Talk:Argentine Navy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Argentine Navy article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Uniforms and grooming standards

The info was out of date. Beards now authorized from Ensign and upwards. See section 1.10 of the latest Navy Uniform Regs (R.A-1-001). Goatees are authorized as well.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.114.160.225 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Naval Aviation

<quote>The COAN (Spanish: Comando de Aviación Naval) and not CANA as is commonly wrong shortened by some foreign bibliography, has 4 main airbases:<quote>

The phrasing of this sentencer really bothers me. Does anyone else feel that it looks a little POV? // 3R1C 19:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Pls feel free to correct the style but should be noted that the acronym is COAN and not CANA as several bibliografy shows --Jor70 00:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

See my comment on FLOMAR below... Jor70 is right —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.114.160.225 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Falklands/Malvinas

Its not true that Argentinians say Malvinas War, they say Guerra de las Malvinas as they speak Spanish. This is an English wikipedia and we are thus duty bound to use the common English term and not reveal a pro Argentine POV re The Falklands War, SqueakBox 00:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I know English speaking people say either Falklands War or Malvinas War and Spanish speaking people say Guerra de las Malvinas--Vintagekits 00:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Not true, English speakers say Falklands, a minority of POV pushing abnti Brits say Malvinas but nobody else does, SqueakBox 00:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
And a large part of the planet (not all ant brits) called them Malvinas --Jor70 00:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Not true, English speakers say Falklands, a minority of POV pushing abnti Brits say Malvinas but nobody else does, SqueakBox 00:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Squ , this is already too boring, yes this is english wikipedia about for the english language not in favour of England point of view. Others english speakers also used Malvinas. --Jor70 00:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Only a tiny miniority do, not enough to warrant inclusion here or elsewhere. Please revert yourself or you are likely to be blocked for blatant violation of 3RR. What we cant have, even for an article on the Argentine Navy, is an anti Brit POV, that violates our NPOV policy. Can you provide a substantial source to back your claims, SqueakBox 00:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
That is almost laughably POV - many people used the term (including the Irish Government) - mostly outside of Britain - why is there opinion POV and yours NPOV. I agree that Falklands is the more common term used but you want ot completely ignore and whitewash the alternative term which has widespread use and is the official name in other English speaking countries!--Vintagekits 00:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
No I dont, I actually added Malvinas to the main body of the paragraph, IMO quite enough given notability in this case, SqueakBox 01:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Nobody provides any evidence here but just says things like "many people used the term". English langauge google gets 35,300 for "Malvinas War" and 511,000 for "Falkalnds War". Clearly the latter is the most common, and should be used in the English language version of Wikipedia as the default. However, given the context of an article on the Argentine Navy, however, I feel that the "Falkalnds/Malvinas War" title part is acceptable, given that "Falklands" is the default term (given precedence over 'Malvinas') used elsewhere in the article. Logoistic 00:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

here you have some, all british sites found by user Vintagekits


Having inserted Malvinas as a translation into the section my objections are with (a) using the term Falklands/Malvinas as a section title and (b) object to including the term Malvinas in this way, and I would argue that doing so gives the article less credibility in the English speaking world, something I am sure Jor would not wish to see. For instance at Battle of the Bulge we translate this term into German but we dont vcall it the Unternehmen War (apologies if my German is incorrect), SqueakBox 01:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe the word you wanted was 'untermenchen' but whatever the German codeword was for the followup to 'operation Market Garden' it was unlikely to be that, and you are close to falling foul of Godwins law :) --Gibnews


I protected the page because of rapid-fire reverts from anons. I will unprotect it now.--CSTAR 03:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An opinion

This is a dispute which we have managed to resolve in other places; Sadly there are those with an anti-British agenda who support the Argentine naming of a British territory for their cause. This promotes discord between the British and Argentine contributors, and should be avoided.

I think its fair enough to refer to the war by the Spanish name, because thats what it was called, and they were clearly the other party involved - however the correct name in English is the Falklands war. At the time here we got to see both sides of the dispute, with the BBC covering the British position and TVE wildly enthusiastic about the invasion.

What is not appropriate is the renaming of the territory, or the use of alternative names for Stanley. There are many territories in the world which have changed hands, and one has to respect the views of the inhabitants.

The Argentines fought la Guerra de las Malvinas, and that should be mentioned, but winners of disputes earn the right to name territories. The object of Wikipedia is to inform people correctly rather than to wage further wars.

--Gibnews 08:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • "but winners of disputes earn the right to name territories" - this basically sums up the POV that is riddled throught out wiki articles on this issue!--Vintagekits 11:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Its an observation of reality confirmed by Charles Darwin. You may be able to dredge up English language websites which refer to the Malvinas, but their authors likely lack a NPOV. I asked someone from the Falklands 'where the Malvinas was' and got a similar look to shouting Rangers in the Celtic stands.
None of that affects the fact that the Argentines fought a war bravely and as best they were able, then wisely surrendered to prevent further needless loss of life; that is what historical articles should accurately record. The inhabitants of the Falklands have the right to self-determination and to call their territory whatever they like.

--Gibnews 13:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

What has that got to do with many English speaking people refering to the islands as the Malvinas? "You may be able to dredge up English language websites which refer to the Malvinas" - dredge up - 30,000 ghits, the Irish Government and the Irish national broadcaster is now dredging up!!--Vintagekits 14:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Really? Googling RTE's site comes up with 12 hits for "Malvinas" only one of which does not include "Falklands" or "Falkland Islands" as well, and seven are just location drop-down option in search pages. Conversely, "Falklands" or "Falkland Islands" comes up with 28 hits, only two (apart from the seven location drop-downs again) of which include "Malvinas" as well.
Likewise, "Falklands" or "Falkland Islands" result in 28 hits on .gov.ie sites, while "Malvina" appears only once, and that in a Seanad debate in which "Falklands" was also used. Nick Cooper 18:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Google gives 22,000,000 for bombay, 1,500,000 for elvis lives, and 3,540,000 for gibralter - none of which proves anything. Using 'The Socialist Party' as a reference is similar to citing This. --Gibnews 18:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • "What is not appropriate is the renaming of the territory, or the use of alternative names for Stanley" - IMHO this statement is not entirely correct, as in official argentinian documentation (including cartography by the IGM) the Falklands/Malvinas capital name is (still) shown as "Puerto Argentino". So to be fair, both names should be used to refer to the city (even though the english one might have priority in the english languaje WikiPedia). This is an issue that maybe legal or diplomatic experts could help resolve (eg: how are the islands and its towns/villages, etc referred by the UN?).
    I agree with the intention of discouraging conflicts between editors, I also support accuracy and neutral point of view. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I have to say that while I like the UN, in these matters I don't think it can be considered the neutral overseer it usually is, as its stated mission is to, as it sees it, de-colonise everything, and damn the views of the people that live there or the consequences of doing so. A vestige of the US view from earlier in the last century Narson (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FLOMAR

I've read another acronym: FLOta de Mar ARgentina — FLOMAR here -> [1]. Should it replace COFM? Necessary Evil 18:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont know where it come out that COFM, FLOMAR is a very common term not only in ARA but among south american navies Jor70 19:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
If you look the official Argentinian Navy website (http://www.ara.mil.ar/comandos.asp) you can see that the ARA "cutting edge" is subdivided in four "Commandos Operativos" (Operational Commands): "Flota de Mar" (Sea Fleet), "Fuerza de Submarinos" (Submarine Force), "Aviacion Naval" (Naval Aviation) and "Infanteria de Marina" (Marine Infantry). So my guess is that in the acronyms, the letters "CO" come from the initials from of "Comando Operativo" and the other 2 letters, from those of the name of the respective command (eg: "AN" from "Aviacion Naval") and not from the word "COmando". I couldn't find the acronyms in the website, so my comment is an "educated guess" (IMHO). Regards, DPdH (talk) 14:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

FLOMAR was old STANAG, now the current acronyms must be four letters long (FLA¡s). All major commands should start with "CO" as well (COIM, COFM, COAN, COFS, COAL) . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.114.160.225 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Name

Wouldn't it be Navy of the Argentine Republic as the preferred translation into English? I notice it was moved without discussion in July Narson 21:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Gone ahead and moved it as no-one seemed to object and the old name was a pretty unusual translation (Seemed to be some attempt at a compromise between the spanish and the English name) Narson (talk) 18:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed that the name of the article has been reverted (via redirection) to "Argentine Navy". Even though is not a literal translation from spanish (as the previous attempts seem to be), I believe that it is a quite adequate one and is similar to the english translation for the 2 other major branches of the Argentinian Armed Forces (Army and Air Force). Maybe further research can clarify this issue, but IMHO the translation should be left as is now unless there is docummented evidence that this name is wrong. If still in doubt, maybe a discussion prior to renaming (again!) the article could be helpful. Regards, DPdH (talk) 14:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:LNMAB.jpg

Image:LNMAB.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)