Talk:Bushmaster Firearms International: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:50, 19 March 2010

Maine Start‑class

	Maine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maine 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.MaineWikipedia:WikiProject MaineTemplate:WikiProject MaineMaine
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Firearms Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Lloyd Woodson

Please read WP:GUNS#Criminal use. This section is nothing more than trivia. The sources give no indication of why it is relevant in this article. In fact, they only briefly mention Woodson had a Bushmaster rifle. The edit also includes POV wording; a semi-automatic .223 rifle is not "high-powered" and is certainly not an assault rifle. — Dan MP5 22:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Left word on your talk page. But re-reading your note here, points I did not address -- the RSs say that the rifle is high-powered, and that it is an assault rifle. Per wp policy, what is reflected is verifiable (the goal), though I gather from you that experts will say it is incorrect. But reflecting what the RSs say is what wp call for.

I also note that what you point me to has a tag indicating that it still needs consensus. As such, it is just a proposal in wikiland.

Also, even if it does attract consensus support, I note that it says "In order for a criminal use to be notable enough for inclusion in the article on the gun used, it must meet some criteria. For instance, legislation being passed as a result of the gun's usage (ex. ban on mail-order of firearms after use of the Carcano in JFK's assassination would qualify)." Here, what makes it notable IMHO is the fact that it was the same gun that led to the DC sniper lawsuit, for which the manufacturer paid half a million dollars ... which was itself notable, as it is reflected in the article.

Also, the make of the gun was mentioned in many articles, in top level RSs, and in articles that were not just regional, but national and non-U.S. All are generally considered indicia of notablity.

Just my thoughts. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Please read [[WP:GUNS#Criminal use]]. This section is nothing more than trivia. The sources give no indication of why it is relevant in ''this'' article. In fact, they only briefly mention Woodson had a Bushmaster rifle. The edit also includes POV wording; a semi-automatic .223 rifle is not "high-powered" and is certainly not an assault rifle. — '''''[[User:DanMP5|<font color="#002FA7">Dan</font>]][[user_talk:DanMP5|<font color="#78866B">MP5</font>]]''''' 22:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
-:Left word on your talk page.  But re-reading your note here, points I did not address -- the RSs say that the rifle is high-powered, and that it is an assault rifle.  Per wp policy, what is reflected is verifiable (the goal), though I gather from you that experts will say it is incorrect.  But reflecting what the RSs say is what wp call for.  Best.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 22:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
+:Left word on your talk page.  But re-reading your note here, points I did not address -- the RSs say that the rifle is high-powered, and that it is an assault rifle.  Per wp policy, what is reflected is verifiable (the goal), though I gather from you that experts will say it is incorrect.  But reflecting what the RSs say is what wp call for.
+:I also note that what you point me to has a tag indicating that it still needs consensus.  As such, it is just a proposal in wikiland.
+:Also, even if it does attract consensus support, I note that it says "In order for a criminal use to be notable enough for inclusion in the article on the gun used, it must meet some criteria. For instance, legislation being passed as a result of the gun's usage (ex. ban on mail-order of firearms after use of the Carcano in JFK's assassination would qualify)."  Here, what makes it notable IMHO is the fact that it was the same gun that led to the DC sniper lawsuit, for which the manufacturer paid half a million dollars ... which was itself notable, as it is reflected in the article.
+:Also, the make of the gun was mentioned in many articles, in top level RSs, and in articles that were not just regional, but national and non-U.S.  All are generally considered indicia of notablity.
+:Just my thoughts.  Best.--[[User:Epeefleche|Epeefleche]] ([[User talk:Epeefleche|talk]]) 22:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)