Talk:List of infantry weapons of World War I

(Untitled)

There is also a catagory page for this. Category:World War I infantry weapons does this throw anything off having a seperate article here as well? --Xiahou 22:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

British/Commonwealth use of shotguns?

I have read that only the United States used shotguns during the Great War, indeed, I have specifically read from several sources stating that British authorities considered the use of shotguns to be rather "unmilitary" despite their eminent practicality for trench clearing.172.190.107.17 (talk) 21:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Austria-Hungary

I propose a section be made for this empire. After all, it was the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, heir to the throne, which triggered the conflict, & the Mountain War with Italy was more intense & deadly than the Western Front. I don't have the time to research much, unfortunately, at least not till Autumn. Archolman User talk:Archolman 15:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I am currently researching the Italian Front, but weaponry is not my area of expertise. I will try to contribute what I uncover. Cmacauley (talk) 15:55, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleting weapons

If you feel the need to delete some weapons, please discuss it here before doing anything else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.192.111.153 (talk) 11:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

World War 1 ended in 1918

The armistice was signed on 11 of November 1918, which led to the end of all fighting. The treaties weren't signed until 1919, but by then the war itself had stopped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.192.111.153 (talk) 12:03, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

a notice

to United States the Puteaux 37mm trench gun seems to had been a 1916 construction and not a 1915 construction

to France the 58mm No.2 mortar was also developed by Saint Etienne and not by someone named Dumisilles because there isn't any reference to that name

also since this list is of infantry weapons the Puteaux SA 18 of 1918 doesn't seem to had been a portable cannon but a tank cannon

to Austria and Montenegro the Werndl-Holub M1877 rifle shows a Werndl-Holub M1867 rifle

to Russia the name of the M1914 grenade is Rdultovsky and not Rdutlovsky

and to Germany the Gast machinen gewehr seems to had been a 1916 construction and not a 1917 construction

how about an addition

long list with multiple unsigned IP contributions and no responses

the Americans seem to had and the: https://postimg.cc/mPGhqC7d Wickersham Land torpedo of 1918 (cable guided explosive machine) https://postimg.cc/5jRCPXPG Dayton-Wright-Kettering Bug of 1918 (remote controlled explosive plane) https://postimg.cc/DSzPS9Mk Hewitt-Sperry Automatic of 1917 (remote controlled explosive plane) Andrews M1917 submachine gun https://postimg.cc/SYsRrYkt Thompson M1917 Persuader submachine gun https://postimg.cc/DWLXJGwr Thompson M1918 Annihilator submachine gun https://postimg.cc/CdCp9zrg Winchester M1907-17 automatic carbine Springfield-Pedersen M1903 Mark I semi automatic rifle https://postimg.cc/phGzd2qX Lewis M1918 automatic rifle https://postimg.cc/CRrgJXPn Winchester-Burton M1917 automatic rifle Johnston D1918 machine gun De Knight M1902-17 machine gun the Canadians seem to had and the: Colt M1909 New Service revolver Colt M1911 pistole Smith & Wesson No.2 revolver Winchester M1897 Enfield M1917 Lee-Enfield (SM) Mark III of 1907 Ross Mark III of 1910 Browning M1918 automatic rifle https://postimg.cc/qz7DQR9Q Huot M1916 automatic rifle Lewis machine gun Browning M1917 machine gun Colt machine gun Vickers machine gun the British seem to had and the: McClintock Bangalore torpedo of 1912 (obstacle clearing explosive charge) No.17 rifle grenade of 1917 No.20 rifle grenade of 1917 No.22 rifle grenade of 1917 No.24 rifle grenade of 1917 No.35 rifle grenade of 1918 No.44 rifle grenade of 1918 https://postimg.cc/T5rCcnrz Royal Aircraft Factory Ruston Proctor AT of 1916 (remote controlled explosive plane) Webley & Scott Mark III flare pistole https://postimg.cc/cgqcS1kq Howell M1915 semi automatic rifle https://postimg.cc/XZ20Hhsy Blanch-Chevallier grenade launcher of 1916 Hay portable flamethrower Morriss portable flamethrower the Australians seem to had and the: No.5 and No.36 grenade (also known as "Mills") No.8 and No.9 double cylinder grenade (also known as "Jam tin") Enfield Mark II revolver Webley Mark VI revolver Lee-Enfield (SM) Mark III of 1907 Lee-Metford rifle of 1884 Lewis machine gun Browning M1917 machine gun Vickers machine gun Caldwell M1915 machine gun Stokes mortar Garland mortar the New Zealanders seem to had and the: No.8 and No.9 double cylinder grenade (also known as "Jam tin") Webley Mark VI revolver Lee-Enfield (SM) Mark III of 1907 Lee-Metford Mark I and Mark II of 1884 the Italians seem to had and the: Lenticolare M1914 grenade Fiat-Revelli M1916 submachine gun https://postimg.cc/14N7q1Tf Villar-Perosa M1918 submachine gun (single barrel version) https://postimg.cc/mPt3110f Rigotti M1895 automatic rifle https://postimg.cc/JG8jxdvq S.I.A. M1918 machine gun the French seem to had and the: OF1 M1915 grenade P1 M1915 grenade Suffocante M1914 and M1916 gas grenade Barbed wire destruction rod grenade M1847 ball grenade M1914 ball grenade M1918 anti tank grenade Pig iron lighting grenade Bertrand M1915 and M1916 gas grenade Foug M1916 grenade IIIrd army grenade DR M1916 rifle grenade Feuillette rifle grenade https://postimg.cc/CBmPTHGz Aubriot Gabet Land torpedo of 1915 (cable guided explosive machine) https://postimg.cc/0zBBrCFm Schneider Crocodile land torpedo first version of 1915 (cable guided explosive machine) https://postimg.cc/0zwBMSsB Schneider Crocodile land torpedo second version of 1915 (cable guided explosive machine) M1917 flare pistole https://postimg.cc/64W52Rbd Chauchat-Ribeyrolles M1918 mitraillette pistolet (submachine gun) https://postimg.cc/PNQCXfVW Ribeyrolles M1918 automatique carabine https://postimg.cc/crT0jr9z Berthier M1908 mitrailleuse (air cooled version) https://postimg.cc/9ryqqtf7 Berthier M1911 mitrailleuse (water cooled version) https://postimg.cc/qg4fTp3H Darne M1916 mitrailleuse https://postimg.cc/gL8bN0wg Saint Etienne 58mm T No.1 mortier of 1914 Schneider 75mm M1915 mortier the Belgians seem to had and the: Van Deuren 70mm M1915 mortier https://postimg.cc/RNtZDS55 Saint Chamond 142mm M1915 Delattre mortier the Austrians seem to had and the: Rohr handgranate Hebel M1894 leucht pistole (flare pistole) Steyr-Pieper M1908 pistole Steyr-Pieper M1909 pistole Frommer M1917 Stop doppel machinen pistole (double barrel version submachine gun) https://postimg.cc/CRjdzFmH Steyr Hahn M1912-P16 machinen pistole (submachine gun) https://postimg.cc/0r8Gv45B Helriegel M1915 machinen pistole (submachine gun) Schwarzlose M1905 machinen gewehr Granatenwerfer 16 (grenade mortar) 7.5cm M17 minenwerfer (mine mortar) https://postimg.cc/8s329LNs Schnellwerfer (grenade mortar) the Russians seem to had and the: Rdultovsky M1912 lantern grenade Prilutsky M1914 pistole Tovarnitski portable flamethrower the Germans seem to had and the: https://postimg.cc/p5XLSzHs Schwarzlose M1917 machinen pistole (submachine gun) https://postimg.cc/9rgrv8zZ DWM Parabellum machinen gewehr MG13 of 1913 (a combination of water cooled version and air cooled version) M1915 kugelhandgranate neuer art M1915 diskushandgranate (offensive version and defensive version) M1913 karabingranate (rifle grenade) M1914 karabingranate (rifle grenade) M1917 karabingranate (rifle grenade) M04 leucht pistole (flare pistole) Walther M1917 machinen pistole (submachine gun) https://postimg.cc/p5x2F8r2 Becker 2cm M2 flugzeugabwehrgewehr of 1916 (antiairplane version) https://postimg.cc/N2w0kSJv Becker 2cm M2 tankabwehrgewehr of 1916 (antitank version) https://postimg.cc/5jGgb3Hd Fokker-Leimberger M1916 machinen gewehr Knotgen M1914 automatischen gewehr (automatic rifle) Knotgen M1912 machinen gewehr (machine gun) https://postimg.cc/kVFY5t0N Schmeisser-Dreyse machinen gewehr MG12 of 1912 https://postimg.cc/NL4tnKLH Schmeisser-Dreyse machinen gewehr MG15 of 1915 https://postimg.cc/kRCHcvWp Bergmann machinen gewehr MG15 older art of 1915 (air cooled version) https://postimg.cc/7fnkpf6z Bergmann machinen gewehr MG15 of 1915 (water cooled version) Granatenwerfer 16 (grenade mortar) https://postimg.cc/G8dPg7SG Krupp 3.7cm L-14.5 sockelflugzeugabwehrkanone of 1917 (antiairplane gun) https://postimg.cc/grrmLYgF Rheinmetall 3.7cm M1918 tankabwehrkanone (antitank gun) the Greeks seem to had and the: Bergmann-Bayard M1908 pistole Mannlicher M1888 Mannlicher M1895

a comment

to United States the "freedom" wasn't an infantry weapon but a moral

by the way all nations that fought for freedom seem to had that moral

a notice

to Britain since this list is of infantry weapons the Vickers QF 3-inch 20 cwt and the QF 4-inch Mark V don't seem to had been portable antiairplane guns but heavy naval antiairplane guns

to Italy the Villar-Perosa M1915 is considered a machine gun and not a submachine gun

to Russia the Fedorov avtomat is considered an automatic rifle and not a machine gun or a submachine gun

and to Germany since this list is of infantry weapons the Skoda 7.5cm M1915 cannon doesn't seem to had been a portable cannon but a mountain cannon, the Krupp 8.8cm KZ L-45 zugflugzeugabwehrkanone 16 doesn't seem to had been a portable antiairplane gun but a heavy antiairplane gun and the Grossflammenwerfer M1911 doesn't seem to had been a portable flamethrower but a static flamethrower

Colonies

Somebody use this photo for the bayard m1908. http://luger.gunboards.com/showthread.php?14442-German-Army-M1908-Bayard Ryan achy (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

I want to make a weapons section for colonies Ryan achy (talk) 11:42, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Let's go a weapons section for colonies Ryan achy (talk) 11:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

How do you add categories Ryan achy (talk) 11:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

you can add countries and their equipment by editing the main article, they seem to be categorized automatically - guest

How Ryan achy (talk) 21:47, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

What do I press Ryan achy (talk) 21:47, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Give a walkthrough Ryan achy (talk) 21:47, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Give me a walkthrough I mean Ryan achy (talk) 21:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

to the main article at the upper side there are some buttons that write on them (from left to right) 'Article' 'Talk' (the one that you are in here) 'Read' 'Edit' and 'View history'

can you see those buttons? can you see the button that writes edit on it? you press that button and opens the editor

if those buttons don't appear then there seem to be a browser problem or other problem

noobie to wikipedia here too but from there I added some countries and their equipment that were missing by following the lines of other contributors - guest

Where is the main article Ryan achy (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

it's the 'Article' page just next to the 'Talk' page (the one that you are in here) :o :o

Somebody do a weapons section for german togoland🇾🇪🇾🇪🇾🇪🇾🇪🇾🇪 Ryan achy (talk) 01:00, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Flag icons in section headers

The Wikipedia manual of style is clear. MOS:HEADINGS says

"Section headings should:

…Not contain images or icons...

These restrictions are necessary to avoid technical complications, and are not subject to override by local consensus or WP:IAR." ie that there are no exceptions to this.

Accordingly these should be removed.GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism on the 'kingdom of the netherlands' section.

It looks like someone has put in a bunch of random weapons into the 'Kingdom of the netherlands' section. I do not know what weapons were actually used so I cannot fix it, but is there someone who could fix this?

Netherlands

Why? They were not a party to the great war, and the section seemed riddled (and may still be) with OR or outright falsehoods. We should just delete the whole mess as irrelevant.Slatersteven (talk) 13:19, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Slatersteven, I have deleted for that reason. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:01, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I would have left it a few days to see if anyone came forward with a defence, but I doubt we would have seen one.Slatersteven (talk) 09:35, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I actually did it before I read your post. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Unverified and questionable entries

This article is about "infantry weapons" in "WWI" - ie it is about weapons used by infantry that "engaged" in the hostilities (ie, the infantry were engaged). The article, as it stands is nothing but a "laundary list". The list includes states, where their participation is questionable - eg Republic of Armenia or Democratic Republic of Georgia. It is also claimed that the Steyr M1912 doppel machinen pistole was used, though the linked article reports that only a "handfull" were actually made. Then we have entries for things like the Marlin Model 1894. It may have found its way to the front as an individually acquired weapon but such entries have no place here unless there was widespread use - eg it was common for officers to personally use a particular pistol instead of the service pistol. Then, there are obsolete weapons such as the Martini–Henry. If it was used (and it might well have been), then this needs to be qualified in the article as to how and where, since it was certainly was not used "at the front". Was it still used in colonies that were not engaged in the conflict? If so, does it qualify? Most of the article lacks citations and I doubt that the citations that do exist actually support the inclusion in the list rather than being more generally about the particular weapon. Any unsourced material may be deleted at any time. The article would then shrink to nothing. I wouldn't go quite that far. It should be reduced to the indisputable suspects and then rebuilt with citations. There is also a need to clear-up just what the criteria for inclusion are - is a lance an infantry weapon? I have touched upon what I perceive are the criteria for inclusion. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 10:10, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

The Martini equipped some native troops in Brtish service.Slatersteven (talk) 10:17, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't doubt that it probably did. However, should not the list entry qualify this? Was it actually used "in the war" against the Central Powers? If not, does it belong her? If so, shouldn't the article indicate the circumstances where it was used - and with citations? Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 10:36, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

As I recall (but its off the top of my head, I would need to dig out where I read it) it was used by some African Auxiliaries in the East African campaign. but not (as far as I know by Australia.Slatersteven (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

I would think the same per colonial auxiliaries. Australians would certainly not have fired them in anger. However, (IMO) the article should make such points clear (such as a note) when reporting weapons that were obsolete. Otherwise, it gives the impression that Tommies marched to the Somme with Martini-Henrys. Regardless, it is still uncited and this is only the tip of the points I have raised. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:27, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion

The title is "List of infantry weapons of World War I". The article is populated by country. There appears to be many entries (for both countries and arms) which are out of scope.

• The war was fought between the Triple Entente (its allies) and the Central Powers (and their allies). There are many states allied to the Triple Entente that did not field infantry troops against the Central Powers (or allies), or did not field them under their own flag. Notably, China provided labour battalions and Nepal provided Gurkha units which fought under the British. Both of these might be deleted. There are also a number of short-lived states that arose from the collapse of the Russian Empire (eg the First Republic of Armenia) and also, the Siberian intervention (in which China did participate). I propose that these are out of scope.

• The heading for Britain is the "British Empire". This includes its dominions and colonies, yet there are separate headings for India, Australia etc. These should be consolidated, noting to a large extent the duplication that exists.

• Infantry weapons are crew-served or personal weapons used by infantry soldiers engaged in the conflict. "Infantry" is reasonably inclusive of mounted infantry, pioneers and marines but does not reasonably include artilery, aircrew or ship-board issue (except for marines) - of which there are instances. It is not a laundary list of small-arms that "may" have been held but were not reasonably "used" in the conflict. I acknowledge that the war extended to the colonies of both sides and that colonial troops would have used obsolescent weapons. Such instances should be noted.

• It should not include personally acquired weapons (particularly sidearms) except where there was widespread use. Again, such instances should be noted.

• All entries in the list should be supported by "reliable sources" that such weapons were used/issued to infantry engaged in the conflict. Virtually no reliable sources have been used to the present. However, we might retain those entries for which reliable sources most certainly do exist even though they have not been cited at the present time.

• I am not certain how we should deal with entries like the Dervish state and Arab states, which largely had ad hoc equipment or were supported by one of the main powers. Is it useful to duplicate such list for each separate state, particularly when the list is unsubstantiated?

These ideas could be constructed into criteria for the list. It would make the list much more useful than the ad hoc unsubstantiated laundary list that it is at present. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 02:32, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• Hello Cinderella157, I agree with your assessment that the page needs some serious work. At List of combat vehicles of World War I we took the approach that every entry had to be reliably sourced with an inline citation in the list, through that process we waded through morass that was. Re your scope, I support all and would suggest one addition, unlike the list of combat vehicles, here I would recommend restricting this list to weapons that actually saw service and not include design concepts or prototypes. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 03:21, 28 June 2021 (UTC).

Hi Cavalryman, if I wasn't sufficiently clear, then it was certainly my intention that they were actually used (and used by infantry). I didn't specifically mention the "concepts and prototypes" but they are (were) certainly on the to-do list. The whole section is now gone. I agree with the concept of mandating reliably sourced inline citations but in the immediate future, I would settle for the obvious suspects - only because there would be nothing left if I applied that immediately. Also, the source must support the criteria for list inclusion - ie be relevant, in that they were actually used by infantry and not that they existed or were used somewhere. However, any unsourced material can be deleted at any time. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 04:08, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree re sources, part of the problem here is "infantry weapon" is such a vague term, does it include picks and shovels? Or trench clubs? And what about crw-served weapons that were handed over to the infantry at certain points (like in WWII, the 6 pounder spent most of war in the hands of artillery but when supplanted by the 17 pounder it was handed over to infantry AArmd Pls)? I will try to pop-by periodically to lend a hand. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 00:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC).

Cavalryman, I think we can include weapons used in trench raids/melee weapons but verified. Open for discussion though. I think it should include crew-served weapons manned by infantry by definition. The Vickers was crew-served. So, it would include the 6-pdr for the same list in WW2. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 01:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Sultanate of Darfur

Current content is unverified and not likely to be. The only thing I can find is this reference reporting about 260 Mausers of unspecified model. Also, the Jezail musket is from Afghanistan?. The status of the sultanate as a cobelligerent with the Central Powers is also questionable (ie, whether the Anglo-Egyptian Darfur Expedition was part of WWI. Entry has been deleted per this link. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 07:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Emirate of Jabal Shammar

The Emirate of Jabal Shammar participated in the Arab Revolt, siding with the Ottomans. Whether they fielded infantry (as opposed to irregular cavalry) is questionable. It is also likely that the best description of their arms would be ad hoc, with arms also supplied by the Ottomans. Entries in the list are unverified and unlikely to be verified. The entry has bee deleted per this link. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Dervish state

The extent to which it was aligned with the Central powers is not clear. The weapons listed are best described as ad hoc and are listed without verification. Deleted per this edit. Regards Cinderella157 (talk) 01:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Kingdom of Hejaz

The Kingdom of Hejaz participated in the Arab Revolt, siding with the British. Whether they fielded infantry (as opposed to [largely irregular] cavalry) is a question. It is also likely that the best description of their arms would be ad hoc, with arms also supplied by the British or captured from the Ottomans. Entries in the list are unverified and unlikely to be verified. The entry has been deleted per this link [1]. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 09:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

what is the zastava m1915

what is the Zastava m1915? it is in the section for Serbia but labeled as a smg? AVeryUncoolGuy (talk) 00:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)