Talk:Ministry of Supply

No merge.
 * The Minister of Supply article is, and should be, essentially a history of the post holders, date in and date out, and possibly any scandals associated with that particular minister.
 * The Ministry of Supply article is, and should be, about what the department did, acheived, or failed to do. It also enables predecessor departments to be [linked] and discussed; as well as successor departments.
 * I personnally have little interest in Ministers, but I am interested in the department. I note there was a proposal to merge other ministers/departments, such as Ministry of Munitions of War. My comments would be identical, in this case. Pyrotec 16:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Potential typo
In WWII/The Royal Ordnance Factories, it's written «these were mostly designed and built by private armaments companies». Sounds wrong to me, the s at armament. But I'm no native speaker, so I'd like a more qualified person to make the decision. That's all! Cheers, Thouny (talk) 05:39, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you are right about the grammar, but it's a total mouthful of a sentence either way! I'm going to change it to, "arms companies", which is a very commonly used contraction in English (73m google hits for "arms companies" vs 21,000 for "armament companies" vs 14,500 for "armaments companies"). Thanks Thom2002 (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Ministry of Supply still active post 1959
I'm looking at a Rolls-Royce drawing that contains a Ministry of Supply stamp dated 10 October 1960. 109.68.192.224 (talk) 09:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

QUESTION ABOUT THE MoS

Can anyone tell me what the "S.S. Division" was in the Ministry of Supply? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.171.127 (talk) 20:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)