Talk:List of World War II infantry weapons/Archive 1

Please Read before contributing to the Germany section of this page
Many of you want to make this section better but unfortanuatly u actualy vadilze this section by addding please do not add these anymore they werenot common at alllll but media outlets and video games give the impression they were. any additions of these weapons will emiditly be reverted by me. i wrote this hoping people will read this and save me some time. (ForeverDEAD 03:51, 12 August 2007 (UTC))OK THE MP44 WAS A STANDERD ISSUE WEAPON TO THE SS FORCES AND THE GWEHER RIFLE WAS THERE M1GRAND
 * Gewehr 43
 * Mp44

I don't know about others, but when I put those down it's not because I thought they were common so much as I just didn't notice 'common' in the title. that could be part of the problem.--MKnight9989 12:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Common Weapons?
I want to ask for consensus but I can not see bows and arrows being common, it isn't even borderline. Yes we know of one person who claimed to use them, but it's much more likely that rocks were thrown more than arrows were used and just because rocks may have been used as weapons it is silly to list it as common. There are some other weapons whose status as common could be questioned, but none I think more flagrantly than this. .... these were not even standard issue by any armed force. Twi1609372 (talk) 23:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree, one man using it doesn't even qualify as secondary issue, let alone common, I also know the SS used the Luger pistols more than any other type of handgun. That gives it the possiblity of being a common weapon even though it was officially replaced by the P38(I interviewed a German Lieutenant who said he was issued 3 handguns over the course of the war, one Luger, one Vis, and one a "Pistol of America", this tells me the Luger was more common than the P38 itself). Also just because something is "offically" anything doesn't mean its true, Hitler decalred the Stg. 44 the offical standard issue rifle of Germany in February 1945, yet it was one of the rarest rifles of the war. Truth be told, most common is what many soldiers have rather than what is officially supposed to be standard issue. David Haring(80newwave@comcast.net)

Walther PP
I removed the parenthetical comment regarding the Walther PP and PPK "(private purchase for officers)" -- during WWII, the PP and PPK were issued to the German military and police, the Luftwaffe, some support personnel, and Nazi Party officials. Existing eamples of the PP and PPK carry a variety of marks, including the eagle "waffenampts" and swastikas, denoting acceptance by the military for issue. Here are a couple of quick links for reference: - http://www.onwar.com/weapons/infantry/firearms/Walther_PP.html: "During World War II they were issued to the..." - http://en.allexperts.com/e/w/wa/walther_ppk.htm: "...PP's and PPK's were issued to German military police, Luftwaffe, and other support personnel." - http://www.whog.org/ppk/markings.htm: "...Model PP and PPK will often be found with Nazi party abbreviations and insignia. Still others will be found with Army acceptance marks in the form of an eagle, Swastika, and Waffenamt numbers. The Waffenamt mark indicates that the gun has been accepted by the government inspector at the plant." MilPistolFan (talk) 15:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoever wrote this cannot spell at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.54.217.43 (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Mortars?
This article sounds like USA was the only country that commonly used an infantry mortars. But germans, italians, british and japanese too had mortars. Take granatwerfer 36 and 42 for example. Italians had Brixia Model 35, 45mm and 81mm variants. Japs had some models, each called "type" and some number behind, like type 97. While i don't know how common any variant was, im sure not only americans used mortars on common basis! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.191.39.41 (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC) edit: ok, brits have mortars in this list too, didn't notice. But most countries have none in theyr list, even germans or russians! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.191.39.41 (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Please be bold and expand the article. We'd be happy to have that information added. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  ((⊕)) 23:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Japanese Weapons
I would weary like it if somebody edited more Japanese weapons in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.8.186.202 (talk) 22:28, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Uncommon weapons
There are a lot of very UNcommon weapons listed here. If you're going to include some fairly esoteric stuff like the Johnson LMG - that was used only by Marine Raider units early in the war - you should consider renaming the article List of WWII Infantry Weapons. If not you need to purge out the oddballs - like the Johnson and the German one-offs. Just because they show up in a videogame doesn't mean they were even remotely common in reality.--Lepeu1999 20:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe that this page should be broken into three pages. Some of these weapons were used more extensively in the first two or three years of the war such as the American Springfield 1903 it was incredibly common early in the fight at places like Guadalcanal but you would have a very hard time finding one on the beaches of Normandy during Operation Overload. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.82.139.150 (talk) 18:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I removed Maxim gun. In its original form the Maxim was outdated by WW2, and while there may have been a more modern Russian gun based on it, more info is needed rather than just saying 'the Russians used the Maxim gun'. DJ Clayworth 22:48, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * Maxim M1910 was the primary Russian HMG through the war. It was never fully replaced with SG-43, appearing in 1943. Pibwl 12:42, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I would like to keep this page for weapons that were the primary ones in their class for the respective nations. A few exceptions, like the M1 Thompson and M3 "Grease Gun" which were both submachine guns used in large numbers are allowed. Oberiko 21:15, 27 Jan 2004


 * In many cases several weapons were used as primary ones, for example French ancient Berthier and lebel rifles (MAS-36 were in minority) Pibwl 12:42, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is this a list of weapons used by infantry, or personal weapons used by infantry? Is it only a list of what each country used that they made, or should each country's entry include weapons made by another country? GraemeLeggett 14:10, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

ones from other countries should be included — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.203.107 (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

THe lugger wasn't in common usage, Hitler replaced it with a new pistol... It should probably be listed in the "secondary weapon list"


 * The Luger was very common and popular even though the issue sidearm was the Walther P38. The Luger was considerably more common then many of the other weapons on this list.--Lepeu1999 01:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the "rare" weapons not be in this list since it is labeled as a list of "common" infantry weapons?Echo.brian 20:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't argue if you took them out--Lepeu1999 01:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

needs more flamethrowers

removed stuff
i removed things with the word rare and the assult rifle section due to they fact none of them werent common. i also took out luger because they were actualy not used muched by the german army, the widespread usage is something popularized by the media and movies.
 * I replaced it and left a note on your talk page. The Luger was rarer then the P38 but to say it was 'not used much' is an over simplification.  The MP44 and FG42 should remain in the article as even though they were rare, they both had a huge impact on subsequent weapon's design (the MP44 was the major inspiration for the AK47 and the FG42 the M60 Light Machine Gun)--Lepeu1999 12:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes they had futre inpact but this is common weapons not weapons that had a really good impact later on inlife. I could put in the liberator for gos skae on that bases, i could say it realy impacted concield weapons, but reall y i personaly would love to have those weapons here if they belonged, but seroisuly i undesrtan that media and video games have brought alot of attention to these weapons and over exagrete there use. if you wacth anything on the sturmgewher u wil see it never made a real impact, and Ive seen an interview with Mikhail kalashnikov that he even said the AK series of rifles were based more on the M1 garand and M1 carbine, the look of the sturm gewher is just cosmitcal. and also the M60 was a horible weapon it could barly do its job right, and the fg42 had mayby 5000 made total, seroisly unless you can provide some good evidence of why they should be kept besides futre impact,(also i think u should mkae a gun articls on revoultionary desgins u coulkd put it in there). Please this common weapons all rares can go to second /special issue (Esskater11 14:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC))

If you want to remove the really esoteric ones like the VG series and some of the one-off's, go ahead. I'm going to disagree with you on the Luger, MP44 and Fg42 as they WERE standard issue weapons. I can live with you taking out the latter 2 but not the P08. It was possibly 'uncommon' but it was far from rare. Certainly more common the the Walther PP series and they were a very popular private purchase pistol.--Lepeu1999 21:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I will not remove the P-08 and the only reason i dint remove private purchase i didnt no how common they were. but i am removing the sturm and FG. i hope this can be an acitable copromise(Esskater11 01:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC))

I agree yet like I said the SS issued Lugers regularly, some manufactured by Finland chambered for the uncommon 7.65mm Luger round. Yet it was a German designed weapon that, despite its problems, was popular with the German and Finnish Armies. In fact, 1.2 million Lugers were produced by the Germans compared to 1.1 million Walther P38's, this is especially telling since the Walther was produced for 1 to 3 years longer than the Luger. However I think the FG-42 and Stg. 44 should be removed because they were special issue weapons, the FG-42 was only issued in very limited numbers(estimated 7,000 total rifles) in 3 variants to the German Paratroopers, and the Stg. 44 was one of the rarest rifles of the war. Plus Walther PP and PPK's were privately purchased only by some German Officers and Police Officers who could afford them, a few were issued but most were purchased. The PP and PPK were so popular that they were a common war trophy on the Eastern Front, making it qualified to be common in my book. David Haring(80newwave@comcast.net)

I agree that the Luger should be left on the list even though the media has overdone the weapon in movies. The Luger saw a lot more service than some of the U.S. revolvers on this list. Also I agree that the Stg. 44 should be left on this list because of its impact on future weapons and the fact that it was the first of its kind to be used to any extent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.82.139.150 (talk) 18:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Removed the PTRS-41 from the Sniper Rifles section of the Soviet Union weapons list. The PTRS-41 was an anti-tank rifle and was never actually fitted with an sniper scope (which would've been pretty unpractical to begin with). Somebody must have picked that up from games like Call of Duty World at War os something. Also removed an comment claiming that the Panzerfaust was only used by the Hitler-Jugend and Volkssturm divisons (?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by TehFNGamer (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

i removed the madsen m50 as it wasn't made until 1950 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.108.198 (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

private purchases?
should they be included(Esskater11 18:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

this needs to have a lock on it for new users i constintly have to remove things

shut up. nealy none of the page would be there — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.118.127 (talk) 17:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

be bold
add more wapons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.70.177 (talk) 13:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Countries
Let's put the weapons in the list according to the COUNTRY OF ORIGIN.We all know they were used by several countries but, if they wanted to know that, then they could look on the given article.Thank you.RobertLunaIII (talk) 20:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

take belgium for example: i would have to look on every page if i had no idea what they used — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.115.11 (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree: it's unclear to me whether this lists common infantry weapons by country of origin, manufacturers, or weapons used by the infantries of various participating countries in WWII. I am stumped, for example, by the absence of Canada in this list, despite the presence of countries like Finland or Hungary. As both an important participant in the war, and a major manufacturer of many of the weapons listed here, Canada should be present, unless you only intend to list countries where these weapons were designed. If that's the case, Australia should only list the Owen, and perhaps the Sten-derived Austen SMGs.

If you are listing countries that manufactured weapons for use in WWII, Canada needs to be included. One could argue that Canada produced British weapons under contract, and that Canadian infantrymen were equipped in a similar fashion to their British counterparts, but that is not necessarily the case. John Inglis and Company made 60% of all Bren guns by 1943, as well as the Browning HP pistol, under contract from Fabrique Nationale. The Long Branch Arsenal likewise manufactured large quantities of Lee-Enfields, Canada-specific Sten SMGs (the Sten Mk. II-Canadian), and Bren guns.

Perhaps the best option would be to delete the Australia heading, and modify the "United Kingdom" heading so as to create a new "UK and Commonwealth" heading, perhaps with sub-headings for weapons specific to one or another of the "dominions".

Belgium's weapons should also be listed here, along with Czechoslovakia's. BugEyes (talk) 22:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

If you would start splitting hairs by what country used what weapons and made what weapons, it could become very confusing very quickly, espcially because the Germans were famous for issuing captured weapons to its soldiers regularly(I interviewed a German Sergant who fought in North Africa with a Carcano Rifle chambered in 7.92mm Mauser because that is what he was issued, not a Kar98k![he was captured in Algeria after being injured by the weapon exploding in his face!]) David Haring(80newwave@comcast.net)

I disagree, the country of origin is not as important as the side that actually used the weapon. Leon Nagant created the Nagant revolver, yet it was mostly used by the Soviet union. The M1 garand was used by the United states, yet it was of Canadian design. IE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.100.58.63 (talk) 02:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

forgoten weapons
you hav all missed simple comen weapons from contries. there is still alot missing though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.203.107 (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

can any one expand on latvia78.151.46.164 (talk) 12:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Austria!?!?
Why is Austria listed here? Austria did not exist as a separate nation during WWII, it was part of Germany and AFAIK Austrian soldiers were not issued weapons any different from any other part of Germany. Also non-participants in WWII: Czechoslovakia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. I'm removing Austria and Czechoslovakia now. Anyone want to defend inclusion of the Baltic nations? --CAVincent (talk) 05:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

actually the baltic states were in wwii and had armies like the rest Agunter999 (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Also: Ireland, Switzerland and Sweden? These need to be defended or removed. --CAVincent (talk) 05:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

had armies

what about before they were invaded. i am replacing them now!!! Agunter999 (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Signifcance
I just removed several countries which weren't in WWII. Many others weren't real players and were insignificant to the bigger picture. We may need to pare back down to just the weapons because we have repetition...this list was meant to be a List of weapons but not necessarily mapped to various countries. There was an argument further up the page to only place the country of origin which has merit as this list is unwieldy. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 14:20, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

These countries made the same sacrifice a the major players(or were a bout to and what if someone wanted to find out about this they will stayAgunter999 (talk) 18:11, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * No, we need to keep this pared down to what is germane. I'm starting to think we need to can the current format and go for a list of the weapons themselves - only - and the country of origin. Spain wasn't in the war, neither was Portugal etc. This list needs to be factual. ⋙–Ber<b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  20:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

say if i wanted to know the spanish weapons i would have to look throug every one to find out i rest my case — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.30.39.177 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2012 (UTC) Agunter999 (talk) 14:23, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * For a country that wasn't involved in the war Spain was quite busy for a neutral, Portugal was selling ore to one side and loaning the Azores to the other, Ireland was under emergency legislation. There's a whole article on how nations were directly and indirectly involved. That said a tweak of the article name might help. GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * And Sweden sold iron ore to Germany and ball bearings and other products to the UK, while at the same time raising and training Danish and Norwegian "police" troops intended for the liberation of those countries. They also provided the Finns with large quantities of weapons, from rifles and artillery pieces to fighter aircraft. And so on. So virtually every "neutral" country in Europe helped one side or the other, or both. Which means that if we ease the rules a bit we'll have to add just about every country in or near Europe to the list. Allan Akbar (talk) 19:16, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * What tweak of the article name would you suggest Graeme? I'm open to suggestions. I'm not sure why there are separate listings for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, etc. ==> all fall under the heading Soviet Union, imo. Thank you Allan for removing the non-participants. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  21:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania belong here since all three were independent countries between WWI and WWII. During WWII they were invaded and occupied, first by the Soviet Union (during the summer of 1940), then by Germany and later in the war once more by the Soviet Union. Allan Akbar (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Change the article wording so it is clear that it refers to the WWII period rather than specifically the combatant countries. It was a world war and all countries were affected. Those that were neutral were mostly armed neutral and prepared to defend their borders if threatened. GraemeLeggett (talk) 10:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Neutral countries
Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland, which were neutral during WWII and not involved in the actual war have been added to the list again by Agunter999, an edit that I have reverted since they clearly don't belong in the list. But I can see another edit war on the horizon, like the one on 20 May. Allan Akbar (talk) 15:39, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I see no problem with them being in the list with respect to the period covered, as I indicated above. GraemeLeggett (talk) 17:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The problems that I see with it are: A) The list becomes too long and unwieldy since it isn't limited to the European Theatre of Operations, meaning that virtually any country in the world can be added to it, and B) The name of the article is "List of common World War II infantry weapons", and a large percentage of the infantry weapons used by the neutral countries can hardly be regarded as being common since there was never any need to mass produce them. And if only weapons that actually were a common sight can be included in the list we will be repeating the same names over and over again under different flag icons/country names. Allan Akbar (talk) 17:42, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

This artical states wwii which is a pereod and these nations were free in this age so I revert them (I do have suport GraemeLeggett)Agunter999 (talk) 10:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC) please read
 * Sweden during World War II
 * Switzerland during the World Wars
 * Ireland during World War II
 * Portugal in World War II
 * Spain in World War II


 * Agunter999 (talk) 11:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "World War II" does not refer to a time period, it's the name of a war. The time period is referred to as "the World War II era" or "1939-1945". And since neutral countries did not take part in the war they don't belong in the list. Allan Akbar (talk) 11:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with Allan Akbar that the neutral countries need to be removed as they are watering down the meaning of the list. Many of the weapons on that page simply weren't used as weapons in the war. I have a suggestion that we require citations for inclusion which show that the weapon was indeed a common World War II infantry weapon. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  14:48, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Tanks
Are tanks allowed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agunter999 (talk • contribs) 11:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * No. Tanks are not "infantry weapons". Allan Akbar (talk) 12:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * (feeling confirmed this list has been trolled for a while) Yeah, this is the judgement in play here. This is getting closer to my concerns. <b style="color:#00C">⋙–Ber</b><b style="color:#66f">ean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b>  14:53, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Agunter999 has now been blocked indefinitely for disruptive editing (edit warring, content forking and talk page vandalism). Allan Akbar (talk) 11:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

new page
I have created a seperate page for the nuetral countries to solve this ongoing dispute agunter998 creating that page was a solution not a problemDavfox9999 (talk) 09:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Agunter999's new alias, Davfox9999, has been added to the sockpuppet investigation and the page nominated for speedy deletion because of CSD-G5. Thomas.W (talk) 10:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * pardon I was just trying to solve an issue 2.96.67.53 (talk) 15:15, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * it's not a bad idea thoughAcdlgfgg (talk) 16:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * it would slove the entire issue 2.96.68.160 (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Unlisted Weapons
Why are there a list of weapons before the 'Contents'?

RobertLunaIII (talk) 03:10, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Country of Origin
Can we keep the weapons under the country that they originated from? Thanks. RobertLunaIII (talk) 00:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

then we must deleat at least half the page. if you wanted to know about belgian weapons the you would have to check through all the weapons! Agunter999 (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is true. That is called research. RobertLunaIII (talk) 03:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Title doesn't match list
Is this meant to be the List of common World War II infantry weapons or the Exhaustive list of all World War II era infantry weapons (including neutral countries)?

The title certainly doesn't match the contents. In which battle was the Mendoza C-1934 used? It looks like this list needs hard pruning starting with countries whose roles were insignificant. This list has been subject to socks adding disinformation like this before. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:37, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Argentine Weapons
The title describe "list of Common World war II infantry weapons", but, most of the argentine weapons were not wery common, and at least 3 or 2 were only use for trial purposes, and others never enter in service. i will like make some changes in that list, and there are all verificable. Here is a page with the common argentine weapons before and during the WWII: http://www.militariarg.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.4.77.57 (talk) 00:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Shisei Type Hei
What is a Shisei Type Hei? Can I get some sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:4081:D690:315E:9CA9:8EA8:6794 (talk) 18:13, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

"What is a Shisei Type Hei?" it is an automatic rifle of 1934

"Can I get some sources?" of course

http://i59.tinypic.com/s3pmz6.jpg Shisei Type Hei automatic rifle 1934 - guest

Merge?
This page seems quite similar to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW2_infantry_weapons_by_faction#.C2.A0United_States_.28Allies.29Thom430 (talk) 15:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Handguns or Pistols
I'm going to change pistols to handguns for uniformity if no one objects. Samf4u (talk) 18:05, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * since all are handguns how about changing to sidearms that seems to be more correct for small firearms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.85.74 (talk) 11:04, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Flag icons in section headers
The Wikipedia manual of style is clear. MOS:HEADINGS says
 * "Section headings should:
 * …Not contain images or icons...
 * These restrictions are necessary to avoid technical complications, and are not subject to override by local consensus or WP:IAR." ie that there are no exceptions to this.

Accordingly these should be removed.GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge with WW2 infantry weapons by faction
Redundant article —SpanishSnake (talk | contribs) 23:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete that article is a better idea than merge. GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)


 * this article wasn't redundant but for some reason someone deleted the only section that wasn’t a mess and and neatly sorted by category instead of the redundant by nation mess without that table if anything the WW2 infantry weapons by faction article is the one that should be deleted due to it’s messiness incompleteness and being and general poor structure bad premise and unnavigability if anything we should delete the messy by faction structure of this article and reorganize it by category 2601:405:4A80:4700:DDF:673F:F2E7:7C25 (talk) 02:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Czech image?
No offense to the Czechs or Slovakians, but shouldn't the image be representing one of the more-used weapons like Soviet, German, Japanese, British, Chinese or American small arms? Juxlos (talk) 11:23, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria
The article title and brief introduction suggest that any item needs to have been in 'mainstream' use by infantry. Do we interpret infantry as specifically just infantry or equivalent or would it apply to pioneer/engineer units? GraemeLeggett (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Soviet guerilla.jpg

Browning Automatic Rifle
I notice that this list lacks the American B.A.R. I feel like this is a mistake and the weapon should be under the rifles section for the United States. 96.35.60.159 (talk) 16:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Disregared this. I just found it under the Machine Gun section. 96.35.60.159 (talk) 16:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Should captured weapons really be listed?
Many nations' lists appear to be needlessly bloated by the inclusion of weapons captured from enemy nations.

Is that really the point of this list?

Especially the list for Germany seems to contain every single model of firearm ever picked up by a German soldier. This pile of tangential information makes it exceedingly difficult to find anything relevant. Herr Hartmann (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I would lean towards agreeing with you on this personally, but I could also see that not mentioning captured weapons being a major part of a countries' small arms stock could leave out that information. I'll track down another editor and ask their perspective on the situation. 96.35.60.159 (talk) 16:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * There are captured weapons and there are captured weapons. A unit of German soldiers with their back against the wall pick up some Soviet submachine guns and use them until they get re-supplied with MP40s and ammunition -not really worth including. German Army collects every Lee-Enfield left behind at Dunkirk, gives them a clean and polish, notes the serial numbers and issues them carefully to selected units - worth mentioning. Germany Army captures rifle factory and starts production for its own use - a must have.
 * Now obviously the kleptomaniac German Reich relied a lot on reusing anything it could lay its hands on, and that should be reflected in the lists. In some cases that might be in the German part of listing. In others it might be a note against the original user. GraemeLeggett (talk) 16:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Can this list get semi-protection?
I use it usually as reference but it's often randomly destroyed or vandalized. Once upon time Denmark was deleted, now Albania section is a total mess that has listed year and tool instead of gun... WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 01:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

(Lack of) sourcing
This article has SEVERE sourcing problems. Very little of the content is sourced, and there appears to be a continual stream of editors (mainly ip editors) who make unsourced changes or add commentary (much of which appears to be original research. Something needs to be done to revert this back to something that can be properly sourced.Nigel Ish (talk) 16:10, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Chinese forces didn't Lend-Leased Springfield
M1917 Enfield was Lend-Leased to forces in Burma but not Springfield. Beside OSS, Springfield was issued in Civil war after WWII WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 13:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia
Why is this section here - what forces is it meant to cover - Czechoslovakia was occupied during the war. While there were Czechoslovak-manned units operating under both British and Soviet control, these operated with normal British or Soviet weapons as appropriate and not the list of Czech weapons here. The various free-Czechoslovak forces don't really need there own section, but can be treated as a part of the "parent" nation. Slovakian forces have there own separate section so shouldn't come into the discussion. I propose to delete this section unless someone can come up with a sensible scope and of course sources. Everything in this list should be sourced.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * It could be considered as weapons from what-remains-of-Czechoslovakia rather than weapons used by Czechoslovakians. The article doesn't have a scope defined in the lede, so perhaps that's the first step. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Czechoslovakia should had only weapons used by Free Czechoslovakian Forces - some of them have fought in North Africa (To be confirmed)
 * Current Section makes no sense since it didn't exist at that time period and their weaponry should be shifted to German Section since they were produced under Occupation WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 20:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Austria section
I have deleted the Austria section from the article as Austria as an independent state did not exist during the Second World War - Austrian soldiers served as part of Nazi Germany's armed forces /paramilitary forces.Nigel Ish (talk) 13:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I would do the same thing for Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Montenegro, Egypt and Mexico.
 * Baltic States were basically annexed. Montenegro didn't existed.
 * Egypt afaik didn't participated (To be confirmed) and Mexico only send air forces (To be confirmed) WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 20:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Delete Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Montenegro and Egypt Sections
Baltic States were annexed without any single shot and didn't participated in conflict: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Baltic_states#Soviet_occupation_and_annexation_(1940–1941)

Egypt didn't fought in WWII, it was already stated here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Egypt#World_War_II

Montenegro didn't existed as country WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 22:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Egyptian Army anti-aircraft units may have defended the cities even if its army wasn't fighting on the front; I'm looking to see if there's anything authoritative. GraemeLeggett (talk)

Prototypes
Prototype weapons should be marked or should have added note "(Prototype)" WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 19:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Slovak Republic Section
Section should include Suomi KP/-31 as it was issued to Slovak Forces on Eastern Front https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suomi_KP/-31#Users WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 20:02, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Belgian section
Add Belgian Chauchat Model 1915/27 as it was issued to rear-line/reserve troops. Stated by Forgotten weapons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RtTck6tLIU WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 13:17, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

German section
Germany should have Wz. 35 anti-tank rifle. It was used by German forces in 1940 as PzB 35 (p) https://pl.pinterest.com/pin/pinterest--708261478877434751/ WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 21:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * German section has 35M Rifle which is incorrect. Name should be changed to 43M Rifle or Gewehr 98/40 and lead exactly here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35M_rifle#43M_and_Gewehr_98/40 WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 13:45, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Proposal: Model SS-41. Czechoslovak AT rifles adopted by SS. Produced only few hundreds. Served on Eastern Front in 1941-1942 where it got withdrawn from service.
 * https://www.forgottenweapons.com/the-model-ss41-a-czech-bullpup-anti-tank-rifle-for-the-ss/ WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 17:19, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Polish section possible improvements
Mortars: -wz.18 seems to be just a polish variation of Stokes Mortar. wz.28 is just and upgraded version -wz.18/31 & wz.31 seems to be a variations of Brandt Mle 17/31 http://www.1939.pl/uzbrojenie/polskie/artyleria/m_81mm_wz18_31_1928/index.html -wz.36 Bofors http://www.1939.pl/uzbrojenie/polskie/artyleria/a_ppanc_37mm/index.html -wz.S Smoke grenade https://web.archive.org/web/20220518234210/http://www.lexpev.nl/grenades/sovietbalkan/poland/granatdymnys.html -wz.33 grenades (offensive and defensive): https://web.archive.org/web/20220527032907/http://www.lexpev.nl/grenades/sovietbalkan/poland/granatzapzecnywz33.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220518231202/http://www.lexpev.nl/grenades/sovietbalkan/poland/granatobronnywz33.html WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 09:51, 18 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Additional thing for Polish Section:
 * -Colt wasn't issued to the forces on the West but Smith & Wesson Revolver https://pl.pinterest.com/pin/387168899218075269/
 * -MAS36 rifle should be added as it was used by French equipped forces in 1940 (Polish forces in France and Norway)
 * Photo was literally shown in MAS36 WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Boys AT rifle was also issued to Forces on The West WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 20:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Browning Hi-Power - weapon should be removed from list due to lack of any evidence that this was issued to Polish troops. Weapon was used post-war by GROM WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 18:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Ross rifle
Is there any evidence that Ross rifle was used as sniper rifle during World War 2? Article mentions only World War 1 WWIIEnjoyer (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2023 (UTC)