Talk:TY-90

Military history: Maritime / Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Chinese

This article 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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force

Rocketry

	Rocketry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

HQ-10

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

According to the chinese zh:紅旗-10近程防空導彈 and Japanese articles ja:HHQ-10 (ミサイル), the SAM version of this missile is the Red Flag/Red Banner 10, however on en wikipedia HQ-10 here redirects to S-300_missile_system#S-300PMU-1.2F2_.28SA-20.29 where there is a single line "China is building its own version of the S-300PMU-1, called HQ-10" this claim is referenced but the ref is old (2008 or earlier) and has suffered from link rot. My inclination is to redirect the HQ-10 namespace to this page. Thoughts?--KTo288 (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic