Talk:Lancia 3Ro (100/17)

In my eyes, this article has three problems that can't be immediately be solved. Sorted by severity from low to high:

The name of the gun. But its article has its own discussion page and should be under "Recent changes"

The history part. Some parts taken from a source were obvious propaganda, the other issue is that it contains thematically:

The history of the truck, built in the thousands and used over dozens of years

The history of the multiple howitzer types, models and submodels, also built in the thousands, serving for 50 years in what are now a dozen armies. Which should also be treated in the article concerning the gun, imho

The history of the gun truck built in the double digits, which history ends after like two years and doesn't have the legendary aura of—dunno, the JT.

95% of the data which isn't fed into the templates directly from the game is based on one mediocre article, in some cases word for word. This article is in turn is based on Wikipedia, it seems, and the best articles that have actual usable (for the article info) are bad, most are worse.

If we as the volunteers (including grunts, moderators and senior moderators) think (or Gaijin thinks, I'm still not sure whose decision such things are) "Hey, that's a problem!", maybe something should be done. Since it's a rather insignificant AFV, the source front should look as bleak as the real one for the real, but depending on who thinks whose concern that is, either a group of volunteers should gather some source material, or Gaijin should provide some, I guess. The data on which the tank is modelled in game didn't come to the devs in a dream, I guess.

Edit: I have no idea how to format with this editor. This has to suffice.

--Disabled#1 (talk) 08:34, 12 July 2023 (UTC)