Talk:Type 99 cannon

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Type 99 cannon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Japan Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 14:50, May 10, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: Kako River (Japan)
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Japanese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force

I attempted to clean up the entry somewhat. I limited my edit to grammer and word usage while keeping the original author's content intact. I hope this helps Liquidvelvet (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article suffered from the widespread confusion between the Type 99-1 and Type 99-2, which each have their own development history and different models. I tried to clean it up, but I suspect that the full detail is lost in the mists of time. I hope that a Japanese-speaking historian can be found to check the designations in Japanese, I can't tell whether they are correct. Mutatis Mutandis (talk) 19:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U.s. data from wwii is different than some in the article. I don't know which is correct. See http://www.lonesentry.com/ordnance/20-mm-aircraft-cannon-type-99-mk-ii.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsellers123 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]