Talk:Valsella Meccanotecnica

Patents

Valsella has a number of patents on land mines though prior to the creation of Valsella Meccanotecnica the IP assignee is REDON TRUST (initial registrations by Carlo Mettler (Chiasso) for Swiss applications (e.g. CH 377688) in 1960 and then registration as REDON TRUST in Chiasso (as a Swiss company) and then seems to have moved as REDON TRUST to Lichenstein). After the creation of Valsella Meccanotecnica then the assignee is Valsella Meccanotecnica rather than REDON TRUST. Ttiotsw (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Timelines of products.

Want to table this...Timeline for sales VS-50, Morocco (1976, 1977,1978), Gabon (1981), Iraq (1980,81,82,83), Valmara 69, Iran (1976),Somalia (1979), South Africa (1980), Iraq (1981, 82, 83), maybe Singapore- End user Cambodia 1983

Istrice, introduced in 1987

MISAR SB33, Argentina (1981), Spain end user Iraq (1982), Greece end user Iraq and Zaire (1982) Ttiotsw (talk) 13:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

2013: what is proper verb tense when writing about now-defunct company's products, no longer produced, that may still be deployed/in-use?

When we write about this now-defunct company's products, should we use present or past tense to describe its various land mines? For example, this is the lead sentence from the Wikipedia article on the company's VS-MK2 mine:

"The VS-MK-2 is a plastic bodied scatterable anti-personnel blast mine manufactured by the now-defunct Valsella Meccanotecnica, SpA, an Italian high-tech defense contractor that specialized in the development and production of area denial systems."

Any insight into the proper verb tense for articles like these about products no longer being manufactured, by companies that no longer exist, but which might still be in use militarily, would be greatly appreciated. Nick-D, I know you're not involved or editing this page, but as an admin w/ specialization in topics of military history and defense, perhaps you can provide some feedback? Thank you in advance to all and sundry who reply (and note, I tried to figure this out from MOS and searching for policy papers but couldn't find a section dealing with writing about land mines)! Azx2 17:25, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

If the weapons still exist then the "is" is appropriate. Only swap to "was" if none (or virtually none) still exist. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)