Talk:M101 howitzer

message: Should no mention be made of the license production of the M2/M101 gun/howitzer in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia as the M-65 (although some sources say it is M-56).  I think it is quite significant that a country in the Communist-bloc license manufactured a US howitzer and it speaks exceptionally well about the quality of the design.  72.146.187.38 02:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was mentioned in the M101A1 article and apparently was lost during the merge of the articles. Fixed. Thanks. Bukvoed 08:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Yugoslavia had a fairly "good" relationship with NATO countries.  Politically, it had positioned itself between Communist countries and Western nations (to Stalin's chagrin).  As a result, Yugoslavia ended up using some NATO equipment. --71.172.37.93 (talk) 01:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved from article page as it was not well integrated into the presentation - "(M56 is copy of German 10.5 cm leFH 18 howitzer not USA M101 but it use 105mm USA ammo)".  Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:35, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Moved from article page as it appears to be wrong - "Yugoslavia manufactured the M101 as the M-56, and 100 of these were inherited by Croatia."  Jane's Armour and Artillery 1981-82 notes the M-56 is a copy of the German 10.5-cm M18/40, although the M-56 uses semi-fixed ammunition unlike the original German howitzer.  Also, on the M-56 vs M-65 issue, JAA notes the M-65 was a copy of the U.S. M114 155-mm howitzer.  Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  M-65  

message: It would be nice if this article could include details about the use of the M2 or M101 howitzer not only by country, but also by service of a particular country.  In the Philippines for example, this artillery piece is still used by the Philippine Army and by the Philippine Marine Corps.  It was also used by the defunct Philippine Constabulary.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.93.16.162 (talk) 10:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Related to that point, I notice the article is written in the past tense. This is inappropriate. I'll have to remember to come back and fix that when I get the chance!Nojamus (talk) 03:58, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of M101 by services 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on M101 howitzer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120227102559/http://www.defencereserves.com/cms_resources/TheBayonet_AUG09_v3.pdf to http://www.defencereserves.com/cms_resources/TheBayonet_AUG09_v3.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:09, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Quite a lot of other weapon pages has procurement & operation section per each country. Also adding some historical background and information from the actual person involved is a worth noting. If there's nothing provided as citation to counterclaim the information written on the section, the tag will be removed. Kadrun (talk) 08:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The South Korea section is excessively and inappropriately detailed, contains WP:EDITORIAL and WP:TRIVIA, and as a result gives undue bias to the importance of South Korea in the weapon's history. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:09, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I can move back to KH178 105 mm Towed Howitzer development section. Also it explains how much the US was / is involved politically and technically. Let me know. Let's hear from more people, and I'll edit it appropriately. Kadrun (talk) 09:44, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think  would be the first person to contact regarding this. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:54, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  For what my opinion is worth, the South Korea section is poorly written (grammar/idiom), contains unnecessary detail. It needs editing in place rather than being a burden on any other article. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:16, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the clear up. Kadrun (talk) 02:50, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

text: Did more editing to simplify and correcting. I think current version is good? Let me know. Kadrun (talk) 10:11, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Better, but still not good [enough]. Not idiomatically English yet. But without English language sources I can't tell what the content/meaning should be. GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:42, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Korea section gets undue weight section