Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Firearms/Archive 3

message: I was looking around today, and I found that we only have a handful of featured articles, and that the only specific featured article I could find was AK-47. If anyone finds additional featured articles within our scope could you please add them in the featured content section of the project's page?--LWF 01:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured content 

message: I would like to propose that we the members of the Firearms project make a joint effort with the members of the Weaponry Task Force of the Military History project to bring the M16 rifle up to Featured article status, sort of as a Featured counterpart to AK-47. Both of these rifles have been very influential in the history of the world, so I think it is only fitting to bring M16 up to the same status as the AK-47.  LWF 02:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A most worthy suggestion- I'd also like to propose that we select 20 firearms (10 rifles, 10 handguns) for the same treatment, in order to increase the profile of both projects here on WP. --Commander Zulu 09:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the M14 is worthy to be a featured article too. Maybe the Stg 44 and Springfield 1903 can be considered also. Maybe not "world shocking" rifles, but the Stg was the first true assault rifle and jump-started the evolution towards current modern combat rifles. The K31 is also quite known, and the straigt pull bolt is "different". For the handguns, you already made a very good selection, but I would maybe add the Glock-range to the list. They were not the first to use polymers, but ignited the "hype" and started the "tupperware revolution" --Boris Barowski 22:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration with the Weaponry Task Force 

message: My suggestions for the 20 Articles that could be collaborated upon to reach FA status, in chronological order. The list is just something to start with, but I've tried to strike a balance between historic importance and recognisability.
Rifles
*Brown Bess
*1853 Enfield Rifled Musket
*Winchester Rifle
*Lebel M1886
*Lee-Enfield
*Mosin-Nagant
*Mauser K98
*M1 Garand
*FN-FAL
*SKS
Handguns
*Walker Colt
*Beaumont-Adams Revolver
*LeMat Revolver
*Colt Single Action Army
*Webley Revolver
*Mauser C96
*P08 Luger
*Colt M1911
*Tokarev TT-33
*Browning Hi-Power
Thoughts, suggestions, etc? --Commander Zulu 10:06, 8 M
S.C.F.ay 2007 (UTC)
:I think the M14 is worthy to be a featured article too. Maybe the Stg 44 and Springfield 1903 can be considered also. Maybe not "world shocking" rifles, but the Stg was the first true assault rifle and jump-started the evolution towards current modern combat rifles. The K31 is also quite known, and the straigt pull bolt is "different". For the handguns, you already made a very good selection, but I would maybe add the Glock-range to the list. They were not the first to use polymers, but ignited the "hype" and started the "tupperware revolution" --Boris Barowski 22:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested Articles for FA Status

message: I would like to help, I'm very knowledgeable with guns and own quite a few myself, how can I become a member? --Semper Fidelis 20:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to write an article on Criticism of the M16/M4 rifle family and alternatives, do I have permission to do that? --Semper Fidelis 20:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Somewhat new here 

message: Hi everybody,
I just spend the better part of the morning adding articles to the to do list. So if you're bored and/or looking for a new article to work on, be sure to have a look. 
I'll be archiving some parts of this talk page in a minute. I'll report back when I'm done. 
Cheers, -- Seed 2.0 16:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'm done. -- Seed 2.0 16:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do list / archiving 

message: I'm wondering if there's an article out there that would be suitable for inclusion of the Dardick Tround.  This popped into my head when thinking about caliber conversion sleeves, which are somewhat related, as some of the trounds were available as conversions to adapt .22 LR and .38 Special to the triangular chamber.  Also probably deserves mention in other places, as it was a very radical concept (I mean, how many other magazine fed revolvers are there?).  Anyone have any thoughts?  I'm not sure I can dig up enough solid info for more than a stub article.  scot 14:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a good starting point.  Dardick. Homefill 20:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, hadn't thought to look for just "Dardick"--the tround is the only reason he's notable, and that's what the article is about anyway...  Well, since it's there, I suppose I can move it to "Tround" and have a go at it.  Still not sure I can come up with enough to expand it past a stub, but I'll try.  Maybe if I go to the patent(s) I can pull out enough content to flesh it out.  scot 20:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Blech, the link in the article lists patent 2885125, which is NOT the right one.  Have to do a patent search on Dardick.  scot 20:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Any chance of an image?  I've never seen one of these. Homefill 20:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Dardick for my notes on expanding the article.  Here's a few pictures; the gun, a good diagram, and pictures, pics and discussion, pics with other cartridges for comparison.  scot 21:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comment

message: The article on the Dardick tround (and various other related stuff) is written, to replace the stub on the Dardick pistols.  Take a look, and feel free to tack on additional categories--I haven't done that bit, and it's going to require a bunch of 'em.  scot 21:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New article

message: Hi there!  An anonymous contributor has made a proposal in today's (27 May) entries that I believe requires an expert's opinion.  If this is no longer today, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2007-05-27.  I'd appreciate it if you could review the request, and either accept or decline. Alternately, if you are uncomfortable with the process at WP:AFC, please let me know here or on my talk what you recommend and I will do the grunt work!  Thanks again for your help.--Xnuala (talk)(Review) 21:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:AFC|Articles for creation]] needs your input!

message: Hello! Is there some policy on how to name firearm cartridge articles? Currently it does not seem like that. There are articles like 7.62×51 NATO, 7.62x39 and 5.56 × 45 mm NATO. I think you need to decide whether to use "x" or "×", spaces around it or not, whether to add the "mm" to it and whether to add "NATO" or some other words to it? I don't have a preference either way and I'm not a member of this project, I just spotted the case and decided to bring it to your attention! --ZeroOne (talk | @) 01:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The consensus is, I believe, for the use of "x", no spaces, and without the "mm"- ie, "7.62x51", "7.62x54R", "5.56x45", and so on. --Commander Zulu 11:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Firearm cartridge naming conventions 

message: I've nominated the Webley Revolver article for FAC status after extensively citing it, rewriting bits, and generally improving it. The nomination is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Webley Revolver- support or suggestions for improvement would be greatly appreciated! --Commander Zulu 13:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good news- Webley Revolver has been promoted to Featured Article status! Thanks for your support, everyone! --Commander Zulu 05:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Webley Revolver]] nominated for FAC

message: Hi all, does Wikipedia contain an article on the German Modell 1879 Trooper's revolver? Thanks in advance. Dreadnaught 13:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you thinking of the Reichsrevolver? If so, then no, I don't believe there is one yet. --Commander Zulu 07:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  M1879 Trooper's revolver 

message: I've been doing research on both and I think its worth making them into articles. Help would be appreciated. Any thoughts?Goldfishsoldier 02:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't think NZ or Japan had any gun politics- I'm not aware of any influential anti-gun groups in NZ or pro-gun groups in Japan, but I'd be interested to see an article on the subject all the same. --Commander Zulu 11:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gun Politics of New Zealand and Japan 

message: Might be useful, to make a WikiAd for this project... What do you guys think? I stink out loud with art, or, I'd consider doing so myself... --SXT40 04:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent idea. Unfortunately, I'm not particularly good at graphics design either. --S up? 21:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting idea, although I am not sure of how helpful it would be. Something I've noticed is that some people come to the project, but never contribute to firearms, perhaps because they enjoy them but don't have any information to add, whioch is not necessarily a bad thing, but we are in need of more users that will be knowledgable contributors to the area of firearms. Which leads me to wonder if a banner would bring more knowledgable people to the project, or more people who like firearms but don't have much to add to Wikipedia in the area, or a mix.--LWF 21:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banner Ads? 

message: What is the best way to handle the Ackley cartridges, such as the .243 Ackley. Should they get their own pages, or are properly listed as variants on the parent case, since they are just improved rounds and not true wildcats. Arthurrh 23:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure this has been discussed before.  Any cartridge with reasonable commercial availability should probably have its own page, but wildcats are probably best handled in a separate section.  On the other hand, Ackley has enough wildcats that he might be worth an article; it could touch on the basic features of the "improved cartridges" (sharper shoulder, less case taper) and provide a list with some ballistic comparisons.  scot 18:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest giving them their own page, grouped together in this situation. Could you give me more context though?--LWF 19:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Parker O. Ackley was a gunsmith, handloader, and author of handloading books.  From http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_8_51/ai_n14694926 An Ackley improved cartridge is distinguished from the original by a neck angle of 30 degrees or more and the virtual elimination of any taper from the body. The idea is to simply increase the powder capacity and most of Ackley's wildcats hold at least 10 percent more than the parent case and The most comprehensive data source is Mr. Ackley's Handbook For Shooters & Reloaders, which is still available. It is, however, not without peril for the unwary. The second volume was written in 1966 (the first in 1962)...  Most of his cases were easily fire formed by firing a commercial cartridge in a custom chambered firearm, and the resulting case, with its greater capacity, would allow greater power than the original.  J. D. Jones is another wildcatter who has produced a significant number of cartridges, most for the Thompson/Center Contender.  scot 20:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on what you've said, I think that the best idea would be to put the improved ones in their own group article.--LWF 20:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Which begs the question, what exactly is an "improved" cartridge?  I don't think all cartridges labeled "Improved" are by Ackley, and not all Ackley cartridges go by the name "Ackley Improved", some, like the .243, are just called "Ackley".  I think families of wildcats that can be linked by some strong factor, such as the inventor, could be grouped together.  If you want a more generic page than just "Ackley wildcats" or the like, then you could have a "Wildcat cartridge families" page that has sections with info on various families (Ackley, JDJ, PPC, BR, and what have you) like a brief inventor bio or motivation, followed by a list of relevant cartridges.  I think it's essential when starting an article to have a clear set of criteria in mind for what is and is not within the scope of the article.  scot 20:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ackley wildcats - variants 

message: Someone proposed that K5 9mm and Daewoo DP51 be merged. I looked online and some sites list a "Daewoo DP51/K5" while others use only one of the names. A google image search also shows guns that sometimes look different from each other. Does anyone know if these are the same? Tocharianne 17:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about daewoo DP51 /K5 

message: Two other editors have taken it upon themselves to delete any reference to the Lee-Enfield in film; regardless of notability. For example, one user as removed references to Breaker Morant invoking "Rule .303" as it "might refer to a Bren Gun or a Lewis Gun" (despite the fact that neither gun existed during the Boer War), and references to the incorrect use of the Lee-Enfield in film (only citing two examples, The Blue Max, and Lawrence of Arabia, in which the inaccuracies are blatantly obvious to anyone with a passing familiarity with WWI firearms, have also been deleted for being "Trivia". My understanding of the "Popular Culture" consensus is that lists of every. single. appearance. of a gun in films is to be avoided, but discussion of a firearm's notability (or, in this case, blatantly incorrect use, and also near total absence from WWII themed computer games) is certainly notable and worthy of inclusion. Some outside opinions would be appreciated, especially since some people seem to have twitchy delete button fingers and are deciding ALL Cultural Impact sections are delete worthy, which isn't helping article quality or stability. --Commander Zulu 08:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My recommendation: do as WP:MILHIST#POP, and WP:GUNS#Pop culture say; get some citations proving the notability.--LWF 18:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cultural Impact and Notability in [[Lee-Enfield]]

message: As per consensus, it states that firearm articles are to be named as they are widely known, by manufacturer, or military title. Currently there are many conflicting pages that have not adopted this format. Some of these include but are not limited to: M1 Garand, AK47, K31, and M16 rifle. This is the result of conflicting terms used and made by the 'consensus'. Firstly, many military rifles are known more by name than their military model and designation, such as the M1 Garand, K98, K31, etc. In pages where rifles are given the term 'rifle' after their name, such as M1 Garand rifle, this is an incorrect term both in regards to its common name and correct usage. Either military rifles are to be called by their actual model and designation (U.S. Caliber .30, M1) or what they are commonly referred to as, because instances such as 'M1 Garand rifle' or 'M16 rifle' is incorrect for both formats. ~ Brenden July 19th 2007, 1050.
** Fixed your wikilinks so we could see what you are talking about. --Mike Searson 18:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we also have the problem that Military History Project naming conventions may differ for both firearms and cartridges from the Firearms project. Arthurrh 19:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: M1 Garand, M1 rifle, M1 Rifle, Garand rifle, M-1 rifle, M-1 Garand, M1 Garand Rifle,and Garand all redirect to the same page: M1 Garand rifle.  At one time, all of the pages that redirected to any or all of those were corrected to read M1 Garand rifle.  This was intentional to allow for a simple, predictable, and uniform method of naming US Military firearms.  The exceptions to this redirect were items requiring disambiguation like M1.  Additionally, the simplified process allows a logical inclusion of weapons using the older M-year method of naming and for logical and clear disambigution of similarly named (to the laymen) or easily confused types like the M1 Garand rifle, M1 carbine, and M1 Thompson submachine gun, and M1 bayonet.  Deathbunny 08:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Can't we use redirects on the "improper" names to point them to the proper names? That way people will find what they're looking for? Arthurrh 21:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you'll find that, for the most part, this has been done for these weapons.  Deathbunny 08:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Naming Convention" is making firearm pages non-uniform