Jump to content

Talk:IWI Tavor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ukrainian license

[edit]

Can we get a citation for the info on "Ukrainian licensed Tavors"? How do we know that Ukraine purchased a license, when? - jrochkind — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrochkind (talk • contribs) 14:59, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know a good search engine ?--Le Petit Chat (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Units in service

[edit]

The TAR-21 has just entered service with the Golani Brigade as well as the Givati Brigade as of August 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.139.152.16 (talk) 22:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a friend in Kfir brigade who also has a TAR-21 as his personal weapon - AvihooI.

Logic Edit

[edit]

For anyone who cares, I removed a statement that was logically incorrect about rifles. The article said, before the edit that the rifle requires partial disassembly to swap from lefty to righty ejection. That is true. The article then said that a result of this is that a shooter can not shoulder the weapon to go around a corner on the "wrong" shoulder, and that this problem is unusual among rifles. Most rifles in the world today are not easily configurable for right-handed or left-handed operation, without disassembly. The most prolific rifles in the world at the moment (the AK-47 and M-16 families) can not be modified at all, most components must be replaced, including the receiver, to allow left-handed operation. Even with these "flaws", either can be fired from either shoulder, with a minor inconvenience to the shooter if it is on the "wrong" shoulder. So both of those points are incorrect. 64.102.254.33 (talk) 17:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to reconfigure an M16 or AK-47 to fire from the left shoulder. Both will function perfectly from the left shoulder, and without any injury to the operator. Most bullpup designs do not allow for left-shoulder use, without at least partial disassembly and reconfiguration as with the Tavor. Some can not be reconfigured and are physically dangerous to fire from the left shoulder as the charging handle reciprocates and would strike the shooter in the face, causing serious injury.
This is not a trivial criticism of bullpups. Firing only from the right shoulder means that the soldier must expose his entire head and upper torso in order to fire around the left side of cover. This greatly increases the likelihood of being injured or killed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.185.105 (talk) 09:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


It's true that the AK and AR can easily be fired from the opposite shoulder, but they have conventional layouts with the ejection port at least a foot forward of the back of the stock. Ejected casings will easily clear the shooter's face. Bullpup rifles like the Tavor are much more difficult to shoot off the opposite shoulder because the ejection port is much closer to the rear of the stock. When firing a bullpup like this from the opposite shoulder it will eject casings right into the shooter's face. Some bullpups solve this by ejecting spent cases downward (P90) or forward (Kel-Tec RFB). The Tavor does neither. Blackeagle (talk) 21:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A Tavor can be fired from the "wrong" shoulder; getting hot cases in the face is uncomfortable, but does not preclude proper operation. 68.146.30.79 (talk) 10:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Tavor is not 100% designed for left-handers but at least it has a design more suitable than Singapore SAR-21. The SAR-21 cannot be easily shot using the left-hand while even the Micro-Tavor can.

147.188.254.196 (talk) 11:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

addition

[edit]

on fps creator, there is a weaopn called tavor. should that be included? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 97.81.109.36 (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No? Koalorka (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why should it be included? Spartan198 (talk) 01:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

maximum Range

[edit]

On the Maximum range it says 3600m, That is more than a standard issue sniper rifle. Can this be changed to the correct range, and/or does anyone know the correct Maximum range? --91.105.29.13 10:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ithink taht this was made with a some of Isreali prejudice. There seem to be some of mistakes that glorifi the weapon.

I think whoever wrote that meant 360 meters, not 3600. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeratul2k (talk • contribs) 22:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The maximum range is how far the bullet travels if unimpeded, and they often go much, much further than their effective range. The figure is not a mistake. Geoff B 22:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They ALWAYS go further than their effective range. Otherwise, correct (-: --212.235.85.149 (talk) 19:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, by my calculations (which do not include air resistance) the max range of a weapon firing at around 3000 feet per second is like twenty-something miles. There's no reason to doubt that a bullet will travel 3.6 kilometers. Hell, the warning label on a box of .22 rimfire ammo says "lethal within five miles" and a 5.56mm cartridge has a lot more ooomph than that stuff. Maximum range is a bogus stat, but if you're just asking "how far it will go," then 3600 meters is a really conservative estimate. J.M. Archer (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Air resistance can not be ignored. The maximum range of 5.56mm ball is about 3600m. This is determined by actual testing. The maximum range of .22LR cartridges is nowhere near "five miles"; it's about 2000m, again from actual testing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.185.105 (talk) 10:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Issued?

[edit]

has the Tavor been issued to Israeli infantry yet? 82.47.137.100 19:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, no. I suppose it's possible, but not likely, that some of their SOF units have seeing as the SOF units of all nations don't always tell you what they use.65.54.154.46 (talk) 05:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)13tawaazun14[reply]

Just read the service section. 86.84.221.109 (talk) 00:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both of these comments are older then what is shown. I entered one of them like 2 years before my service changed.13Tawaazun14 (talk) 23:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another country using Tavor that is not mentioned

[edit]

I saw a video by the Croatian army and they seem to use the Tavor. Would someone with more expertise look this up, and then add it to the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.56.20 (talk) 01:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've probably confused the VHS for the TAR-21. I suggest you look at the video again. Jun Kayama (talk) 22:28, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On this video you can see the TAR-21 in service in the Republic of Macedonia's armed forces (time index 2:57 and onwards): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S04s40UuHRo&feature=player_embedded Does anyone have any data on this. This video is just 2 days old and is from the Independence Day parade.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain dalan (talk • contribs) 17:57, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Folding Stock

[edit]

The article states: 'By 2005, IMI had supplied 350–400 Tavors to India's northern Special Frontier Force (SFF). These were declared to be "operationally unsatisfactory", however, due to problems with their folding stock.'

Folding stock? It's a bullpup, the stock categorically does not fold.

Nahal Brigade

[edit]

I added info about the upcoming switch to Tavor. PluniAlmoni (talk) 12:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey

[edit]

http://birliknet.net/uploads/1/33%5B1%5D.jpg

turkey use it this pohto is from 2008 or 2007 from EFES Landing Traning

sorry there is no source becouse the weapon trades of the special forces keeped secret

Azerbaijan and Turkey

[edit]

The Tavor is also in use with Azerbaijani and Turkish special forces, and there are numerous photos of these troops wielding Tavors in parades or exercises. The "owner" of this page seems to insist on having a "credible source" such as newspaper articles as references. Militaries in Turkey and Azerbaijan do not operate with the levels of transparency that Western populations take for granted, and many weapons purchases are simply never reported in the media. This means there probably will never be a "credible source" (by the criteria used in this article) for verifying Tavor's use in these countries.

I wonder what could be more credible than actual photos showing the weapon in use by these countries' soldiers??

Azerbaijani special forces with Tavors: http://www.murdoconline.net/2008/azerbaijan_tavor.jpg Turkish special forces with Tavors: http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/4382/pic00941lg2.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.172.111.123 (talk) 04:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read Wikipedia's verifiability policy or even the note you're shown when you open an edit window. Direct quote: Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. You need to provide either a reliable source stating those organizations use the weapon, or else a picture with a caption from a reliable source identifying the organizations that are pictured. ROG5728 (talk) 05:01, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken. I was able to find a reference to Azerbaijan's Tavor purchase in the monthly bulletin of the Turkish Undersecretariat for Defense Industries, which in turn refers to a past issue of Jane's Defense Weekly. I added it as a reliable source and added Azerbaijan as a verifiable Tavor user. I hope to find a source for the Turkish purchase, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.172.111.123 (talk) 06:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup / merge

[edit]

The Users section and the Deployment section should be re-arranged. The Deployment section may contain information about deployment in IDF, in this case the Users section should be called Export (without Israel). Flayer (talk) 16:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. PluniAlmoni (talk) 09:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Flayer (talk) 10:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fire selector options

[edit]

In this article, it states that the Tavor allows for semi-automatic, Burst, and fully automatic fire, with a "safe" position as well, but, according to numerous sources, IWI's website being one of them, the weapon is not configured for "burst fire". I do have to say it is not entirely impossible a version which allows two or three round bursts(most likely three)was or is manufactured in small numbers, but to my knowledge there isn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.131.101.161 (talk) 23:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reference site not now available.

[edit]

It seems this reference site is no longer available.

^ "IWI Tavor civilian semi-automatic carbine". Canadaammo.com. Retrieved 2010-08-31

Please make note!

Regards, Ronald L. Hughes

96.19.158.71 (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes[reply]

Problem in design description

[edit]

The article states "The TAR-21 is waterproof" What does that even mean, hahahaha, no conventional rifle or bull-pup rifle is "Water proof" lol, makes no sense at all. It then goes on to say The weapon has a built in laser and MARS red dot sight; one of the main advantages of having a built in system is that the weapon does not have to be zeroed after each use Again this statement doesn't make sense, it suggests that other firearms without such a system need to be re-zeroed after each use, this is entirely false, even with aftermarket sights such as the aimpoint, eotech, or acog, when replaced on the same slot of pcatinny rail, no re zero is necessary.

This section should be edited accordingly96.54.181.40 (talk) 21:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IMI or IWI?

[edit]

There are numerous references in this article to IMI and IWI. Are these typos, or are there really two separate entities. If there are, need clarification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.247.207.210 (talk) 17:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IWI used to be the Small Arms Division of IMI, an Israeli government-owned company. IMI sold the Small Arms Division to a group of private owners who renaed it IWI.
http://www.israel-weapon.com/default.asp?catid={5C80290A-8823-4F46-9454-675D18629CC1} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.185.105 (talk) 10:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why no comparision with Steyr AUG?

[edit]

Another older bullpup, similar and its not worth mentioning? Alexmcfire (talk) 20:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because no reliable sources have made that comparison, and we can not make our own. 217.209.73.224 (talk) 03:17, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be like comparing the G36 to an AR-15 just because they're both conventional; it's not like bullpups are some new revolutionary idea. The first french ones were made around 1950. AA Quantum (talk) 12:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding this for user reference?

[edit]

Should we add this since the Pennsylvania State Capitol Police adopted the Tavor SAR? Ominae (talk) 07:37, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For reference.

[edit]

I added this external link

but was reverted with vague reference to WP:EL. What is wrong with this link? It is informative and contain technical information about the Tavor, including shooting range tests. MathKnight 21:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was no explanation given what is wrong with this link, I re-add it to the page. MathKnight 20:10, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on IMI Tavor TAR-21. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:28, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MTAR-21 and X95

[edit]

The MTAR-21 and X95 are not the same weapon. This is an MTAR-21 and this is an (original) X95. The X95 is a development of the MTAR, and has a whole hand trigger guard, vs the single finger guard of the MTAR.

Somewhat unhelpfully when trying to logging the history of variants, IWI currently produces the X95 in the following forms: this one has a whole hand trigger guard and different forearm to the MTAR and original X95; this is an X95 with MTAR-type (single finger) trigger guard and new forearm; and this is an X95 SMG, which still uses the MTAR/original X95 forarm and X95 guard (also available with MTAR-21 trigger guard,[1], and may be available with the other forearm?).

To put it simply, there are two forearm styles and two trigger guard styles, and if it has a round forearms and single finger guard, it should be an MTAR-21; anything else is an X95.

I now see it's not as clear cut as I thought it was when I started writing this! RadiculousJ (talk) 10:00, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Will modify variants of both the Tavor and X95 pages. AA Quantum (talk) 16:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did some research; the versions with different trigger guards aren't different variants, they're just options of customization, like how adding a foregrip doesn't make an M4 a different variant. The forearms though, they're different variants; the circular one is an MTAR-21, the rectangular one with the rail covers built in is an X95. This can be proven by searching on Google images; if you search X95, a massive majority of the time it shows the rectangular one, and if you search MTAR-21, it shows the circular one. It is also shown by going to IWI's official website; under Products - X95, it shows the rectangular one. It should also be noted that the MTAR-21 design was abandoned and is no longer produced. I will now edit accordingly. AA Quantum (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have conducted further research after a few of my changes on here have been reverted and me looking around at X95s. The handguards are not different weapon models, but just different variants of the X95. The MTAR-21 is this. The rounded handguards are for military use to put a suppressor on and have it sit in the handguard; the one with the rail covers is the civilian version, and the one with rail covers, a longer handguard, and thicker buttplate is the U.S. civilian one. AA Quantum (talk) 02:47, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The X-95 was called the MTAR-21 until well into 2011. They are the same variant. The X-95 itself didn't really need a separate article, it was content-forking at the time. The problem is that nobody weighed into the discussion about the content fork.Avaya1 (talk) 08:54, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on IWI Tavor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on IWI Tavor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1.1.1 long stroke piston

[edit]

The second paragraph in this section contains one statement referring to "less reliable short stroke piston systems" which is an unsubstantiated blanket statement without citation and should be removed, and reference to the M1 Garand's reliability in adverse conditions (implied to be due to said long-stroke gas piston, already a dubious claim) is demonstrably false and should also be removed.2601:1C2:5203:14F1:F91B:3182:B66C:AF85 (talk) 08:00, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move page?

[edit]

Dang it BilCat. So, IWI lists both the TAR-21/SAR and X95s as "Tavor"s (Tavor TAR-21, Tavor X95), and the X95 page is listed as "Tavor X95", so naming this page simply "IWI Tavor" is incorrect. Does anyone object? AA Quantum (talk) 00:37, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is this page has been moved several times, along with other IWI weapons, without discussion, every time a relatively new user decides the current name is incorrect. Just get a consensus before you move the page. - BilCat (talk) 01:06, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is the problem with the Tavor pages; people rarely use the talk pages. AA Quantum (talk) 13:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article is for the IWI Tavor. It is considered a single rifle, with different variants. In the IDF they're all referred to as 'Tavors'. The confusion probably comes from the content forking for the Tavor X-95 variant. We had a discussion about whether or not to delete the content fork, but no other editors weighed in at the time. Avaya1 (talk) 09:05, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The X95 isn't a variant of the Tavor, it is a Tavor. "Tavor" is a family of rifles, kind of like the "Kalashnikov" family of rifles; you'd call all Kalashnikovs (AK-47s or derivatives highly similar to it) "AKs". The TAR-21 has it's own variants, just as the X95 does. There is a new Tavor that's not for sale yet called the Tavor 7; it's in 7.62x51mm.AA Quantum (talk) 15:12, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They're called Tavors in Israel and in the IDF. All Hebrew sources call them Tavors or Micro-Tavors. The X-95 and the MTAR-21 and Micro-Tavor are all the same rifle - X-95 is simply the international marketing name. In all IDF and Hebrew reports, it's called a Micro-Tavor. Avaya1 (talk) 01:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Most of those points are valid, except the MTAR-21 part. This is a picture of an MTAR-21, coming from a very incorrect article: http://www.nazarian.no/wep.asp?id=793&group_id=5&country_id=85&lang=0 It was a prototype that was created in the process of making the X95. AA Quantum (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on IWI Tavor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:07, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

X95 / MTAR / MTAR-21 Difference Discussion

[edit]

The X95 and the MTAR-21 are two different firearms; The MTAR-21 is a variant of the TAR-21. All of them are part of the Tavor rifle family.

Now let us discuss whether or not this is true. Keep it civil. AA Quantum (talk) 03:06, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The MTAR-21 is the same as the X-95, as mentioned in all reliable sources, and in Hebrew sources - simply an older and newer name.Avaya1 (talk) 05:24, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is a picture of an MTAR-21, a prototype variant created in the early stages of developing the X95, based on the CTAR-21: http://www.nazarian.no/wep.asp?id=793&group_id=5&country_id=85&lang=0. The article is very incorrect, but I couldn't find the original article I got the info from. AA Quantum (talk) 21:55, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
MTAR-21 stands for Micro-Tavor (21st century), which is the same as x95.--יניב הורון (talk) 23:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Are you Israeli? Can you confirm that most sources in Hebrew call it an MTAR-21? And also, just for information's sake, what is this then: http://www.nazarian.no/wep.asp?id=793&group_id=5&country_id=85&lang=0. AA Quantum (talk) 02:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, this is the English page, not the Israeli one. AA Quantum (talk) 02:00, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request to move page to IWI Tavor TAR-21

[edit]

There are now 3 rifles separately listed by IWI, all as Tavors (TAR-21 and it's variants, X95 (MTAR-21), and the new Tavor 7). For the sake of clarity, and the fact that there are already separate pages for them (some people consider these "content forks", I personally don't, as they are listed separately by IWI and - I believe - have enough differences), I propose moving this page to "IWI Tavor TAR-21", as the TAR-21 is the base variant of the rifle that this article mostly talks about, and is what it is called by IWI. Furthermore, the other articles' (IWI Tavor X95 and IWI Tavor 7) names both start with the manufacturer (IWI), then list the rifle family (Tavor), then the model (X95, 7), and it seems odd to me for this one not to list it. AA Quantum (talk) 23:06, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BRD

[edit]

Regarding the edit I have made which has been in contention, each entry into a user section must be attributed to a reliable source, as documented on the invisible comment here, and on most other firearm articles, which is seconded by WP:Firearms: "When listing users of a certain weapon, only include users that have a citation to go with them. This citation must specifically say that the force, unit, or notable individual in question uses the weapon. That is to say a photograph of someone holding what appears to be the weapon does not qualify as a reference." This is my rationale for deleting the unsourced users, and the references on Colombia and the Nigerian Navy, as they consisted only of images, which are considered inadequate. Loafiewa (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 April 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below; splitting is an editorial decision and is outside the scope of this close. Dekimasuよ! 04:11, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IWI Tavor → IWI Tavor TAR-21 – Name from lead and infobox. Someone shortened (original research) it to "IWI Tavor" for no reason because lead and infobox still has full name and there is no any explanation if "IWI Tavor" is actually any official shortened name or whatever. Eurohunter (talk) 07:19, 12 April 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 20:56, 19 April 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 21:41, 26 April 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. 晚安 (トークページ) 15:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Firearms has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 21:41, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This appears to be a family article, and not just the TAR-21; since there's other non-TAR-21 models handled here. I suggest that the TAR-21 be split off into the suggested article name instead, and a better family article be left at "IWI Tavor" -- "IWI Tavor" is a family of guns; and the IWI Tavor 7, Tavor X95, Tavor TAR-21 are frequently compared against each other. There also being another derivative IWI Tavor TS12 that is different from these carbines and assault rifles. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 01:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 27 April 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

IWI Tavor → IWI Tavor TAR – The official nomenclature/designation given by both IWI and IWI US (manufacturer of the rifle) is the IWI Tavor TAR. The Tavor name refers to the family of rifles of which the TAR, Tavor-7 and X95 is apart of. Naming the article as the IWI Tavor TAR differentiates it from the Tavor-7 and Tavor X95. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guns & Glory (talk • contribs) 11:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Firearms has been notified of this discussion. a!rado🦈 (C✙T) 16:59, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Israel has been notified of this discussion. a!rado🦈 (C✙T) 17:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Would it be preferable to instead move it to IWI Tavor TAR-21, as that is the article's primary topic? Loafiewa (talk) 09:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was wrong. There is no need for a rename or to move the page. I looked into IWI's brochure both old and new and they only have referred to it as the Tavor (for some reason it's capitalised, 'TAVOR'. Tavor is a place, a mountain where a battle had occur in Israel if I'm not mistaken). Former designation of the rifle is the Tavor TAR-21, TAR simply stands for Tavor Assault Rifle, and 21 signifies that it was made in the 21st Century. Now IWI simply refers to it as 'IWI TAVOR'. The two barrel lengths are differentiated by the 'TAR and CTAR' designation.
So I retract my former request to move this page to 'IWI Tavor TAR'. If ever it should be moved to ' IWI TAVOR' but I don't think TAVOR stands for anything besides that it is a place in Israel. Guns & Glory (talk) 09:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:IWI_Tavor&oldid=1194924817"