This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms 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.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
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 is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I’m a bit bewildered about the lemma. There’s many distinguishing particularities between the two, beginning with unmatched prevalence (100M vs. a mere 8kk) and development philosophies, regarding caliber and ballistic profiles, etc., and even more eminently, concerning rather recent perspectives, i.e. the AK still happily been deployed around the globe, with the M-16 mostly replaced by civilian and ordinance derivatives. Sure, you can always compare two assault rifles, but both layman and specialist ought to perceive incomparable features of these unrelated makes. And of course the article is far too substantial to be contested, yet still, I find the comparison of those models, to at least some degree, questionable. -- Gohnarch░ 20:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Why does is the STG44 on this page instead of the SKS?edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The M14 was the rifle the USA army used before they started using the M16, and this is not the case with the STG44 and the AK WHYYYYYYYY!!!!!1??????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hafflockman (talk • contribs) 14:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletionedit
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion
The article incorrectly refers to the mechanism for the M16 platform as "direct
impingement" multiple times, but does also call out this general misconception in one section. Is there any opposition to fixing the incorrect terminology? The operating mechanism is more correctly called "internal piston." Jasavina (talk) 18:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Well if no one has any objections I'm going to start fixing the incorrect descriptions. Jasavina (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I just removed a repetitive citation from a bullet point list, since it's all the same source and left the one at the end of the sentence introducing the bullet points. This seems a lot cleaner, but I can't find a wiki style guide saying how to deal with violet point citations. Anyone know what the convention is? Jasavina (talk) 22:36, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
.svg)
