Talk:Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project

About the Orphan thing
I linked Electromagnetic Pulse to this page. The link is under non-nuclear weapons. I believe that means that this page is no longer an orphan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belac Athanasius (talk • contribs) 03:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100321164415/http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog to http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3A347da0db-c427-4928-85ff-da01662523fe

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:02, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit request
(moved from above)

The following quote is incorrect: "The CHAMP is superior to other electronic warfare weapons because it destroys electronics…", the reason being that the device doesn't exist yet. It's a concept. Therefore a more accurate, less marketing driven statement would be, "The CHAMP program intends to produce a weapon that is superior to current electronic warfare weapons, because it destroys electronics…". A proper edit cannot be made however, because the edit link for this particular section is not present. Both mistakes should be rectified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.13.17.37 (talk) 23:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * While still(?) experimental, the device exists, and has been tested, as described in the second paragraph. As for the section edit button, for some reason the default is to not have an edit button on the lead section, although one can be enabled in preferences/gadgets/appearance, but I think that requires an account.  But the whole-article edit button should still be available at the top, and I see no protection on the page that would prevent you from making an edit.  Rwessel (talk) 11:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)