Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Krag-Petersson/oldfac
Krag-Petersson edit
Self-nomination. Having trouble finding any sort of information on the Krag-Petersson rifle, I did my best to pull all avilable information together in this article. I believe it is the most comprehensive article (in english) avilable on the 'net today. Hopefully, y'all will find it suitable for becoming a featured article (and if not, I'll do my best to make it suitable =) )WegianWarrior 09:13, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment - compare Krag-Jørgensen. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Being in an excelent position to do so (since I wrote most of that one too), I fail to see what you try to say... are you wanting this one to have as much / the same sort of information as the one on the K-J? Trouble is, since less than 1000 K-Ps was manufactured for use by the norwegian navy, there is neither much to be found in the way of interesting models, prototypes or usage by other nations. WegianWarrior 06:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I meant that it compares unfavourably with Krag-Jørgensen. If online sources are lacking, what about offline sources? Sorry, but I would not support the article in its present state. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- There is a print source - see the references section! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:15, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I meant that it compares unfavourably with Krag-Jørgensen. If online sources are lacking, what about offline sources? Sorry, but I would not support the article in its present state. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:53, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Being in an excelent position to do so (since I wrote most of that one too), I fail to see what you try to say... are you wanting this one to have as much / the same sort of information as the one on the K-J? Trouble is, since less than 1000 K-Ps was manufactured for use by the norwegian navy, there is neither much to be found in the way of interesting models, prototypes or usage by other nations. WegianWarrior 06:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Object, this might just not be the most comprehensive article on 'net. Phoenix2 18:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- It is more comprehensive on this subject than any other online resource I've found. Off course, I would love if you could prove me wrong on this - since I could add more to the article. WegianWarrior 06:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Please provide a more comprehensive article so we can update this one. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:15, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Maybe it is the most "comprehensive" on this gun on the internet, but featured articles need to be a tad bit longer. File:PhoenixSuns 100.pngPhoenix2File:Teamflag1.png 02:15, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Object. This article seems a bit too short. I'm not a gun expert per se, but maybe you could add information like collector's information, influences on modern gun design, and maybe an expansion on the Usage section. --Omni gamer 06:59, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Object. Too short of an article for FA. Craigy
(talk) 02:55, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
- No offense, but disagree. If this is the most information that can be found on the article, then it is the right size. I feel that this is not actually an actionable objection. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:15, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support seems pretty comprehensive to me, I know that WegianWarrior thoroughly researched it. Feel that it should be an FA. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:15, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment, isn't there some fire arms infobox to add? - Mgm|(talk) 10:52, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
- I think I found the one you was refering too. WegianWarrior 28 June 2005 07:37 (UTC)
- Comment; Since the main objection people have seems to be the lenght of the article, as opposed to the contents, I've rewritten the major parts of it... all while refering to the only good source avilable; Norske Militærgeværer etter 1867, ISBN 82-993143-1-3. Hopefully this will answer some of the objections. WegianWarrior 20:28, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)