Talk:152 mm gun-howitzer D-20

message: "152 mm has been a Russian calibre since World War I, when Britain supplied 6 inch Howitzers and Russia purchased 152 mm guns from Schneider (probably derived from the 155  mm Gun Mle 1877/16) for the Imperial Army.". This is very incorrect: 6-inch (152 mm) caliber was issued in Russian military as early as early 1870s with introducing of the first Russian rifled cannons, known as Model 1867. 6-inch guns were issued in the Army as seidge cannons and in Navy as the secondary guns for capital ships and main guns for cruisers. I cannot find an article in Wikipedia about Model 1867 guns but there is a mention in Breechloader: "The M1867 naval guns produced in Imperial Russia[23] at the Obukhov State Plant used Krupp technology." Later, 6-inch caliber was introduced in Model 1877 Army and Navy guns, and in 152 mm 45 caliber Pattern 1892. So the statement that 6-inch caliber was introduced in Russia only in WW1 is very, very incorrect. Please correct it. Thanks a lot! With best wishes, Gr.M. --176.193.81.90 (talk) 13:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect in History section 

message: In 1907 Schneider and the Russian Govt signed an agreement that Schneider would design and build prototypes of certain types of artillery pieces with a view to producing these guns in Russia. One of these types was a 152mm Siege Gun to replace older types in service with the Russian Army which did not have modern recoil absorption and recuperation. Schneider produced a prototype 152mm gun in 1910 based on a design for a 150mm for the Spanish Army and after testing by Schneider in France was sent to Russia for further tests. The gun was accepted as the 152mm Siege Gun Model 1910 and was produced at Putilov's St. Petersburg works. 
Peloux, "Matériels de Campagne et de Siège à Tir Rapide de Gros Calibres, Titre III. Canons Longe de Siege Système Schneider", Revue d'Artillerie, 80, Avr-Sep 1912, pp.118 - 130 (from http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k64702869)
http://milday.ru/ussr/ussr-army/urrs-artillery/771-152-mm-osadnaya-pushka-obrazca-1910-goda.html (Russian)
http://ww1.milua.org/R152osad.htm (Russian)
http://landships.info/landships/artillery_articles.html?load=artillery_articles/152_Putilov_M10.html
The Schneider Canon de 155 L Mle 1877/1914 was a gun born out of panic when the French Army realised that they were likely to be in a war with no modern heavy artillery. The Schneider gun used the barrel from the old Canon de 155 Mle 1877 de Bange gun married to a carriage with hydraulic recoil absorption and pneumatic recuperation that Schneider had developed for a 150mm gun that Schneider had prototyped for the Spanish Army. The deal with Spain never eventuated.
François Vauvillier & Pierre Touzin "Les Canons de la Victoire 1914-1918 Tome 1", Historie & Collections, 2006, p.53
François Vauvillier "Le 155 Long Modele 1877-1914 sur affût Schneider", Histoire de Guerre, Blindés et Matériel, No.83, Jun-Jul 2008, pp.46-51
http://landships.info/landships/artillery_articles.html?load=/landships/artillery_articles/Canon_155_Mle_1877_1914_Schneider.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlie Landships (talk • contribs) 11:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Schneider gun attributed to the WW1 Russian 152mm gun.  

message: I have added a citation to the header, "Ammunition". it now references an article where the information is similar. Everything Checks Out, and I don't want to remove the tag just yet, as my citation might have a few problems. Fetviper8 (talk) 03:10, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Permission to remove "Section is Unreferenced" in header: Ammunition 

message: Why is Poland marked on the map as an operator but not present on the operators list? 188.146.126.25 (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poland 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved to 152 mm gun-howitzer D-20. A rough consensus.  – robertsky (talk) 23:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: 152 mm towed gun-howitzer M1955 (D-20) →  – or  or . Per WP:MILMOS and WP:LOWERCASE and to remove redundant name and extra words in title. Titles should be WP:CONCISE, not provide excess detail. The "D-20" is an alternative name, not part of the same name and not a disambiguator. Wikipedia doesn't put two alternative names in article titles like that. The model name/number should be put first, before the equipment type description, not at the end of the title (see, e.g., WP:MILMOS#TANKS, which says to identify the equipment as a tank at the end, not before the model number). WP:MILMOS#Capitalization "". Also for consistency. Please note the related RMs at Talk:T1 Light Tank#Requested move 19 February 2024, Talk:Heavy Tank M6#Requested move 21 February 2024, Talk:A7 Medium Tank#Requested move 22 February 2024, and Talk:Ford 3-Ton M1918#Requested move 22 February 2024. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Military history has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 15:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Soviet Union has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 15:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I can support 152 mm gun-howitzer D-20 (the Russian is 152-мм пушка-гаубица Д-20) or 152 mm gun-howitzer M1955 but not the model designation at front of article title. GraemeLeggett (talk) 07:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Also
#Some weapons that are not American have a WP:CommonName with the Model part at the end of the name
#the M number does not exist in isolation but one of the descriptors that forms the gun name, the 3-inch gun M1917 is different from the 3-inch gun M1918 and in a different way this M1 gun is different to this M1 gun. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the two cited WP:MILMOS sections are relevant, since they both support the idea of putting the numerical model designation first and the equipment type description (e.g., tank, rifle, or howitzer) after that. Note that its guidance refers specifically to rifles and howitzers, not just tanks (please see the green quote). I don't see anything wrong with hypothetically using M1917 3-inch gun, M1918 3-inch gun, M1 37 mm gun, and M1 40 mm gun. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Common Name is the higher level policy. And that is not what those weapons are known as in sources. The MilMos only says for clarity that 'tank' should appear in title, applying it to other weapons would mean only that we should not have articles like 37 mm M1.  GraemeLeggett (talk) 07:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

text: D-20 or D-30 xx were the most common designations used in the Cold War-era books that I saw. I don't think that I ever saw that Russian Army designation until recently.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 23 February 2024