Talk:Ice Station

Untitled

The articel as currently writen sounds far more like a publisher's blurb than an encyclopedia article. The closing elipsis in particular is simply a bad idea, IMO. DES 17:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC) Agreed. Ive only edited a few pages before, and i didnt want to tread on anyones toes by deleting what they have written (although it sounds like they enjoy just getting off writing words like enigmatic) plus i thought the whole point of these types of pages was not to advetise books but to present the facts (which is why the bit at the top says "spoiler") This is my first edit on Wiki, so bear with me if I make a few mistakes here. I've read Ice Station a few times, so i've gone through and edited the mistakes in the plot summary, added a background section at the top and fixed up various formatting, grammer and spelling mistakes in the article. Can someone check over what I've done and confirm that it's correct? --Stretch 06:26, 26 September 2005 (UTC) My god.

You rang Cdinesh? --Stretch 01:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Citations - none, but if someone adds a few it will make a huge difference Iciac 08:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC) With regards to the inaccuracies section: "Several times throughout the novel, Reilly has lower ranking enlisted personnel address higher ranking enlisted personnel as "Sir". In the U.S. military, and especially in the U.S. Marine Corps addressing an enlisted man as "Sir" is seen as a slight, or at least mildly offensive." Matthew Reilly is an Australian author, and as far as I know, in the Australian army, personnel of higher rank than sergeant are usually referred to as "Sir". --203.164.95.67 08:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC) No, the Australian army never refers to any NCO's, (Warrant Officers included,) as 'sir.' If you did say this to a WO, you should expect the curt reply, "Don't call me sir, I work for a living!" It was a mistake that stuck out to me all the way through the book, and in the other Matthew Reilly books too. Otherwise I really enjoyed them. The Bryce (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC) "The SAS unit use a "Nitrogen grenade". A small explosive that contains super-cooled liquid nitrogen. However this device is infeasible as any explosive force used to detonate the grenade would heat the nitrogen to the point where it would turn into gas." This is not neccessarily true. One could use gas propulsion by either storing compressed gas inside the grenade or use an explosive that rapidly dissintergrates into gas with minimal heat generation. Correct. It's not certain how Reilly expected this grenade to work, so I think the comment should be removed. A detonation doesn't necessarily require an explosion to the extent that would vaporise the liquid nitrogen. The Bryce (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

crap

I wonder if there's an approved, encyclopedic way to note that an artistic work is complete crap? Teemu Leisti (talk) 16:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Warrant Officers in the Australian Army are addressed as 'Sir'

"08:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC) With regards to the inaccuracies section: "Several times throughout the novel, Reilly has lower ranking enlisted personnel address higher ranking enlisted personnel as "Sir". In the U.S. military, and especially in the U.S. Marine Corps addressing an enlisted man as "Sir" is seen as a slight, or at least mildly offensive." Matthew Reilly is an Australian author, and as far as I know, in the Australian army, personnel of higher rank than sergeant are usually referred to as "Sir". --203.164.95.67 08:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC) No, the Australian army never refers to any NCO's, (Warrant Officers included,) as 'sir.' If you did say this to a WO, you should expect the curt reply, "Don't call me sir, I work for a living!" It was a mistake that stuck out to me all the way through the book, and in the other Matthew Reilly books too. Otherwise I really enjoyed them."

'No, the Australian army never refers to any NCO's, (Warrant Officers included,) as 'sir.' If you did say this to a WO, you should expect the curt reply, "Don't call me sir, I work for a living!" It was a mistake that stuck out to me all the way through the book, and in the other Matthew Reilly books too. Otherwise I really enjoyed them. The Bryce (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)'

Not true. NCO's below the rank of Warrant Officer are referred to by rank, or appointment, but a Warrant Officer is addressed as 'Sir' by subordinates, or by appointment 'RSM', 'CSM' etc. A soldier not calling a WO 'Sir' could expect a bollocking. The infamous 'Don't call me Sir, I work for a living' is used by Sergeants, but once they are promoted to WO2/WO1 it no longer applies. Remember, a Warrant Officer actually is a form of officer, by virtue of a warrant (in Australia, signed by the Governor General). They remain members of the Sergeants Mess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.92.163.12 (talk) 11:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Correct, in the Australian Army, WO2 & WO1 are addressed as Sir, as they hold a Warrant Signed by the minister of defence, they techinically arent officers, but are somewhere in between.Emcee george (talk) 23:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Inaccuracies

I added the Fact tag because this entire section reads like a personal opinion. Yes, some of these things are impossible but this is a work of fiction. It is not intended to be accurate on every item. Also, why pick only these items as inaccuracies when the piece of military technology with the biggest role in the entire novel (and the other Scarecrow novels), the MagHook, doesn't exist either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.162.164 (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Even if not simply personal opinion, the inaccuracies are generally trivial. This has been around a long time without being fixed - if there are no objections, the section should be deleted.MurfleMan (talk) 04:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I've now deleted the section. MurfleMan (talk) 03:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Plot Summary?

Is this summary from an elementary school essay which was originally intended to be for Battle Royale (film)?

Where is Wilkes Ice Station?

Were the French scientists theoretical soldiers at first?

Is Schofield a god? Did he ascend to heaven afterwards?

What attack was the SAS adding to?

I assume Schofield is a god because he killed an entire SAS team...

Is Wendy a mutant, too?

Why?

What is this summary telling me? Nightvisiongoggles (talk) 20:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC)