Talk:Flying wedge

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Flying wedge 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: Technology C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Outlawed in sports?

Is the flying-wedge formation still banned in modern American football? -Toptomcat 17:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, completely. Although it used to be a contributing factor in some plays, which themselves are now outlawed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.116.178 (talk) 19:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect

I'm not sure why the flying wedge is refered to as 'the most common and generally most effective formation in the game of rugby' when the law 10 specifically outlaws its use. Is there a misunderstanding about how a flying wedge is defined? ReadingOldBoy 09:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image

It would be really nice to have a picture depicting the flying wedge in action in a football game. If it was banned in 1892 there must be a number of photographs taken of it that are in the public domain.--marqmike2 21:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iceni usage

In the TV show Battlefield Britain they show it on one ep, to show its effectiveness against massed people. Check that out. It was the ep on Boudiccas Revolt. Its worth watching.--Lord Laos (talk) 08:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The use of the wedge against shieldwall

The Normans in Hastings did not deploy their infantry in wedges. I know of no such instance as an infantry formation in wedge breaking up a shieldwall (skjaldborg) and I would welcome any feedback on this. A good hint would be its use by the Vikings and the reverence they held towards this formation, but still, I can quorte only Frontinus describing Roman wedges in Pydna which were not successful, though in breaking up the phalanx.

I also sincerely believe that the name of the article should change to just "wedge", since I have never encountered it in a military text as a "flying wedge" and for me the title was really deceiving at first. Again any feedback is welcome.

GK1973 (talk) 14:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander

I removed a recent edition about Alexander in the "miliary use" section, since the matter is adequately analyzed further on, a matter the editor who added the text most obviously missed. GK1973 (talk) 17:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous spelling errors in diagrams

Not sure if this is the right place to mention it, but there are several spelling errors in the diagrams that line the right column of this entry. It would be nice if the original poster could make the appropriate corrections. Otherwise, I would argue there's a need for a new set of diagrams as the existing errors may actually distract or confuse the viewer. --Alika 21:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flying wedge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022212345/http://www.irb.com/mm/Document/LawsRegs/0/070110LGLAW10red_667.pdf to http://www.irb.com/mm/Document/LawsRegs/0/070110LGLAW10red_667.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]