On a site entitled tank encyclopaedia there is an illustration of a female MkIV with a grenade netting. Is this poetic licence by the illustrator or did actually happen? I thought such netting removed after the MkI.
Complete garbage is what it looks like to me! That's not even a Mark IV; looks like the artist took a picture of a Mark V and removed some bits. And what's that nonsense about "Hotchkiss Mk.I" machine guns!
It does show what you can find on the internet! When I taught I often used the 'banning dihydrogen monoxide' site to illustrate the problems of using the internet as an information source.
This sodding Tank Encyclopaedia site is atrocious. I don't know who's behind it, but great sections of it are flawed and garbled. Naturally, it is frequently cited on Wikipedia, sometimes alongside Landships, which is deeply embarrassing.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
This sodding Tank Encyclopaedia site is atrocious. I don't know who's behind it, but great sections of it are flawed and garbled. Naturally, it is frequently cited on Wikipedia, sometimes alongside Landships, which is deeply embarrassing.
Well They do apparently have a forum that boasts over 5,000 members with 298 posts between them
However they have asked for help from a "Historical fact checker"......
Probably best to start here: http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww1/gb/tank_MkI_proto_HD.jpg described as "Mother" despite that its a female.... of sorts.......
A thought it was a joke sight at first....... not a single reference mentioned.... oh hang on I just saw a credit for Wiki
Well They do apparently have a forum that boasts over 5,000 members with 298 posts between them
The majority of those members appear to be anxious to improve the market share of the third-world economies dedicated to making more affordable for the frugal consumer goods of all kinds with famous labels.
"Fences" and warnings don't seem to work very well on the Internet. I suspect there's a version of Gresham's Law in Economics (bad money drives out good) working
with the quality of information on the Internet. They have asked for help - although they may have no idea of the consequences of asking for help on the Internet.
My view is that they deserve a good monstering for the crap they've put up so far - it's lots easier to do this from the inside - after all they can hardly toss out people
who are trying to help. If they do toss out "helpful people" then they are intellectually broken and deserve what they get.
A good starting point for them might be to block "public" access to their member list (through forum access permissions and robots.txt). For some reason public access (access by non-members) to the membership lists drives robot membership registrations (SEO demons and comment spammers) into a frenzy - I suppose any links in the profiles get "indexed" by search engines although Google at least is supposedly working to eliminate the benefit of such abuse.