Talk:Explosives/Draft: Difference between revisions
imported>Mary Ash |
imported>Milton Beychok m (→Part of my review that you asked for: new section) |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:Just as an example, PBX-9404 is not an acronym, but a designation for a mixture of 94% [[HMX (explosive)]], 3% NC, 3% Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (CEF); I don't know what NC is. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 02:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC) | :Just as an example, PBX-9404 is not an acronym, but a designation for a mixture of 94% [[HMX (explosive)]], 3% NC, 3% Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (CEF); I don't know what NC is. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 02:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Part of my review that you asked for == | |||
Howard, when I started my review, the first thing that caught my eye were the three images. One of them had a very dark background that made the text hard to read ... so I revised the background to white, and I also cleaned up the somewhat blurry text in that image. The I added credit line to all three images. Hope those changes are okay by you. | |||
I will try to review the content tomorrow ... but keep in mind that I know very little about this subject. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 02:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:59, 17 August 2010
The {{subpages}} template is designed to be used within article clusters and their related pages.
However, it cannot function on sub-subpage talk pages..Please continue discussion at [[../../]], or return to the Draft subsubpage.
Fixed typo
Changed firing pink to firing pin.Mary Ash 02:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- -) You must admit that sounds like something that Combat Barbie would use. Howard C. Berkowitz 02:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- ROFL the vision of combat Barbie...where's G.I. Joe when you need him :-)Mary Ash 02:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- -) You must admit that sounds like something that Combat Barbie would use. Howard C. Berkowitz 02:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Clarification
It would help to have some of the acronyms spelled out such as PBXN7. What's that?? Thanks!Mary Ash 02:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- As far as I know, that's a designation, not an acronym. My guess is that it derives from PBX (explosive), with various additives. [1] describes it simply as an explosive composition from China Lake.
- Just as an example, PBX-9404 is not an acronym, but a designation for a mixture of 94% HMX (explosive), 3% NC, 3% Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (CEF); I don't know what NC is. Howard C. Berkowitz 02:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Part of my review that you asked for
Howard, when I started my review, the first thing that caught my eye were the three images. One of them had a very dark background that made the text hard to read ... so I revised the background to white, and I also cleaned up the somewhat blurry text in that image. The I added credit line to all three images. Hope those changes are okay by you.
I will try to review the content tomorrow ... but keep in mind that I know very little about this subject. Milton Beychok 02:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)