Talk:Dog tag

Facts Confirmed

• On 22:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC) Yamanba had some issues with this article, including, "Is this an actual picture of a UNSC dog tag or just some American present day version? This isn't a encyclopedia of American military hardware. Erase the FAN FICTION!". However on Esemono 07:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC) they were resolved:

Technology

Should this be considered Technology? Its a simple metal necklace.--JohnSpartan117 07:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

FOF

File:Dog Tag.jpg|thumb|This is a modern day dog tag. It is unknown whether the UNSCDF uses the same exact Dog tags because it is likely they have changed.]] The image is definitely of a modern dog tag. However, I believe dog tags are mentioned in Halo: The Flood, when John finds Mobuto. --Dragonclaws 22:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I have no doubts that dogtags exist in the Halo Universe but do they look exactly like present day American dogtags?　　I think not. In 500 years you don't think there would be any improvements? Maybe a datachip? -- Yamanba 23:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I havea good idea, ill caption the image.--JohnSpartan117 06:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll remove it until we get a description -- Esemono 07:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Now see, I have a problem with the idea of Dog Tags all together. The only place that dog tags are mentioned is a fleeting reference in Halo: The Flood, when John finds the corpse of one Marvin Mobuto. As all UNSC-issued suits (ODST body suit, MJOLNIR armor, Marine armor) are said to have a Friend-Or-Foe tag, not to mention the identification on each individual's neural interface, it would seem HIGHLY unlikely that military forces this advanced would even think about using something so inefficient and simplistic as a dog tag. Those of you who say "Well it's clearly in the book, so it HAS to be there," must be ignoring the fact that the book's author, William Dietz, also stated in The Flood that Hunters had vertebrate spines and skulls. Countless other inconsistencies can be found online. Obviously it's not any of our place to judge what mistakes are canon and what mistakes are to be retconned, but people, it just seems like common sense....--Nerfherder1428 02:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

"Inefficient and simplistic"...It's because it's so simple, and redundant, is why it would still be in use even in an advanced military. Machines can break. If you were a medic/corpsman in a field hospital, which would you be more concerned with; Getting a dented helmet/data chip fixed, or just glancing at a piece of a metal to get the information you need to save a patient's life? Granted, 4-5 centuries into the future the material may be different...like advanced carbon fiber composite or some other light weight nano-material, but the concept is still sound. - Kylar (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2015 (EDT)