Talk:Daimler armoured car

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daimler armoured car article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Land vehicles / Technology / Weaponry / British / European / World War II

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 a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military land vehicles task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

On 19 October 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Daimler Armoured Car to Daimler armoured car. The result of the discussion was moved.

Daimler Armored Cars in Iraq

We can now add Iraq to the list of countries which used these vehicles after the Second World War. There is a photo of at least two of them in a parade taken in Baghdad sometime in the late 1940s or early 1950s. This is a photograph that can be found on page 10 of Iraqi Army Equipment 1930-2017 in the Internet Archive. SASH155 (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2022 (UTC)SASH155[reply]

Requested move 19 October 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daimler Armoured Car → Daimler armoured car – Like other armoured cars, not a proper name, frequently lowercase in sources. Dicklyon (talk) 04:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose proper name, frequently capitalised in sources. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as stated above, it should be capitalized. Ktkvtsh (talk) 01:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC) I'd like to remove my vote. Ktkvtsh (talk) 15:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like other armoured cars, sources mostly use lowercase, with an uptick in caps after Wikipedia capped it. Still not consistently capitalized in sources, so per MOS:CAPS, we shouldn't be capping it. Dicklyon (talk) 23:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Wikipedia's guidelines consider whether capitalisation is consistent, not just frequent. The NGram comparison above shows a lack of consistent capitalization. "Daimler" is a brand; "armoured car" is a vehicle type description, like many other similar cases that have been discussed before, including many cases listed at User:Dicklyon/MIL precedents, including Humber armoured car, King armored car, M1 armored car, T7 armored car, and T27 armored car. WP:TITLECONSISTENCY also applies. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per BarrelProof's reasoning. Tony (talk) 11:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per MOS:CAPS, Armoured car is a description of the vehicle like dual-cab or utility. It is certainly not a true proper nou|name, which is not descriptive (per Collins Dictionary). Furthermore, this article is not about a particular model of Daimler armoured car but two different models - the Mk I and the Mk II. Most recent ngram figures (see here) place capitalisation at 73%. However, ngrams do not distinguish usage in prose from usage in headings, captions etc where title case is expected. It is usual to apply a 10% allowance for such usage. There is also a large amount of random noise (eg large fluctuations in usage from year to year). Smoothing the curve further to reduce the background noise further reduces the apparent capitalisation (eg 62% here). While it might be argued that capitalisation is approaching the threshold of a "substantial majority", it is not yet there. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:51, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per MOS:CAPS, WP:NCCAPS, MOS:MILCAPS, WP:CONSISTENT. The proper name here is Daimler, the rest is description, and often lower-case in external sources. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:43, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per Andy Dingley's reasoning, even though I'm sure it will inevitably be forced through by Dicklyon (what an appropriate name!) and co, as it always is. RadiculousJ (talk) 21:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.