Talk:IMBEL IA2
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IMBEL IA2 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
[edit]The information easily available for the IA2 is limited, and as such the page suffers from a lack of clear and coherent facts. I have done major changes to the page. Most prior citations were from a site in a foreign language (probably Portuguese). A lot of the content made no sense whatsoever, so some content was probably messed up/garbled in translation or intentionally vandalized (I suspect difficulties in translation and seriously doubt vandalism, but it is a possibility). The page also needs a picture of an IA2. Grizzly chipmunk (talk) 17:19, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- That rifle will be popular in a next few months. Please give chance to some Brazilian Army units. Some free pictures will be available soon. Shadowgun master (talk) 13:51, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Untitled
[edit]Is it copacetic to copy and paste pictures from Google Images? Grizzly chipmunk (talk) 17:40, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
why this article is too short
[edit]can someone please tell me why is too short? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalininos (talk • contribs) 21:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Reworked page
[edit]I have added vast amounts of information from the original portuguese page. I archived the major sources and added missing citations. I added a proper table for the variants section, and reworked the phrasing.
Some information I could not corroborate with sources, and inevitably someone will say some sources are not ideal. However, as is the case with south american weapons, there are just simply very few sources, in English and in the original language, which means information is usually available through tabloid articles, forum posts and video blogs. I personally believe that rather than having a stub article with little to no information, these less rigorous sources should be included and at any rate the reader should exercise their best judgement regarding the information's credibility. Ale rc310 (talk) 19:21, 20 July 2023 (UTC)