This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Great page. However, could we add a numbers column if possible? It would be great to be able to see how large each countries tank divisions are. However, this information is probably not accessible for most countries.
Just a thought. The Bryce 07:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
The definition can be Heavy Armour in the Military of a Nation. There may be one, two or more such tanks in the Army and hence that nation will have multiple MBT's. In that case this article becomes wrong.
The perception of a single MBT and Many light tanks is no more feasible, because today many armies fielding heavy armour and that also in good numbers making it difficult to differentiate even within the heavy tanks. Chanakyathegreat 03:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Looks great, but I think we should have a cost column as well (average per tank).
Also, there seems to be a contridiction. South Korea is listed twice ("South Korea" under S, and "Republic of Korea" under K) and, although the tanks are the same, the manufacturer differs ( Rotem or Hyundai? Read it was Hyundai...). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RebDrummer61 ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC).
how is this a Tank, it seems more like a armoured personal carrier( Esskater11 02:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC))
Its not an MBT. An armored personnel carrier or a light armored vehicle at the most. Surely not an MBT even if the country uses it in that role.
As suggested above, a figure for the number of tanks in service would be useful. It makes more sense to put it in brackets after each tank than to add a column, since some countries have more than one MBT.
But why have a column for manufacturer? Each row represents a country not a tank, so there can be multiple values, which makes no sense. This belongs in the respective tanks' articles, not here. — Michael Z. 2007-08-16 05:45 Z
Pakistan | Al-Khalid, T-80UD, Type 85-IIAP, Al-Zarar | Heavy Industries Taxila |
Hi All,
The MBT classification criteria seems to focus on "heavily armoured, heavily armed" tanks. If so, the
"TAM" would not fit in it (hence, in this list). But for Argentina, it seems to be in the role of an MBT. Can anyone please comment? Thanks & regards,
DPdH (
talk) 04:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
This list (which I believe is very useful) currently includes several tanks that clearly do NOT fit in the criteria to be classified as MBTs, as for example:
Additionally, there is a severe lack of sources/references for the majority of the statements.
If nobody reasonably opposes, I'll remove the beforementioned cases where it's clear that the tanks cannot be considered "MBT".
Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk) 07:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The lead section must unambiguously state the list's membership criteria. There have recently been questions about vehicles which technically are not MBTs serving in that role. I believe that these should be included, and I'd like to suggest a rewording of the lead section.
See Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists)#Lead and selection criteria.
Currently:
This is a list of main battle tanks in active military service with countries of the world. A main battle tank (MBT) is the type of powerful, heavily-armoured and highly mobile tank which is the backbone of a mechanized land force.
Proposal, with change indicated:
This is a list of main battle tanks, and other vehicles serving that role, in active military service with countries of the world. A main battle tank (MBT) is the type of powerful, heavily-armoured and highly mobile tank which is the backbone of a mechanized land force.
Any objections? — Michael Z. 2008-06-13 15:10 z
Please stop revert-warring over the numbers of Arjun tanks in service. According to Jane's, 124 have been ordered, half of them are built, but none are in service. Please don't put contrary information in here without some source. — Michael Z. 2008-10-01 06:16 z
There appears to be a conversation in a foreign (to me) language after the references
What's going on there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.95.72 ( talk) 01:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Should I remove nations on here which don't have MBTs or have a military, it seems a bit redundant having all these nations without MBTs being listed here as well as ones with them. Nohomers48 ( talk) 21:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
No jokes here people, why exactly does it list the United States has 5 T80UD's here? If they were for testing they shouldn't be on here, and the lower number tells us different. Also, if you're going to list a second tank, list the M60A3's in RESERVE! I'm removing this ASAP. AloDuranium ( talk) 20:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
To be more precuse US have 1 T-80U from UK and bought 4 T-80UD tanks from Ukraine, these tanks were modified from original T-80UD, they have some equipment from T-84U Oplot tank, probably all or some of them new welded turret. DamianPL ( talk) 14:34, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
GDLS manufactured frm 1980 to 1985 more than 3000 M1 and frm 1984 to 1985 894 M1IP's as is stated on the armorsite and in books like S. Zaloga's "M1 Abrams" anf few others. These tanks are mostly stored, some of them used by some ARNG units.
GDLS from 1985 to 1992/93 manufactured ~4393 M1A1's in all versions for US.Army and USMC and from 1992/93 77 M1A2's.
In late 90 and in early years 2000 of XXI century GLDS upgraded almost all M1IP's, 400 oldest M1A1's and at least 1000 basic M1's to M1A2 and M1A2SEP variants basing on GLDS, US goverment and press notes.
Unfortunetly some internet sources do not note these oldest variants still stored for future upgrades or misunderstand sources and include them in to more than 4000 M1A1 manufactured.
Steel Beasts military (and civilian) simulation program developers that are mostly ex tank crews from NATO countries (also US), stated on their site such numbers of M1 tanks manufactured:
2374 M1 tanks, 894 M1IP's, 3280 M1A1's, 2289 M1A1HA's, unknown number of M1A1HC's, 77 new builded M1A2's + 600 upgraded M1's to this standard + 240 M1A2SEP's (unknown if these tanks were indeed new builds or older versions upgraded). This numbers are from time period of 1980 to 2007 and desen't include more tanks upgraded from 2007 to 2010 to newest standard like M1A1SA, M1A1FEP and M1A2SEP.
But the current numbers of 5970 M1A1/A2's in Army service, 403 M1A1's in USMC service and ~3200 M1/M1IP's in ARNG service and storage are closest to true numbers.
DamianPL ( talk) 11:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)DamianPL
Your completely wrong, M1IP's were new builded tanks, not rebuild so besides more than 2000 M1's there were also 894 new builded M1IP's later some M1 tanks were rebuilded to M1IP variants.
M1 and M1IP variants that are still in their original configuration are stored, I know that from tankers and sources like TankNet, not all of them were rebuilded and still waiting for such. If You search photos or video material from ANAD Ypu can see many of them in rebuilding process.
As for solded tanks, only 59 M1A1's for Australia, additional 58 for Saudi Arabia modified to M1A2S configuration and 140 for Iraq are from US stocks, rest of exported tanks were new builds for customers. So I don't see reason to underestimate quantity of tanks used by US armed forces.
John Pike in his estimation gets in to consideration only M1A1 and M1A2 variants used by Army. Unfortunetly it doesen't give the full view on how many tanks US armed forces have.
Also book that You use as a source is a joke. IPM1 is not correct designation, correct designation is M1IP and IP doesen't mean Improved Product but Improved Performance. Also why IP is after M1 not as in the book? Like in all US designation such letter code is after alpha numerical designation.
Also why authors designated USMC tanks ass Common Tanks? Oficial designation is M1A1HC (Heavy Common) Heavy because it got 2nd generation Heavy Armor package, Common because this variant was also adopted by US.Army.
Attrition to use is normal but this doesen't mean that tanks are not used, such tanks are send to storage and wait for rebuilding/repairing process. Combat losses were extremely low and most tanks were rebuilded, sources claims only 20-25 completely destroyed tanks with beyond repair status in OIF and 21 in ODS.
DamianPL ( talk) 17:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
R.P. Hunnicutt "Abrams : A History Of The American Main Battle Tank vol.2" "Production of the basic Ml continued at both plants for a total run of 2374 tanks. The last basic Ml was completed in January 1985." page 216.
Same author and book "The first IPM1 was delivered in October 1984 and production continued until May 1986 with a total run of 894 tanks." page 231.
Steven Zaloga in his book "M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank 1982-1992" says that "by April 1993, bringing production to 4802 M1A1's" and "Delivery of 221 M1A1 Common Tanks <dunno why they use such designation, maybe early one, later changed to Heavy Common> to the Marines Corps began in November 1990 and was completed in 1992." page 12.
So it gives 8368 tanks manufactured for US.Army and USMC, minus 59 sold to Australia, 58 sold to AS (M1A1's modified to M1A2S) and 140 M1A1's for Iraq - official combat losses beyond repair it gives still 8000 tanks in US inventory. This is ok?
As for designation name, it is strange, but ok, maybe I am wrong here.
83.31.20.41 ( talk) 18:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
And there are some official documents about M1 tanks in US inventory availabale?
As for stored tanks, many of them can be still somewhere in POMCUS and CONUS magazines, many are in ANAD and LATP/JSMC, they can be seen on google maps satelite images. The question is what is ratio between tanks used by active units, stored, in ARNG and in ANAD/LATP. DamianPL ( talk) 22:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\barmy-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of main battle tanks by country. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:46, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
The formatting for the Bangladeshi section is completed screwed up, and the flag of Bangladesh is missing throughout the table. 2A02:C7D:51AC:5000:492E:1155:3ABB:3E0B ( talk) 15:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on List of main battle tanks by country. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:33, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I think it would greatly enrich the article if it had other columns indicating the cost ( as suggested by RebDrummer61), armour, weight and caliber of the cannon. -- 181.111.29.241 ( talk) 21:31, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
The table says the tank has had its DU removed. Does that mean it never had it added? Also, what is the SOURCE for that claim. There is none cited. So it could just be more US military fanboy jibberish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 133.7.7.240 ( talk) 11:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
I added "light tanks" or "medium tanks" in some cases as they needs, personally if this is a list of MBT there is no reason because they are in, but if i remember i need consensus for deleting — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.232.13.210 ( talk) 15:41, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
i can update using as source the military balance 2018, if there is consensus i can update with all the estimates from same source sorry for my english — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.21.9.50 ( talk) 09:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC) if need you can contact here Francomemoria ( talk) 10:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Great page. However, could we add a numbers column if possible? It would be great to be able to see how large each countries tank divisions are. However, this information is probably not accessible for most countries.
Just a thought. The Bryce 07:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
The definition can be Heavy Armour in the Military of a Nation. There may be one, two or more such tanks in the Army and hence that nation will have multiple MBT's. In that case this article becomes wrong.
The perception of a single MBT and Many light tanks is no more feasible, because today many armies fielding heavy armour and that also in good numbers making it difficult to differentiate even within the heavy tanks. Chanakyathegreat 03:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Looks great, but I think we should have a cost column as well (average per tank).
Also, there seems to be a contridiction. South Korea is listed twice ("South Korea" under S, and "Republic of Korea" under K) and, although the tanks are the same, the manufacturer differs ( Rotem or Hyundai? Read it was Hyundai...). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RebDrummer61 ( talk • contribs) 23:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC).
how is this a Tank, it seems more like a armoured personal carrier( Esskater11 02:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC))
Its not an MBT. An armored personnel carrier or a light armored vehicle at the most. Surely not an MBT even if the country uses it in that role.
As suggested above, a figure for the number of tanks in service would be useful. It makes more sense to put it in brackets after each tank than to add a column, since some countries have more than one MBT.
But why have a column for manufacturer? Each row represents a country not a tank, so there can be multiple values, which makes no sense. This belongs in the respective tanks' articles, not here. — Michael Z. 2007-08-16 05:45 Z
Pakistan | Al-Khalid, T-80UD, Type 85-IIAP, Al-Zarar | Heavy Industries Taxila |
Hi All,
The MBT classification criteria seems to focus on "heavily armoured, heavily armed" tanks. If so, the
"TAM" would not fit in it (hence, in this list). But for Argentina, it seems to be in the role of an MBT. Can anyone please comment? Thanks & regards,
DPdH (
talk) 04:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
This list (which I believe is very useful) currently includes several tanks that clearly do NOT fit in the criteria to be classified as MBTs, as for example:
Additionally, there is a severe lack of sources/references for the majority of the statements.
If nobody reasonably opposes, I'll remove the beforementioned cases where it's clear that the tanks cannot be considered "MBT".
Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk) 07:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The lead section must unambiguously state the list's membership criteria. There have recently been questions about vehicles which technically are not MBTs serving in that role. I believe that these should be included, and I'd like to suggest a rewording of the lead section.
See Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists)#Lead and selection criteria.
Currently:
This is a list of main battle tanks in active military service with countries of the world. A main battle tank (MBT) is the type of powerful, heavily-armoured and highly mobile tank which is the backbone of a mechanized land force.
Proposal, with change indicated:
This is a list of main battle tanks, and other vehicles serving that role, in active military service with countries of the world. A main battle tank (MBT) is the type of powerful, heavily-armoured and highly mobile tank which is the backbone of a mechanized land force.
Any objections? — Michael Z. 2008-06-13 15:10 z
Please stop revert-warring over the numbers of Arjun tanks in service. According to Jane's, 124 have been ordered, half of them are built, but none are in service. Please don't put contrary information in here without some source. — Michael Z. 2008-10-01 06:16 z
There appears to be a conversation in a foreign (to me) language after the references
What's going on there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.95.72 ( talk) 01:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Should I remove nations on here which don't have MBTs or have a military, it seems a bit redundant having all these nations without MBTs being listed here as well as ones with them. Nohomers48 ( talk) 21:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
No jokes here people, why exactly does it list the United States has 5 T80UD's here? If they were for testing they shouldn't be on here, and the lower number tells us different. Also, if you're going to list a second tank, list the M60A3's in RESERVE! I'm removing this ASAP. AloDuranium ( talk) 20:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
To be more precuse US have 1 T-80U from UK and bought 4 T-80UD tanks from Ukraine, these tanks were modified from original T-80UD, they have some equipment from T-84U Oplot tank, probably all or some of them new welded turret. DamianPL ( talk) 14:34, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
GDLS manufactured frm 1980 to 1985 more than 3000 M1 and frm 1984 to 1985 894 M1IP's as is stated on the armorsite and in books like S. Zaloga's "M1 Abrams" anf few others. These tanks are mostly stored, some of them used by some ARNG units.
GDLS from 1985 to 1992/93 manufactured ~4393 M1A1's in all versions for US.Army and USMC and from 1992/93 77 M1A2's.
In late 90 and in early years 2000 of XXI century GLDS upgraded almost all M1IP's, 400 oldest M1A1's and at least 1000 basic M1's to M1A2 and M1A2SEP variants basing on GLDS, US goverment and press notes.
Unfortunetly some internet sources do not note these oldest variants still stored for future upgrades or misunderstand sources and include them in to more than 4000 M1A1 manufactured.
Steel Beasts military (and civilian) simulation program developers that are mostly ex tank crews from NATO countries (also US), stated on their site such numbers of M1 tanks manufactured:
2374 M1 tanks, 894 M1IP's, 3280 M1A1's, 2289 M1A1HA's, unknown number of M1A1HC's, 77 new builded M1A2's + 600 upgraded M1's to this standard + 240 M1A2SEP's (unknown if these tanks were indeed new builds or older versions upgraded). This numbers are from time period of 1980 to 2007 and desen't include more tanks upgraded from 2007 to 2010 to newest standard like M1A1SA, M1A1FEP and M1A2SEP.
But the current numbers of 5970 M1A1/A2's in Army service, 403 M1A1's in USMC service and ~3200 M1/M1IP's in ARNG service and storage are closest to true numbers.
DamianPL ( talk) 11:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)DamianPL
Your completely wrong, M1IP's were new builded tanks, not rebuild so besides more than 2000 M1's there were also 894 new builded M1IP's later some M1 tanks were rebuilded to M1IP variants.
M1 and M1IP variants that are still in their original configuration are stored, I know that from tankers and sources like TankNet, not all of them were rebuilded and still waiting for such. If You search photos or video material from ANAD Ypu can see many of them in rebuilding process.
As for solded tanks, only 59 M1A1's for Australia, additional 58 for Saudi Arabia modified to M1A2S configuration and 140 for Iraq are from US stocks, rest of exported tanks were new builds for customers. So I don't see reason to underestimate quantity of tanks used by US armed forces.
John Pike in his estimation gets in to consideration only M1A1 and M1A2 variants used by Army. Unfortunetly it doesen't give the full view on how many tanks US armed forces have.
Also book that You use as a source is a joke. IPM1 is not correct designation, correct designation is M1IP and IP doesen't mean Improved Product but Improved Performance. Also why IP is after M1 not as in the book? Like in all US designation such letter code is after alpha numerical designation.
Also why authors designated USMC tanks ass Common Tanks? Oficial designation is M1A1HC (Heavy Common) Heavy because it got 2nd generation Heavy Armor package, Common because this variant was also adopted by US.Army.
Attrition to use is normal but this doesen't mean that tanks are not used, such tanks are send to storage and wait for rebuilding/repairing process. Combat losses were extremely low and most tanks were rebuilded, sources claims only 20-25 completely destroyed tanks with beyond repair status in OIF and 21 in ODS.
DamianPL ( talk) 17:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
R.P. Hunnicutt "Abrams : A History Of The American Main Battle Tank vol.2" "Production of the basic Ml continued at both plants for a total run of 2374 tanks. The last basic Ml was completed in January 1985." page 216.
Same author and book "The first IPM1 was delivered in October 1984 and production continued until May 1986 with a total run of 894 tanks." page 231.
Steven Zaloga in his book "M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank 1982-1992" says that "by April 1993, bringing production to 4802 M1A1's" and "Delivery of 221 M1A1 Common Tanks <dunno why they use such designation, maybe early one, later changed to Heavy Common> to the Marines Corps began in November 1990 and was completed in 1992." page 12.
So it gives 8368 tanks manufactured for US.Army and USMC, minus 59 sold to Australia, 58 sold to AS (M1A1's modified to M1A2S) and 140 M1A1's for Iraq - official combat losses beyond repair it gives still 8000 tanks in US inventory. This is ok?
As for designation name, it is strange, but ok, maybe I am wrong here.
83.31.20.41 ( talk) 18:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
And there are some official documents about M1 tanks in US inventory availabale?
As for stored tanks, many of them can be still somewhere in POMCUS and CONUS magazines, many are in ANAD and LATP/JSMC, they can be seen on google maps satelite images. The question is what is ratio between tanks used by active units, stored, in ARNG and in ANAD/LATP. DamianPL ( talk) 22:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\barmy-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of main battle tanks by country. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:46, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
The formatting for the Bangladeshi section is completed screwed up, and the flag of Bangladesh is missing throughout the table. 2A02:C7D:51AC:5000:492E:1155:3ABB:3E0B ( talk) 15:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on List of main battle tanks by country. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:33, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
I think it would greatly enrich the article if it had other columns indicating the cost ( as suggested by RebDrummer61), armour, weight and caliber of the cannon. -- 181.111.29.241 ( talk) 21:31, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
The table says the tank has had its DU removed. Does that mean it never had it added? Also, what is the SOURCE for that claim. There is none cited. So it could just be more US military fanboy jibberish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 133.7.7.240 ( talk) 11:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
I added "light tanks" or "medium tanks" in some cases as they needs, personally if this is a list of MBT there is no reason because they are in, but if i remember i need consensus for deleting — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.232.13.210 ( talk) 15:41, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
i can update using as source the military balance 2018, if there is consensus i can update with all the estimates from same source sorry for my english — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.21.9.50 ( talk) 09:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC) if need you can contact here Francomemoria ( talk) 10:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)