Case

@Dicklyon has moved the page from "All-Purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment" (proper noun case) to "All-purpose lightweight individual carrying equipment" (sentence case). I think this move was done in error. "All-Purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment" appears to be a proper noun. Reference 1 also capitalizes each word, and references 3 and 4 (while they use all caps when naming ALICE) capitalize each component, implying that it's all a collection of proper names. Dicklyon, am I missing something? I'm a relatively new editor, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was a part of the MOS I missed or something. EducatedRedneck (talk) 00:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalizing words in phrases to define an initialism is a common style, not implying anything about proper name status. It is not WP's style to use caps for that. Capitalization in sources is very mixed, so per MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS, we default to lowercase, avoiding unnecessary capitalization. Dicklyon (talk) 02:53, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that reference 2 (US Army Field Manual 21-15) has it all lowercase, even when defining the initialism (ALICE). And reference 1 points out that it's a "designation" (not a name). It was military style to capitalize their designations (usually).
For more background, see the last few years of capitalization discussions summarized and linked at WT:MOSCAPS#Concluded, which includes these discussions of downcasing military equipment terms:
Dicklyon (talk) 02:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your detailed response! I appreciate you taking the time to point me in the right direction. You've convinced me; pointing to Reference 2 was particularly useful to demonstrate that at least one US Government publication doesn't use Title Case, which makes the interpretation of References 1 and 3 as stylistic, not prescriptive. Thanks again for taking the time to discuss! EducatedRedneck (talk) 14:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It feels very odd to me seeing it in lowercase, as my experience with them from the military (back in the late 90's/early 2000's when we still were issued ALICE clip rucksacks and LBEs) was that they were always capitalized; but it's correct that the military is rather inconsistent about it's actual stylization in documentation, and we can't cite to an unspoken practice nor personal experience. Notably though, the ALICE manual uses the term in all caps: [1] (I think this is the same document, or possibly a revision, as reference 3); and also included in the linked list of capitalization discussions summarized above was this: Talk:Ballistic Missile Early Warning System#Article title – Use sentence case? Result: Title case, since it's the name of a specific system which seems applicable here, as we're referring to a system, not an individual vehicle (like the other examples). I'm also not sure that the fact it's inconsistently used -- in lowercase on an FM that's about general wear of equipment (not specifically ALICE gear) and presented in a graphically stylized manner vs. uppercase on the actual manual for the specific system as prepared by Natick -- implies that the interpretation is stylistic vs prescriptive. It could just as easily be an error, or an intentional choice to deviate from the standard on a single document due to it's format (see, e.g. the A-10 pilot's coloring book. I'd also add that fully capitalized is consistent with how we're currently utilizing MOLLE (within the article), Pouch Attachment Ladder System (as a title), Improved Load Bearing Equipment, Modular Tactical Vest and most other similar terms for comparable attachment systems, load bearing gear, and other equipment carriage systems. See, e.g. Family of Improved Load Bearing Equipment, Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops, Combat Integrated Releasable Armor System, Full Spectrum Battle Equipment Amphibious Assault Vest, etc. As such, I'd prefer to see it capitalized, as I don't see why it's not a proper name (and thus capitalized per MOS), though I can live with it the other way.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 19:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly true that there are still a ton of military designations being treated by Wikipedia as if they are proper names. But discussions usually move them toward lowercase, since being consistent with guidelines is the only way to move toward consistency in general. The BMEWS was a specific product, while ALICE is really a design specification, to be made by anyone. Dicklyon (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it's more that "there is a general consensus towards treating military designations as proper names" by historical example, and *some* specific discussions have moved towards lowercase (particularly around vehicles) while most others have not. And I don't think that it makes much of a difference that ALICE is a design specification made by multiple manufacturers. So is, for instance, Battle Dress Uniform -- BDUs are a system specification, but they're individually supplied by Propper, Tru-spec, etc. So are the USMC Flame Resistant Organizational Gear, so is the Army Combat Shirt (made by Crye, Propper, Patagonia, etc.) All of which are closer conceptually to ALICE (being individual soldier issued clothing and equipment) than the examples involving armored vehicles. The guidelines are that we capitalize proper names; I'm not really getting the argument as to how this isn't a proper name. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of those are quite commonly lowercase in sources, e.g. battle dress uniform. Just because they make an acronym of it doesn't make it a proper name. Dicklyon (talk) 01:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, and it makes sense as those sources would be including scenarios where they're referring to the general concept of a battle dress uniform, as in the concept of "battle dress"; as opposed to the specific 1980's era Battle Dress Uniform (and the same concept for, e.g. the general concept of a "combat shirt" vs. the Army Combat Shirt, FWIW). But that's not an issue that ALICE has; this article isn't about the generic concept of "all purpose, lightweight, individual carrying equipment," or it'd be Ultralight backpacking.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 03:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And FWIW, I think the argument for decapitalizing M-1956 load-carrying equipment is significantly stronger than for ALICE.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That "Family of ..." article is a strange one, based on a single source that uses "Family of" only in the title, and in the lead sentence to define the acronym. And then the whole article is basically an over-capitalized list of things that are not proper names. Is there even a notable topic here? It seems like a good example of the kind of thing we should be fixing. Dicklyon (talk) 01:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's probably only a single source because there's no expectation of the name "Family of Improved Load-bearing Equipment" being challenged. The article's content could use some improvement and additional sourcing, but that's not relevant to a discussion about article *titles*, which is correct in this case.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 03:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So we should also be capitalizing Patrol Pack and Repair Kit and Canteen w/ Cover and Idividual [sic] First Aid Kit as that doc does? Dicklyon (talk) 16:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That depends on the usage. When referring to the generalized concept of an IFAK, then no; when referring to a specific type of IFAK, then yes (which is, in fact, how IFAK's are typically referred to in the military). But I'd appreciate it if we can stick to the topic of this particular discussion though, which is ALICE, and not go too far down the rabbit-hole of analyzing other pages whose only relevance to *this* discussion is a comparison. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 17:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:All-purpose_lightweight_individual_carrying_equipment"