This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms 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.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
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
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I removed the following from the page, I think it was supposed to be here. I have no idea what it means:
"That is not thrugh. The ejector was a seperate rod. that was fastenet in the waist belt, and used to eject the spend shells. The Missing Link. (out of Denmark)"
If anyone feels like doing something with it, you are welcome. --Muhandes (talk) 15:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
According to http://www.thegunzone.com/webley-fosbery.html, paragraph 4 and 5, this gun not only has a punch-rod extractor (presumably on the right side, to punch out empties through the loading gate), but is one of only four revolvers in history to have a safety catch designed and fitted by the maker. I want to add this info correctly, but the cite system is damned confusing. 100.4.62.213 (talk) 20:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Reply