User talk:RAF910

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. CuriousMind01 (talk) 00:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 into Assault rifle. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, RAF910. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

• See Talk:Assault rifle where TeeTylerToe has been pushing all kinds of fringe ideas, without getting support from any other editor...--RAF910 (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Assault rifle". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 21 July 2016.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 17:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Assault rifle, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Assault rifle

Had to chuckle over the meatpuppet allegations. I got called to the discussion via the RfC process. I doubt I ever encountered any of the editors previously. I thought the question might be interesting - I have some interest in infantry weapons - and possibly have some political significance. Instead I found a bucket of warm twaddle. Yes, I suppose you could arm every man in a squad with a balloon-busting rifle and it would sound good in theory, but it wouldn't work for the same reasons you wouldn't give every guy a BAR. The reason the StG-44 was successful rather than yet another of Hitler's odd weapons was that it worked in practice. --Pete (talk) 16:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it worked very well indeed. With the standard German infantry tactics of the day and paired with the MG-42, it was devastating weapons combination. Especially, against Russian troops armed primarily with bolt action rifles. Even by today's standards the STG-44 can hold its own against modern assault rifles. A true testament to the men who made it. Thank God, they didn't come up with it 5 years earlier. While it would not have won the war for the Germans, it would have prolong it and made it a hell of a lot bloodier.

As for TTT, I believe he's just some kid/troll with no real gun knowledge or experience who thinks he can rewrite 100+ years of firearms history. It is amazing to what length he was willing to go to get his way. I still can't believe that he thought that tag trick would work. "Oh no sir...I'm not edit warring. I'm just adding one random tag after another to the article. It those evil meat-puppets that are edit warring by removing them." Of course he will be back in two weeks. I'm sure he'll come up with some equally clever trick that will force us to waste our time and efforts. I hope you stick around for the fireworks. I'm sure it will be an epic fail.--RAF910 (talk) 18:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Entertaining, but I know that people change in their habits and behaviour. If he has any sense he'll work out that he's on the wrong path. Unless he's deliberately trolling, in which case he'll be indeffed soon enough. I'll keep watching in case he begins practising on a fresh group in two weeks.

Hitler was the fly in the ointment for so many weapon systems. I guess he got Germany into the fix, but German design and engineering produced so many excellent weapons that I guess we can be grateful that he held them back. The Me 262 jets, for example: far superior to the kludgy British designs. --Pete (talk) 21:54, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah...Just imagine what the World would look like today if Hitler was a patience man and simply waited for the French to elect fascist government before invading Poland. The French would of most likely remained neutral (like Spain) and the smaller European nations would have had no choice but to do the same. Or, just imagine if he wasn't obsessed with building the biggest and the best. Instead of giving the Kriegsmarine two 42,ooo-ton battleships, he gave Dönitz 82 1000-ton U-boats. Or, instead of wasting resources making a dozen railroad guns, Germany made a 1000 Panzer IV tanks.--RAF910 (talk) 23:41, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

If he'd let his generals and especially economic and production people have their way instead of trying to micromanage everything, Germany would have been in a better position. Which is a frightening thing. --Pete (talk) 10:56, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jungle style (firearm magazines), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page H&K. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Personal comments

Please stop making comments about other editors on article talk pages. They are personal attacks and don't belong. If you want to make a complaint, do so in one of the proper venues. Felsic2 (talk) 21:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Again, please stop making personal comments where they don't belong. Felsic2 (talk) 21:59, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome to the firearms project. I thought you were already a member and until a few days ago had you confused with another editor who was ex-Australian military that used to edit here years ago!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 16:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Cheers Mate.--RAF910 (talk) 20:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

CETME

Could you take a look at CETME? The article is about both the company and the rifle. Splitting it was discussed on the talk page about 5 years ago, but nothing was done. Do you have any thoughts on how best to handle this? - BilCat (talk) 16:46, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

I was considering the same thing. The final titles can be worked out later. - BilCat (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'll split it out shortly, and start working on the redirects. - BilCat (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done Still needs a LOT of work. I added a blank infobox, nd I'll try to add some info from the German and French WP articles if I can understand/translate them, but firearms are not my specialty. Both articles still need inline citations. - BilCat (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! The Lead and infobox were more than I could manage. - BilCat (talk) 23:35, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, RAF910. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited General-purpose machine gun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yugoslavian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited General-purpose machine gun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

AR-15 pages

When can we make the changes to the AR-15 pages?--Limpscash (talk) 04:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

You can do it whenever you want. Worse case scenario, they are reverted and it sparks the discussion. Remember to add the "AR-15 (disambiguation)" page.--RAF910 (talk) 14:47, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I have made the changes.--Limpscash (talk) 04:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I think I made a mistake. Can you look at the Talk:AR-15 page?--Limpscash (talk) 06:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

• I tried to fix it, but it has been reverted again. We're just going to have to wait this out. Sorry.--RAF910 (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
• I'm sorry. Thanks for trying. Thanks for helping to explain what I'm trying to do. I added another renamed and moved request. Hopefully it works out this time.--Limpscash (talk) 04:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
• Thanks for your support on these articles. I get it now. There are too many editors who insist on editing a subject that they know nothing about. I also want to thank you for removing the Armalite content from the Colt AR-15 page. As you said, it was not necessary and clearly confusing people.--Limpscash (talk) 04:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Good job on cleaning up the Colt AR-15 page. I really like the new images--RAF910 (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank You for all you help. It works perfectly now--Limpscash (talk) 04:03, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Categorization

Hello RAF910,

When you add categorize pages please use the most specific categories available. For example Category:Bayonets of the United States is already a subcategory of Category:Bayonets and bayonets are subcategory of Category:Blade weapons, Category:Firearm components and Category:Military knives. This means that there is no point in adding the parent categories to article if it already in a subcategory. See also Wikipedia:Categorization dos and don'ts. MKFI (talk) 10:25, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of List of conflicts and wars fought with M16 type rifles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of conflicts and wars fought with M16 type rifles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of conflicts and wars fought with M16 type rifles until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MilborneOne (talk) 14:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

JFK assassination

The theory that JFK was accidentally killed by a bullet accidentally fired from a Secret Service agent's AR-15 rifle is more accurately described as an 'accidental shooting theory', not a 'conspiracy theory'. That said, there would have been a conspiracy to cover this up but that is a separate if related issue. I was wondering you had seen the 2013 documentary by Colin McLaren titled 'JFK: The Smoking Gun'? After having watched it you might come to believe, as I do, that it reveals an uncomfortable truth. Thank you for your time. CodeBadger (talk) 02:55, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve USS Deucalion (AR-15)

Hi, I'm Boleyn. RAF910, thanks for creating USS Deucalion (AR-15)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This has been tagged for two issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 19:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, RAF910. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Handgun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Serpentine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

thx

Hi RAF910, thx for accepting the matter. As you can see by my edits, I have tried to address some co-authors. For you and the friends of project good luck for further libraries. Best regards --80.187.109.37 (talk) 12:39, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement discretionary sanctions alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

To add a signature, this was by me. Sandstein 17:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

"Possible Wikipedia:Canvassing"

The feedback on the tread was that In any event accusations of canvassing are off the mark. [1]. Would you mind removing your heading or changing it to something more neutral? --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:02, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

HEADS UP!

We are being targeted by Lightbreather on Twitter. Please see the sites below:

https://twitter.com/Lightbreather --Limpscash (talk) 06:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Okey Dokey--RAF910 (talk) 17:07, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

SMGs

Hi, we have 2 lists in list of smgs page for no reason, I wanna consult with you about this... I don't think it would be nice to talk here, it'll waste our time... we can finish this job in some minutes if you have any social media to talk about this... thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hayyanhami (talk • contribs) 21:20, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

It would be best to have all discussions on the Talk:List of submachine guns. so that other editors can contribute as well. Also, I suggest that you stop deleting past comments. As it make it hard for other to understand whats happening and why it's happening.--RAF910 (talk) 21:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

You are right, but it gonna make mess in the topic page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hayyanhami (talk • contribs) 21:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Merely a formality; it does not look like you have been notified in the past 12 months. --K.e.coffman (talk) 23:49, 3 April 2018 (UTC)