User talk:DeusImperator

Hello, DeusImperator! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking

if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:05, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content
Miscellaneous
User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

.460 Weatherby Magnum

Ok, I finished the convert templates and all the reference updates to use the cite template. What's next? Do you have any pictures? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should have a picture of the Norma's 460 Wby loaded with the DGS @ 2600 ft/s while Hornady loading the 500 Gr. Interlock @ 2300 ft/s for the 458 Lott for their Custom line both from 2009 as soon as I find my batteries for the camera. Whaat other pictures do you think we need for this article? DeusImperator (talk) 10:55, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok uploaded the picture to WikiCommonns. Ok so I'll need someone to put it add it to the article. Picture = 460DGS458IL.png. It will need to be reduced in size for article obviously as it is 17 Mb in its original form.DeusImperator (talk) 03:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok better pic 460WbyMag458Lott.png for articleDeusImperator (talk) 04:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any pictures are helpful. Were you able to fit all the pictures you want? Did you figure out how to add pictures from Commons? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 02:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes figured it out. Had trouble with the schematic diagram ( fit to page) but replaced it with one made in ACAD and was able to have the dimensions verified as being correct for the .460 as several sources provide conflicting information.DeusImperator (talk) 06:38, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nitro Express article

Just a heads up - I wasn't sure if you were aware of the Nitro Express article. I added the two cartridge articles you created to it. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:01, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Was not awareDeusImperator (talk) 07:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New gun articles

I took the liberty of adding your new articles to the firearms project new articles list. Feel free to update comments there, rather than my lame ones. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 23:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Just a heads up. Rather than putting your email address in talk pages, you might want to adjust your account preferences so that people can email you, and then give your actual email address privately. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!! Done.

Firearms Project

Hi, I was just wondering if you've thought about joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Firearms? It's really low-key, but basically just people who work on firearms article. Checkout the page and see what you think. I'm guessing it's up your alley. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutly! I have been looking at the page and just working on either requested articles or just getting the articles to at least B quality. I just want to draw your attention to the Lott article. As it is written currently it infringes on the copyrights held by Peterson Publishing. This need to be re-written end to end. The text is copied outright for the most part from Kevin Steele's article Buff Busters word for word. DeusImperator (talk) 01:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wilson Combat

Do you happen to have any sources for Wilson Combat? It just got listed at AFD, so we need to improve it or it will be nuked. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update - the AFD was withdrawn, but still could use some good sources if you happen to have any. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me check into it DeusImperator (talk) 00:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I did a bunch of work, but I didn't find anything with a real history about them. You seem to be good at finding stuff, must be that Jesuit thing. ;-) AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:) Well I think we should have a pretty good one by Friday. We should have some early history and pictures from that time. I have spoken to the Nick, the technical Advisor at Wilson Combat and he should be able to provide some pics and info and cross-refed from print media.

Nick has not provided any information for the Wilson combat piece which I believed he would do sometime today. DeusImperator (talk) 00:42, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bummer. Maybe Nick was the one who messed up the article in the first place and almost got it deleted. ;-) Anyway, if something comes in we'll use it, otherwise I'm putting the article back in my queue and moving on to others, like the User:AliveFreeHappy/6 mm BR Remington I'm working on. Probably not up your alley, since it's too tiny. heh. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 18:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of my shooing is with the "tiny" ones. No one can afford shooting biggies all the time. Eats into the wallet and too much of it leaves one with a flinch that can make one look like an epileptic trout. Besides I am thinking of building a 6.5x284. I am surprised that there is no wiki article on the 6 BR.DeusImperator (talk) 04:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I do love my 45-70's dearly. But they don't cost all that much to shoot. But I am also constantly amazed that no one has done the 6BR so I finally started on it. Didn't get much chance over the weekend, but maybe I'll get it done this week. If you have thoughts on the idea of one 6BR article vs two (one for norma, one for rem) let me know. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 05:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep it was Nick who did that DeusImperator (talk) 13:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

.700 Hubel Express AFD

I went ahead and listed .700 Hubel Express at AFD and then found that you had already done it, but someone it was an incomplete nomination. I've asked for assistance on the talk page so that someone can straighten it out. FYI - there are tools that will help you list things at AFD, etc that might make your life easier. I use WP:TWINKLE so I don't have to go through all the horrible steps manually. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look

What do you think about .17-357 RG? AliveFreeHappy (talk) 00:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these are quite problematic. This is again someone's (Real Guns) pet project. The Wiki should not be a venue for someone to talk about their projects. I have read about it prior to this on the real gun site sometime ago. Real Guns have had a few projects such as this in the past. It is a two gun project or so it seems as well.

Something should not be excluded for just being a project, some projects warrent an article, the Human Genome project, SETI project etc, Advanced Combat Rifle project. This is due to the nature of the project itself, those who underwrite the project and the subject matter the subject explores, scope, influence and the amount of chatter regarding the subject. The Real Guns project does not meet these conditions, and is simply a project (this is claimed within the article itself). It is not a project within the scope of a military contract, or to win a prize etc. It is just a project someone came up with and a strict interpretation of Wiki's policy and mandate should not really be in the Wiki.

However, I know that RG does extensive testing for safety and abides by recommend procedural norms and methodology recommended you RFC White Papers. I think the article touched on this aspect to a certain degree. The fact that RCBS has provided the dies (they do make custom dies based on detailed schematic drawings) helps their case somewhat. My QuickLoad does have a couple of RG cartridges listed.

There is a lot of speculative information in the original sourced article. The Wiki article draws from this speculations in the original and regurgitates it into the Wiki article. However there is no reason to doubt that it would not make a good varmint cartridge, but no one outside RG states that. Apart from RG source there is little to no information. There is definitely a conflict of interest. There does not seem to be much traction outside Joe4570 aka(Joseph D'Alessandro). On the other hand I don't think Joe4570 is selling anything apart from promoting his Website. Maybe he could do a write up about Real Guns site and ditch the article :).

The short of it is that I don't think Joe4570 belong on the Wiki - my opinion.

DeusImperator (talk) 02:53, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should see if we could create a good realguns article and patch what's usable into it. For some of these obscure cartridges we could create a page and give them a paragraph, like in COTW. Something like Proprietary cartridges etc. I think many of the cartridge articles we have are going to need to be combined and then a redirect inside the article so a search will find them, like I did with the variants on the .458 Lott. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 04:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Oh I meant the I don't think Joe4570's article belongs on the wiki not Joe4570 himself.

We're probably going to need to start a todo list somewhere, maybe on the firearms project, re cartridges with notability issues. Maybe I'll start a userpage for now. We can probably add .50 Hush Puppy to the list, IMO. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the .50 Razorback. Maybe a Delta Company Arms page is in order for both of those and probably others attached to them? I'll try and take a look later, but may not get to it today. Take a look at User:AliveFreeHappy/cnote. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 22:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something must be done because everyone will want to get their cat and dog listed on the Wiki just to get some notoriety. This listing of every project however undeserving it is makes a mockery of the idea behind the wiki. Everyone it seem wants to be listed on the Wiki. I had an friend who could bills himself "media whore" write himself into the Wiki to help himself get noticed. I'd help with the project as long as long as there is a format to follow. DeusImperator (talk) 01:30, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Combining nitro

I combined the .450/400 Nitro Express articles. Hopefully I didn't screw anything up. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 22:25, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope its good. Lets keep that as a general page on the .450/400 NE cartridges. I re-wrote a couple of sentences so that it applies to all the cartridges.DeusImperator (talk) 03:44, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AFD for .17-357 RG

I saw you tried to do an AFD for .17-357 RG so I finished setting it up. Hopefully I got it straightened out, I think I did. If you want to AFD something it can get tricky. Even using WP:TWINKLE sometimes I have to do something by hand. If you have a problem again, just let me know. I also notified the article creator for you. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 04:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks AFH! New to the AfD thing. How often does issues like this crop up? I mean articles submitted for projects etc? DeusImperator (talk) 04:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

6.5 mm Remington Magnum

It looks like the 6.5 mm Remington Magnum is in place now. When you moved it to the mainspace you accidentally moved the talk page rather than the article, but I think we're ok now. I did it the cheap way so we lost edit history, but didn't think it was important since it's essentially a "new" article at this point. Plus I struck it from open tasks list and added it to the new articles list for WP:WikiProject Firearms. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!! I was wondering as to why the Talk Pages showed up there instead.

Interesting article

I'm guessing this one is up your alley - Big Five game. I've just been working on it. It might be fun to really move it to an A-class article and even suggest it for the "Did you know" or article of the day or something. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 01:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it need some work. :) DeusImperator (talk) 06:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

deletion list

I created a link on the firearms project page to this Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Firearms list, similar to how the military project does it. It makes it convenient to monitor AfD as long as someone adds the AFD to the list as it describes at the top. Let me know what you think. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Have the article vetted first. DeusImperator (talk) 00:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jonson Cartridges Deletion

Hello DeusImperator, I have written AliveFreeHappy the same note. I have to apologize but I am a major contributor to the Jonson articles and I don't understand how to post on the conversation about their deletion...but if you can help me, I'm willing to learn.

I have contributed to the Jonson cartridges articles and am distressed at having them deleted because the rounds have been part of the shooting world since the 1980s. Guns for them are made in the US and Australia and are being shot currently. Articles about building Jonson rifles have been posted on forums, including the Chuck Hawks forum, one of the largest forums in the firearms world. I don't think a lot of research has gone into the reasons for deletion. Perhaps the article isn't that good but I am in contact with the inventor and can clarify the history, etc. with him if necessary. For example, the inventor shared the drawings for inclusion in Commons so that issue can be withdrawn, as I am certain most of the issues can be clarified.

I would appreciate if the articles that have already been deleted can be replaced until we can work things out amicably. If, after a proper discussion (these articles were only put up a couple weeks ago for deletion, why so fast) it is determined that this is not a proper subject for Wiki, there will be no problem here.

The real problem is that I don't know enough about operations to even find how to enter the discussion. It would seem somebody would have notified me or at least done the proper due diligence to find out that these cartridges were the inspiration for the Lazzeroni short magnums and the basis for all the Winchester, Remington and Ruger short magnum cartridges that make up one of the largest segments of the gun business. Thanks for any help you might throw my way on getting this situation cleared up. I'll be happy to work with the team to do what's necessary to clear the air on these articles, as I and many others feel they are legitimate Wiki articles. I hope you will help this ignorant soul (me) get to the right section and join the discussion. But for the record, the notes on the reasons for deletion refer to talk on the 7.62 Jonson page and, since it's been taken down, there's not even any way for a discussion group to get all the facts. Many thanks, 100%BulletProof TALK 13:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 100%! the real issue here is that the cartridge is not that noteworthy. I was aware of the cartridge's existence during the early years of rec guns where I was a contributor. BJ was trying to generate hype about his cartridge then but when he found that there was not much traction he looked elsewhere. There was no consultation with rec.guns, promising everyone everything isn't consultation it is tailoring the cartridge to the given audience. Also, you cannot write an article using yourself or the inventor (??? inventor of WHAT? If English is not your primary language my apologies. If the English language is your primary language do not throw the word if you have no understand of the meaning of the word) but should be sourced from other sources available.

Something like "I want the cartridge to do this." "of course it does that." As for the Lazzeroni, Remington, and Winchester taking the lead from BJ you know like most people I'll call bull. Remington got their inspiration from the Imperial Magnum cartridges except that the Imperial Mags actually share with the 404 Jef. casehead. Drinking the kool-aid of an "inventor" is never a good idea. Winchester and Remington did not copy anything from Jonson. They probably never heard about the Jonson which is an utterly insignificant excuse for a cartridge. Jonson? What? What is that? DeusImperator (talk) 01:10, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll refrain from calling BS on your statement that Jonson was hyping his cartridge on rec.guns until you give me a reference to such a post. I just searched the entire archive and there is but one reference to any cartridge by a BJ (if that is Jonson) and that is in a very short post that asks interested parties to contact via email if they have an interest. That's not a lot of hype. If you have such a problem with such an insignificant cartridge, why don't you write directly to the Jonson web site and talk to the "inventor" yourself and find out if he's for real or not. What if the company can document the claims made on the web site? As mentioned elsewhere, I have two of the rifles and reload for them regularly. I'm not going to defend anybody as to claims made but it would seem that you would want to hear the proof, if there is any, before you totally condemn someone just on your opinion or whim. You really ought to play around with this round before you try to destroy it without any testing or proof of any kind. Your unkind words really don't make much sense unless you have some vendetta against this company. 100%BulletProof TALK 20:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]