Overleg:Mannlicher M1895

message: Hallo Dennis !
De afbeelding is - zoals door mij aangegeven - van een Oostenrijks Mannlichergeweer met de volgende verschilpunten met het Nederlandse geweer M.95:
ander kaliber: 8 x 50 R
ander grendelsysteem
andere patroonhouder.
Teneinde desinformatie te voorkomen zou het beter zijn om mijn opmerking over de afbeelding niet weer te verwijderen.
Met vriendelijke groet,
Fortie
_____________________
AMAG 21 sep 2008 14:14 (CEST) Vrij veel taaltechnische zaken aangepast. Bovendien bron aangepast, want daaruit is alle informatie door de eerste auteur overgenomen.

message: As it seems this article is about two different rifles; the Dutch Mannlicher and the Austrian Mannlicher M95. You guys should really fix this to avid misinformation.
Groeten uit Slovenië! M11rtinb (overleg) 19 jun 2015 14:56 (CEST)
replies: text: Giving the article a grammatically flawed name doesn't help. If you don't speak Dutch, it would have made sense to discuss first and, if appropriate, rename later. Richard 19 aug 2015 10:46 (CEST)
replies: text: :Sorry, I just wanted to help, but I agree that I didn't act appropriately. However, if you're interested I'd like to help you correct some errors in the article. I can provide sources, if necessary, but I belive that the Dutch M95 rifles were not manufactured in Steyr, Hembrug and Budapest but only in Steyr and Hembrug. Also there weren't 3 millions produced, but roughly 500000, respectively. I also saw that you removed a drawing of the action, saying the picture was of the Beaumont rifle (as suggested by its title and description) and of the Austrian Mannlicher by content, which it is clearly not, as the Austrian Mannlicher utilized a straight-pull (non-rotating) bolt-action, different ammunition and a different ammo-clip. I'm not trying to fight with you, I just want to help. M11rtinb (overleg) 19 aug 2015 16:58 (CEST)
replies: text: ::If the title of the image is wrong, a rename might be considered. In any case, in the article was referred to the image as 'this image shows a rifle, but in most aspects it doesn't reflect the rifle that was used in the Netherlands'. It wasn't just because the name of the image suggested differently, the text of the article played an even bigger part.

text: ::If you have sources for the other remarks you made, please post them here and I'll see if and how they can be used to improve the article. Thank you in advance.

text: ::Last: I didn't think you were trying to pick a fight. If I gave you that impression, I'm sorry for that. Richard 19 aug 2015 17:17 (CEST)
replies: text: :::candrsenal.com - A Quick and Dirty Guide: Dutch Mannlichers - A quick introduction to the different models.

text: :::candrsenal.com - Dutch Mannlicher Model 1895 - In depth article about the (long) rifle.

text: :::John Walter - Rifles of the World - If you prefer book references.

text: :::Othais, the guy from candrsenal.com does a great job of describing the different rifle variants and the (long) rifle itself in depth. It's a good read if you're interested. I also added a book reference, that shortly describes the rifle. M11rtinb (overleg) 19 aug 2015 18:16 (CEST)
replies: text: :::: I'll look into it, if possible tomorrow. Richard 19 aug 2015 21:18 (CEST)
replies: text: ::::: As promised, I've taken a look at your suggestions. They agree with your remarks (didn't expect anything else). However, when I read the article, the mistakes you thought you noticed aren't really there. The given number is for the entire range of this gun, not just the models used by the Netherlands. Budapest is not mentioned as a site where the Dutch version was produced either. I can understand how someone with insufficient knowledge of the language might come to the wrong conclusion though. I will try and incorporate 'your' numbers in the article and add some remarks. Richard 20 aug 2015 15:07 (CEST)
replies: text: :::::: Oh, sorry, I didn't understand that you're trying to describe two different rifles in the same article. Isn't it a bit odd to describe two such diverse models in the same article? Wouldn't it be maybe better if they were described in their own articles? M11rtinb (overleg) 20 aug 2015 15:39 (CEST)
replies: text: ::::::: It starts with a brief history of the rifle in general, but soon focuses on the Dutch version. Richard 20 aug 2015 15:50 (CEST)
thread_title:  Sorry, but I don't speak Dutch 

message: Hallo medebewerkers,
Ik heb zojuist 1 externe link(s) gewijzigd op Mannlicher M1895. Neem even een moment om mijn bewerking te beoordelen. Als u nog vragen heeft of u de bot bepaalde links of pagina's wilt laten negeren, raadpleeg dan deze eenvoudige FaQ voor meer informatie. Ik heb de volgende wijzigingen aangebracht:
*Archief https://web.archive.org/web/20151002101629/http://candrsenal.com/rifle-dutch-mannlicher-model-1895/ toegevoegd aan http://candrsenal.com/rifle-dutch-mannlicher-model-1895/
Zie de FAQ voor problemen met de bot of met het oplossen van URLs.
Groet.—InternetArchiveBot (Fouten melden) 20 mei 2018 12:48 (CEST)
thread_title:  Externe links aangepast 

message: Waarom staat er lengte 1,1 m? De Steyr was 1,285 m lang zonder bajonet, zoals vrijwel al zijn tijdgenoten van de lengte 1,25-1,4 waren. Ik snap nooit zo goed waarom op Wikipedia zoveel fouten vermeld worden, zelfs van zaken die zo makkelijk in betrouwbare literatuur na te zoeken zijn. Ik heb het dus van 1,1 m naar 1,285 m veranderd. Merkwaardig genoeg komt de looplengte niet in de bewerkpagina tevoorschijn, maar ook die is verkeerd. In plaats van 0,6 m was dat 0,79 m Grebbegoos (overleg) 7 dec 2019 11:24 (CET)
thread_title: onjuiste lengte=