Talk:Active attack/Draft: Difference between revisions
imported>Anthony.Sebastian |
imported>John Stephenson m (moved Talk:Active attack to Talk:Active attack/Draft over redirect: Cannot get the banner info on approved-article Talk pages to show with Citable Versions subpages, so moving this whence it came for now) |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== Approval Process: {{ApprovalProcess| | == Approval Process: {{ApprovalProcess|certify}} == | ||
''Call for review: ''[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 20:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC) | ''Call for review: ''[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 20:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC) | ||
''Call for Approval: '' | ''Call for Approval: ''—[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 22:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC) | ||
''Approval Notice: '' | ''Approval Notice: ''Set for 20 June 2012 [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 15:02, 5 June 2012 (UTC) | ||
''Certification of Approval: '' | ''Certification of Approval: ''[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 22:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC) | ||
---- | ---- | ||
''Please discuss the article below, [[{{BASEPAGENAME}}/Approval]] is for brief official referee's only!'' | ''Please discuss the article below, [[{{BASEPAGENAME}}/Approval]] is for brief official referee's only!'' | ||
=== Comments === | === Comments === | ||
++++<br> | |||
*Announced call for approval.<br> | |||
*Submitted requests for comments/suggestions to mailing lists: Mathematics; Computers.<br> | |||
*Submitted request on forum: "Please review "Active attack" for consideration of approval. —[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 20:50, 27 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
++++<br> | |||
No further comments posted since requests for comments went out over a month ago. I know Pat Palmer wants to comment, and has been told there's no rush. To keep the approval process moving along, however, I will set a notice for two weeks hence. If the article receives approval by then, any substantive changes to the article that occur later, in response when Pat has time to review the article, will make new draft eligible for facilitated re-approval. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 14:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
<!--Add sections/comments above this message--> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<hr> | |||
==APPROVED Version 1.0== | |||
<div class="usermessage plainlinks">Discussion for [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Active_attack&oldid=100681576 Version 1.0] stopped here. Please continue further discussion under this break. </div> | |||
Latest revision as of 15:07, 2 October 2013
Perhaps more of an aside from electronic warfare...
Rather than active vs. passive in electronic attack, the terminology nonkinetic vs. kinetic is used. Nonkinetic uses all the elegant electronic and computer methods, while kinetic is truly brute force. Many years ago, I was at an Armed Forces Communications Electronics Association meeting after the 1973 Middle East war. Someone asked an Israeli general how he preferred to counter a particular Soviet radar, expecting some involved imitative jamming technique. He said he really preferred a 500 pound bomb straight down the antenna. Howard C. Berkowitz 06:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Call for review re approval
Approval Process: Approval certified
Call for review: Anthony.Sebastian 20:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Call for Approval: —Anthony.Sebastian 22:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Approval Notice: Set for 20 June 2012 Anthony.Sebastian 15:02, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Certification of Approval: Anthony.Sebastian 22:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Please discuss the article below, Active attack/Approval is for brief official referee's only!
Comments
++++
- Announced call for approval.
- Submitted requests for comments/suggestions to mailing lists: Mathematics; Computers.
- Submitted request on forum: "Please review "Active attack" for consideration of approval. —Anthony.Sebastian 20:50, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
++++
No further comments posted since requests for comments went out over a month ago. I know Pat Palmer wants to comment, and has been told there's no rush. To keep the approval process moving along, however, I will set a notice for two weeks hence. If the article receives approval by then, any substantive changes to the article that occur later, in response when Pat has time to review the article, will make new draft eligible for facilitated re-approval. Anthony.Sebastian 14:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)