Talk:Ram bow

This redirect 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

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Ships

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Factual accuracy disputed

Disputed: Primarily because this article was entered by an anon on April Fools Day. The discussion about the battle of Nissa jives with Wilhelm von Tegetthoff, but I don't know if that was in fact the last time a ship was rammed.-Rholton 13:56, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)

There appears to be ample evidence on the internet to support at least the existance of the "ram bow". For example: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/design.htm

Which one would think would be sufficient enough to remove any factual doubt.

I can assure everyone that ram bows are real — I have removed the disputed tag and will be updating the article shortly. -Lommer | ^talk 22:21, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've rewritten the article from scratch. Together, Everyone Achieves More - that's what 'team' stands for! -Ashley Pomeroy 15:29, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There appears to be a linking error. A reference to "U-29", a submarine, leads to a page on U-29, a road in Utah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.32.152.197 (talk) 16:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge article titled "Naval Ram"

This would make a good sub section to Naval Ram. I recommend a merger. 98.196.146.113 (talk) 15:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I have trouble seeing any distinction between the two.

Peter ^Isotalo 08:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate Passage

"according to inscriptions found on the tomb of Phoenician King Sargon II and ramming was the dominant form of naval combat until at least the third century BC"

Sargon II, while controlling the Phoenician port cities as part of his empire, was a king of the Neo-Assyrian empire, not a Phoenician king. Additionally, there is way the information stated above could be from his tomb, given that he died waging war to the North and his body was never recovered.

Inaccurate Passage

"according to inscriptions found on the tomb of Phoenician King Sargon II and ramming was the dominant form of naval combat until at least the third century BC"

Sargon II, while controlling the Phoenician port cities as part of his empire, was a king of the Neo-Assyrian empire, not a Phoenician king. Additionally, there is no way the information stated above could be from his tomb, given that he died waging war to the North and his body was never recovered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.118.144.222 (talk) 23:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]