Jump to content

Talk:M69 incendiary

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

A couple things

[edit]

First, I'm not sure if the hyphen is needed, thus it should be the M69 (though I do see it rendered both ways). Second, the M69 is not a cluster bomb, but (in more modern parlance) a bomblet; the M19 would constitute the actual cluster. Mention should also be made of the actual functioning of the M69.--172.190.14.150 (talk) 00:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M-69 incendiary. 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) 14:05, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tightening up wording

[edit]

   "... they were called", in the lead, has a plural pronoun, which is entitled to an unambiguous (and BTW plural) antecedant, yet the previous mention of the M69 is singular. Does the plural usage characterize a stockpile of multiple cluster-bombs? Or the multiplicity of bomblets within the cluster-bomb (or -bombs, for that matter)?    The format of thecitation our colleague has offered is odd; i 'spose it could be straight-outa-Turabian for "Source A is scholarly, which obviates my also consulting source B as A claims to have done". B 

to me it smells of our colleague saying "Why would

which may mean The ref following the mention has a link to the whole of (but no part within) a multi-hundred-page scholarly work, which turns out to attribute (not the T.c.c. phrase but effect to (and perhaps only to) the editors of the popular magazine the scholar cited at p. 144 (where the scholar BTW up-cased all three words' initial letters),

The preceding was entered by me in the preceding 24 hours, using a tool to which I am unaccustomed, and unintentionally saved on my behalf. (Maybe a bot will come along and stamp it in my behalf.)
--Jerzy•t 21:54, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M-69 incendiary. 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) 05:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Damage to people as well as buildings

[edit]

This article should also mention the casualty list of the firebombing raids on Japan: it's not just a question of damaging infrastructure. Omitting this over-sanitizes the use of such weapons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.85.4 (talk) 20:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:M69_incendiary&oldid=1201662490"