Talk:Front Sight Firearms Training Institute

message: Just did an overhaul. Sorry to step on anyone's toes but I had it half-written for months now and the article needed some polish. I added quite a bit (including Front Sight Alaska, totally not mentioned before!) and removed most of the cop-and-paste verbiage which was clearly taken from the corporate website. Pics to go up within a few days. --shift6 (talk) 17:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  overhaul 

message: I just undid the removal of the category "second amendment" as Front Sight is very second amendment oriented. After I did that I realized it may have been removed because "Second Amendment" isn't a category. Do you think we should replace it with Category:Gun rights advocacy groups in the United States ? Ashton.Sanders (talk) 03:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it would fit that category well enough, even though it is a commercial venture..  Trasel (talk) 13:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: The "number of shooters trained has doubled every year."  Assuming 10 the first year (as is often stated), that would mean 163,840 students for 2010.  Geometric progression can't continue for long.  Does the statement need refined?Mzmadmike (talk) 06:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update? 

message: I've removed the notability tag. While there is clearly some COI editing going on and some opposite POV editing on this article, a simple  or google query will turn up plenty of hits to satisfy GNG.  I've removed the either biased or abjectly lazy tag. The Dissident Aggressor 05:30, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: *Hi there, DissidentAggressor. I am not sure this article meets the GNG. Could you please help me understand your point of view? Delta13C (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What part was confusing?  The Dissident Aggressor 02:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not confusing. I just don't see how this article can meet GNG when there are only 2 or maybe 3 reliable sources that mention the topic. The other cited sources are either affiliated with the org or broken links. Delta13C (talk) 12:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: How many Ghits did you come up with?   I see several RS with in-depth coverage on the first screen I see.   That's probably enough right there to satisfy GNG, but there are 400+ other Ghits.  Have you clicked in the  links above? The Dissident Aggressor 16:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you please add these sources you are finding per WP:RS? I would like to nominate this article for deletion, but if you have sources out there that you think will push the article over the GNG hurdle, then I will be glad to reconsider. Delta13C (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: , , , are the first three decent web hits and there are book references as well. Those 3 alone should satisfy GNG.  The Dissident Aggressor 01:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  notability 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Front Sight Firearms Training Institute. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061215063903/http://www.tsa.gov/lawenforcement/programs/ffdo.shtm to http://www.tsa.gov/lawenforcement/programs/ffdo.shtm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:26, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified