View source for Talk:E77 balloon bomb

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WikiProject Military history|class=B|Weaponry=y
<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> 
|B1=yes
<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and 
does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> 
|B2=yes
<!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including 
a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> 
|B3=yes
<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> 
|B4=yes
<!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> 
|B5=no}}
}}
{{dyktalk|15 December|2008|entry=... that the design of the U.S. [[biological warfare#Anti-agriculture BW|anti-crop]] '''[[E77 balloon bomb]]''' was based on the design of the [[World War II]] [[Empire of Japan|Japanese]] [[fire balloon]]?|views=9025}}

==What does this mean? Reference confusion...==
The text in the article's background section reads:
:The inspiration for the E77 balloon bomb came from the Japanese use of balloon bombs.<ref name=wheelis/><ref name=whitby/> Two works that have been called the only authoritative works on the [[Fire balloon|Japanese balloon munition]] failed to connect the E77 to those weapons despite it being clear that the inspiration came directly from the Japanese munitions.<ref name= whitby>Whitby, Simon M. ''Biological Warfare Against Crops'', ([http://books.google.com/books?id=jqLrDLZvt9kC&pg=PA157&lpg=PA157&dq=e77+bomb+balloon&source=bl&ots=jNhd7liOta&sig=ejku8L3QRE6YPtWq84YqwMLmIRg&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result#PPA157,M1 Google Books]), Macmillan, 2002, pp. 157–67, ({{ISBN|0333920856}}).</ref>
What I don't get is that the same reference (#2, Whitby) is used to say there was no connection found between the E77 and Japanese balloon munitions, but that there was a connection ("The inspiration for the E77 balloon bomb came from the Japanese use of balloon bombs").
I don't have the cited reference handy, but at best, this is confusing and poorly-written.
:Basically he is saying these two books failed to mention the connection, but there was one. Fix it as you see fit. --[[User:IvoShandor|IvoShandor]] ([[User talk:IvoShandor|talk]]) 00:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
::Further: U.S. Army documents confirm the E77 was inspired and based on the fire balloon, these books do not mention that. --[[User:IvoShandor|IvoShandor]] ([[User talk:IvoShandor|talk]]) 00:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
:::I will try to clarify this later tonight, and repair the confusing and poorly written syntax. Thanks for your comments. --[[User:IvoShandor|IvoShandor]] ([[User talk:IvoShandor|talk]]) 01:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
::::What you wrote seems ok, I can't find my other source, the Army doc, right now, I will try to dig it up. It may have been released after these books were published, but I would note ''Deadly Cultures'' was published four years after the book that says no direct connection was made. ''Cultures'' states that the E77 was "based upon" the Japanese design. --[[User:IvoShandor|IvoShandor]] ([[User talk:IvoShandor|talk]]) 01:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}