Jump to content

Talk:M2 mortar

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

Image removed

[edit]

Image removed. The mortar shown was *NOT* a US M2 60mm mortar. Even a cursory comparison would reveal major differences in the bipod configuration, it lacks the T&E mechanism of the US M2, the tube is quite different, and the breech cap is completely unlike that of the US M2. The baseplate was also completely unlike that of the US M2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.130.1.193 (talk) 01:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move all Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
M2 MortarM2 mortar — per concensus at user:user name one/Capitalization username 1 (talk) 02:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

username 1 (talk) 14:52, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Does anyone know why we have a big directory box to the "United States Chemical Weapons Programme" at the bottom of the page?

[edit]

I suspect this is a case of mistaken identity for the M2 4.2 inch mortar (which was a chemical weapons project), especially since this M2 mortar didn't fire any chemical munitions. Unless anyone has a good reason for this I suspect the "U.S. infantry weapons of World War II and Korea" directory would be a better fit. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 08:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]