Talk:L3/33

Military history: Land vehicles / European / Italian / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military land vehicles task force
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)
	World War II task force

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Claim of use of flamethrower variant.

The following: "During the Italian attack on France On 22 June a battalion of the Inf. Div. Cagliari, helped by a GAF company and 5 companies of the 1st Tank regiment (equipped with L.3/35 Fiamma flamethrower tankettes), with a company of the 4th Bersaglieri Regiment in reserve, conquered the fort des Arcellins." seems to be a cut and paste from here. It needs a proper reference or be deleted. Hohum (talk) 18:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checked and deleted. The position was captured by a border patrol using hand grenades.

Pictures of remains of the fort [1] prove a tank towing a bowser would have no chance getting even near the place. Brutaldeluxe (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah there were, Wikipedia says there are 174.240.65.24 (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CV-33 → L3/33 — A related tank is listed under L3/35, so this would standardize it. Also, from all I could find, L3/33 is the more frequently used name.—AP1787 (talk) 04:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I expected an aircraft carrier when I saw the title. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 05:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Article title

While being concise is expected, and following other like articles is a good thing for consistency, being too concise has draw-backs. When one is familiar with the subject of course there can be a logical argument but an encyclopedia article is intended for the general reader.

It would seem that "Carro Veloce 33", "Carro Armato L3/33" (whichever is more correct), "Italian L3/33", or even "L3/33 tankette/"L3/33 (tankette)" would be concise enough to identify the subject and remove the ambiguity of just letters and numbers as a title. -- Otr500 (talk) 18:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Meme Culture

In recent years, the L3/33 has become something of a meme due to its particular ridiculous nature, and I'm wondering if that should be included. It's really not important, and not relevant or appropriate, but you know, it's the l3/33. Cheers! <3 Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 16:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it can be included, as long as there is a reliable source for it. --Sus scrofa (talk) 17:49, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D alright now I got to find one hmmm thx! Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 18:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

D: I can't find any.... I have been defeated. but if I stumble upon any reliable sources I'll add it Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 18:16, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]