Talk:Wz. 35 anti-tank rifle

message: * Move for the reasons mentioned above and in the WP:RM. Halibutt 16:10, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
* Oppose - what should we call Type 97 20 mm AT/AA Rifle then? This looks like a dubious vote so soon after the previous one.  --Henrygb 01:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New voting

message: This has gone on long enough.  Please put forward any names that you believe are acceptable for this article.  Add them to the list but please do not discuss it in this section.  This is also not a vote, which I will start once we have some submissions.  I will add the current title to begin the list.  violet/riga (t) 13:10, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *Can you cite any other Wikipedia titles including a description as both an English translation and some other language? We don't even put both American English and British English in the same title (except for a brief trial of a Gasoline/Petrol title, or something along those lines). These two shouldn't be considered a serious proposal, but rather just Halibutt trying to make a ridiculous suggestion that everyone will reject. Gene Nygaard 13:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it was not me to propose a partial translation of the name of that weapon in the first place. Halibutt 15:46, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
Guys, this is getting pathetic. Cool down, stop wasting your time and spend it on something more productive.  --Lysy (talk) 18:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final naming decision 

message: :*Can you cite any other Wikipedia titles including a description as both an English translation and some other language? We don't even put both American English and British English in the same title (except for a brief trial of a Gasoline/Petrol title, or something along those lines). These two shouldn't be considered a serious proposal, but rather just Halibutt trying to make a ridiculous suggestion that everyone will reject. Gene Nygaard 13:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it was not me to propose a partial translation of the name of that weapon in the first place. Halibutt 15:46, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
Guys, this is getting pathetic. Cool down, stop wasting your time and spend it on something more productive.  --Lysy (talk) 18:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Commentary to name suggestions

message: Ok, after almost a month without any discussion here I decided to move this article to a shortened name, in accordance with other Polish arms listed in the Template:DefWarPlInfWeaponsNav. Halibutt 12:19, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The one we use know seems fine to me - at least we use original names and not ones invented by someone just to make them sound more "English". OTOH perhaps we could add an article on Polish weapons' naming scheme to the template. Halibutt 22:05, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 23:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class review

message: In the article, we refer to:
:... the tests of German-made Hagler bullets ...
This intrigued me, so I started hunting for more information -- but all in vain. The only reference I can find to these "Hagler bullets" are pages that (like this one) seem to translate one original Polish article (or possibly it is actually a blog post.)
However, in one forum I found a reference to these bullets being invented by "Gerlich" (presumably Hermann Gerlich of later squeeze bore fame), and that might set us on the right path. Because Gerlich's commercial high-velocity hunting rifles were made in Kiel by his partnership, "Halbe und Gerlich", which used the portmanteau Halger (not Hagler) as a brand name. Incidentally, while Halbe und Gerlich made the rifles, the high velocity cartridges were actually made for them by RWS. -- 202.63.39.58 (talk) 22:22, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hagler bullets -- probably a typo? 

message: Whatever the situation was in 2005 regarding the title of this page, there's really no reason nowadays to ignore WP:UE for this article. If the gun had a particular name in Polish (like, "Maroszek rifle" for example, as with the Boys) then we could use it; but as it is purely descriptive (ie. the Polish for "Model 35 anti-tank rifle") there's no reason not to use English. Which, I believe, would be the same rationale on the Polish WP, n'est ce pas? So I've changed it. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead sentence 

message: The article contains this bit "and sped up work on their own simplified, one-shot anti-tank rifle Panzerbüchse 39 (PzB 39)". Considering PzB 38 was ALREADY used DURING Invasion of Poland, that's some serious time travel going on. And as a falling block design it has similarities to Martini-Henry rifle, but in no way to a Mauser inspired magazine rifle.
P.S.: article also misses the focus point of these rifles completly. Main advantage of this rifle among other AT rifles is it's low weight and compact dimensions. Meaning that it is closer to antimateriel rifles and can be used as one, something oversized monsters like Lahti and PTRS can't do despite their order of magnitude higher power. Instead article tries to complement penetration mechanism as much as it can instead of understanding what makes it one of the 3 best AT rifle designs of WWII.
37.214.50.151 (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed indeed