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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel 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.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
Now I'm puzzled - you're ex IDF? So presumably you're familiar with mixing Hebrew and English, maybe even the Sho't? Yet you're questioning this? Whatever the linguistic niceties of this (and I know so little Hebrew as to just know that this is plausible, not that it's correct), COMMONNAME and the bulk of sources on this tank do use it. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley: There is nothing in any Hebrew transliteration rules that suggests an apostrophe there, and it's not even a plausible transliteration under some hypothetical rule – apostrophes are added to indicate a stop before a vowel, for example in be'er (באר, well) or mad'an (מדען, scientist). In some very rare cases I have seen transliterations with apostrophes before a "silent" vowel (so in English before a consonant), but there are not standard (a bit more common in Arabic), and it's not the case for Shot, which has no such vowels. I am not sure about WP:COMMONNAME, I have searched for it and it seems like many sources on the Internet just randomly put an apostrophe (there is both sh'ot and sho't), and some sources have neither. Which reliable sources that discuss the tank in-depth refer to it as sho't? —Ynhockey(Talk)11:24, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]