Talk:Comparison of the AK-47 and M16

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jasavina (talk | contribs) at 22:36, 17 September 2023 (→Citation Convention Question, Can't Find Answer: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:36, 17 September 2023 by Jasavina (talk | contribs) (→Citation Convention Question, Can't Find Answer: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 4 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Firearms Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Misplaced Pages. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Soviet Union Mid‑importance

	Soviet Union portal 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 Misplaced Pages. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Russia: Technology & engineering / Military Mid‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the technology and engineering in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Mid‑importance

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 Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vietnam

	Vietnam portal This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 26, 2005	Articles for deletion	No consensus
August 17, 2007	Articles for deletion	No consensus
October 1, 2010	Articles for deletion	Kept

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.

Comparability truly inherently given?

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)

Why does is the STG44 on this page instead of the SKS?

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)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

PM md. 63.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:08, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Direct Impingement vs Internal Piston

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)

Well if no one has any objections I'm going to start fixing the incorrect descriptions. Jasavina (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Citation Convention Question, Can't Find Answer

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)

Categories: