Talk:Bravo Zulu

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

According to this page NATO adopted the phonetic alphabet from ICAO, but the page on the NATO phonetic alphabet says the opposite. Which one is right?

Looks like we might have a case of plagiarism here... Compare this page to [[1]] which sites its source.

Definitely looks like plagarism. See this page: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq101-2.htm

That is a public domain source, thence fair game for inclusion here. Rmhermen 18:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've offered no proof of that. Groupthink 18:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to the article in question, follow the link to its main page, and from there follow the Privacy Policy link you will that the fact that the article is in the Public Domain is explicitly stated.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, and I have tagged with the appropriate template to indicate this, but I think I can be forgiven for showing alarm at a page being a word-for-word copy of material on another website. Groupthink 19:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States Navy Obsession

This article refers on several occasions to the United States Navy for no particular reason. The article correctly states that the term predates the USN, so wondering what the opinion is of cleaning the article up to a more international viewpoint? Philip.t.day talk 06:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha or Alfa?

When I was a Midhipman at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, I learned that the correct spelling for the letter "A" was "ALFA" (not "ALPHA"). I don't know why it was decided to do it that way, but I'm pretty sure about it. Any discussion?

Timothy Chen Allen 22:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed ALFA. The pronunciation of "alpha" would be confusing to speakers of English as a second language. I removed the reference to the current Allied Tactical Publication, since the ATP is technically classified, not germaine to the discussion of where "Bravo Zulu" originated, and caused a disconnect with following references; and replaced it with the original language from the referenced source. --71.104.18.213 (talk) 05:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Merge

Discussion copied from Talk:Naval flag signalling.
It was suggested that this article be merged with Naval flag signalling. Debate closed for lack of support for merge. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not support merge. Bravo Zulu is very frequently used & warrants it's own separate article. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 13:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not support merge. Passing down "Bravo Zulu" is a distinct Naval tradition with cultural significance that warrants separate treatment. Thanks! Kgdobson (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not support merge. "Bravo Zulu" is used in written and verbal communications with great frequency, if not greater frequency than in realm of signal flags. Thanks! Frebo3 —Preceding undated comment added 14:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bravo Zulu. 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/20150913223636/http://www.marines.mil/News/Messages/MessagesDisplay/tabid/13286/Article/142096/bravo-zulu.aspx to http://www.marines.mil/News/Messages/MessagesDisplay/tabid/13286/Article/142096/bravo-zulu.aspx

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) 21:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]