Talk:Barrett M82: Difference between revisions
m Removing obsolete {{Afd-merge from}} Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/AFDMergeFromCleaner |
Assessed |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
|Weaponry-task-force=yes |
|Weaponry-task-force=yes |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{WPGUNS|class= |
{{WPGUNS|class=C |
||
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = no |
|||
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = yes |
|||
| b3 <!--Structure --> = yes |
|||
| b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes |
|||
| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes|importance=low}} |
|||
{{archive box|bot=MiszaBot I|age=100|search=yes|auto=long}} |
{{archive box|bot=MiszaBot I|age=100|search=yes|auto=long}} |
||
Revision as of 01:45, 27 March 2014
 | Special Application Sniper Rifle was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 27 January 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Barrett M82. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
 | Military history: Technology / Weaponry C‑class | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Firearms C‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Australia
should Australia be included in the section regarding users? i have a link to a picture released by the Australian ministry of defence showing an australian special forces operative with a Barret m82.would this be enough evidence to include Australia as a user? http://www.defence.gov.au/op/afghanistan/gallery/2010/20101105/20101018adf8262658_008.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pikcelled (talk • contribs)
- I added Australia to the users list with a different version of the same image, and cited it as a source. The caption in the source I used describes the pictured soldier as Australian SOTG (Special Operations Task Group). ROG5728 (talk) 10:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Used by the IRA, what nonsense
Unless youn cite please remove, no wonder serious academics and schools don't allow the use of Wikipedia as a research tool [shakes head]. 82.31.236.245 (talk) 12:49, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Try Harnden, Boyne, or pretty much any decent article about the IRA in South Armagh in the late 80s/90s. Ed Moloney good enough for you Twobells (please remember to log in)? The reason serious academics and schools don't allow the use of Wikipedia as a research tool is because editors add all sorts of rubbish that isn't in the sources. How about "This comes as a further blow to the Metropolitan police's reputation. as well as raising further questions over the UK's ability to create and manage large infrastructure projects" (added by you), or "While the UK never publicly discusses or acknowledges special forces operations reports emerged later from Japanese sources that the UK on request from the Japanese government had sent a six-man team from 22 squadron of the Special Air Service to advise and support local security forces on preparing for the embassy assault due to their expertise in embassy rescue and counter-terrorism" (also added by you). I could carry on for hours documenting the Jackanory information you've added to Wikipedia, but I've already made my point. 2 lines of K303 10:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Images
I have gotten permission from Barrett to use some of their images. Would it be useful if I uploaded some new images of the M107A1 and M82A1? --Zackmann08 (talk) 07:38, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Infobox Image
Just an FYI, the image in the infobox previously held the caption of M82 Barrett. Since it was the same image located later in the article that was marked as M107 and the file was marked as the M107, I removed the duplicated image in the infobox and replaced it with another M82 image that was already in the article. Aneah|talk to me 22:49, 1 May 2013 (UTC)