Talk:Executioner's sword

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Europe Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Inconsistencies[edit]

The swords "were lacking a point," yet the illustration clearly shows a standard two-handed sword, point and all. Can someone clear this up? Xiphe 02:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions 1540 as the earliest date, yet the photograph shows a sword from 1484! 145.253.2.29 (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have serious doubts the sword depicted dates from 1484, but I have to admit this seems to be what the label suggests. We need more and better sources. --dab (𒁳) 19:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Three holes in the tip of the blade[edit]

What would be the reason for them? 70.50.4.186 (talk) 01:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about the veracity of it, but in the manga Innocent these swords are portrayed, and the holes are said to whistle when there's bad edge alignment in the cut 185.185.55.72 (talk) 03:05, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]