Talk:IWI Tavor X95

Requested move 4 November 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. This request should be granted since there are the proposer and a supporter with no direct opposition, and it has been relisted twice. Even the alt. suggestion has the "IWI" in the page title, and since that suggestion was made, it is okay with me if any editor should like to open a discussion on this talk page to garner consensus for a different page name. Happy Holidays to all! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  02:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

---

Tavor X95 → IWI Tavor X95 – There is no reason why the company name shouldn't be mentioned in the title, like it is mentioned for IWI Tavor and IWI Dan. Flayer (talk) 06:19, 4 November 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 10:40, 12 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Support: Yup, the company name should be mentioned. Bingobro (Chat) 08:23, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Alternative suggestion: The article should be moved back to IWI X95: the "Tavor X95" is the US civilian, semi-automatic rifle version, whilst the "X95" is the military/law enforcement assault rifle version. As far as I am aware, the mil/LE version is (or should be if it isn't) the primary topic of the article. Also, despite what has been said in the edit summaries, IWI US actually distinguishes between the Tavor X95 and the X95, as seen on their LE sales page: if you go onto each of the individual pages, the first five are semi-auto only and called "Tavor X95", whilst the sixth is select-fire and just "X95". Thanks, RadiculousJ (talk) 19:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Rebuttle: It may be true that it is listed that way in IWI US's page, but I think that is because it is listed as such on IWI (Israel)'s page. That doesn't mean that the X95 isn't a Tavor, however. The operating system of the X95 is almost the exact same as the TAR-21, and in the description of IWI US's listing, it says, "Like its predecessor the TAR-21, the X95 is...", which implies that the X95 is the "successor" to the TAR-21; I think that this means they're both Tavors. It also says in the description on iwi.net (IWI Israel), "The X95 (Micro TAVOR)..." which I think also implies that the X95 is a Tavor. I think the lack of a clear classification is an error on the part of IWI and IWI US. One of us should get in contact with someone from IWI (Israel or US) to clarify, but until then I think that the article title should be "IWI Tavor X95". AA Quantum (talk) 01:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

---

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

Section is Self-Contradictory. Machine gun or Semi-auto???

Article claims 1st: "X95s sold in the U.S. are semi-automatic only" Then it lists 2nd one type as: "XB17-9: 9×19mm submachine gun" It cannot both be semi-auto & a submachine gun. This needs correction. Also, the question arises when the claim is made about what is sold in US, whether or not law enforcement or military (US) does have available fully auto (civilians no)??? (PeacePeace (talk) 20:43, 27 March 2018 (UTC))

Fixed. AA Quantum (talk) 21:51, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Barrel Length Error? 17" available?

Right now as of March 27, 2018, there is advertised a 17" barrel model of the 9mm (see CDNN Sports website). So it looks to me like the list of barrel lengths is defective. (PeacePeace (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2018 (UTC))

It's listed as so in the article. AA Quantum (talk) 21:31, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Citation needed. What is the source for 20 & 25 round magazines?

Article says, "With the use of a relatively simple conversion kit, the Tavor X95 can be converted from a 5.56 mm assault rifle to a 9 mm submachine gun loaded with 20, 25, and 32-round magazines." All I have found for the civilian version X95 sold in USA (semi-auto) are 10 & 32 round magazines. Editor should provide a source for 20 & 25 or delete the claim. (PeacePeace (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2018 (UTC))

I just removed it in general; different sized magazines can be made. AA Quantum (talk) 21:33, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Removal of X95 from line units

Why remove the citations? Both are reputable, including one being one of the newspapers of the Israeli gov.

The citations did not say they were all dissapearing or that they were not buying anymore. It said that they are migrating to more AR pattern rifles. FrozenIceman01 (talk) 22:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ehrbar FrozenIceman01 (talk) 22:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

If you actually have a genuinely credible source that, in fact, Israel did actually start moving the X95 out of front-line units back in late 2021 (or maybe early 2022), please, go ahead and actually produce it. (Hint: You don't, and you can't, because it didn't happen.)

Yes, sure, there have been new claims, in early 2024, that Israel is going to do this in the future. Even if that actually happens (go ahead, find a source not using the future tense for the actual switchover, or indeed having any better basis for its claim than the fact that Israel recently procured some M4s while it's fighting a war), it doesn't make the old 2021 report of the imminent removal of the X95 from front-line service any less false. Old false rumors about a weapon being moved to reserve-only use don't belong in an encyclopedia article about that weapon, and particularly not in the lead section. Ehrbar (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Here are the sources, in the sections you deleted as it seems you missed them. Note, your removal reason indicated that one refuted the other. If you still believe that you are in error. One says Israel is procuring more M4's and moving SOME of the weapons to reserves. The other says they are procuring more of them without defining who will be equipped with them.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/313041

https://www.israeldefense.co.il/en/node/51751%7Caccess-date=2021-11-15%7Cwebsite=Israel%20Defense%7Clanguage=en%7D%7D

Do you have any evidence to show that these news organizations aren't credible? Or more specifically why these aren't credible for this citation, but ARE credible in other citations in other parts of the Rifle in the page?

@Ehrbar FrozenIceman01 (talk) 00:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The general credibility of a source (and I have no opinion whatsoever on www.israelnationalnews.com's general credibility) is utterly irrelevant when a specific claim is demonstrably false. The www.israelnationalnews.com story claimed in subhead that the X95 was going to face "particularly early retirement" (which was directly contradicted by the reporting of Israel's continued purchases of the weapon), and in the body that Israel was going to move the X95 out of front-line service (which didn't actually happen, which is why you don't have any sources that actually say it ever happened). Ehrbar (talk) 04:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The articles and wording you removed made no indication it was going into early retirement.

Please restore the articles and links as they are credible sources from credible news agencies indicating that Israel is replacing some of their x95's in front line units with alternatives. FrozenIceman01 (talk) 06:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

If your mischaracterization as to what the www.israelnationalnews.com story claimed was true, it would itself be irrelevant trivia unsuitable for the lead section of this article. Minor shifts in exact weapon mixes might manage to rise to notability in an article on the Israeli military (though they probably don't manage it there); they do not actually tell a reader anything relevant about the X95. Ehrbar (talk) 12:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

You are reading a news title designed to draw in readers rather than the facts in the news article. As always, we report facts on Wikipedia. There is a reason the text in the x95 page didn't say 'ealy retirement.' it said X95's are moving front front line to reserve. There are 4x more Israeli reserve troops than main infantry troops. Of course they need to be equipped.

It tells us two things, both equally important to service date. 1. The Israelis see other patterns of Rifle that the M4 and Carmel as being a better choice than the x95 for line troops. 2. The X95 future remains filling reserve roles that make up half a million Israeli troops for now.

And the second article says that they don't have enough guns to equip all of who they want with the x95 and as such it is still being actively procured by Israel.

However we report just the facts.

Please restore the text and citations FrozenIceman01 (talk) 14:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)