Talk:Gun Control in the Third Reich

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 January 2014. The result of the discussion was withdrawn.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gun Control in the Third Reich article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Firearms Low‑importance

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

First sentence

The first sentence contains the text: "Gun Control in the Third Reich is a non-fiction book that describes the gun control tactics used by the German Third Reich from 1918-1938". There was no Third Reich in 1918. Can someone rephrase this? I'd do it myself but I'm feeling a little slow today. FiachraByrne (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC) Done Gaijin42 (talk) 14:59, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gaijin42. By the way, do you have the book and do you know exactly when it was published (early/late 2013)? FiachraByrne (talk) 17:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

fiachraByrne According to amazon its publication date was nov 1, 2013. I have it on kindle, but have not yet read it (which is why Halbrook's arguments are sourced to his journal articles and not the book, which I assume makes the same argument in greater detail. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out to see if its reviewed in mainstream history periodicals, etc., but that can take a while. FiachraByrne (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although I am fully aware that these don't "count" and this type of thing is notorious for cherry picking, being just plain made up etc, two of the book blurbs are from historians (i do not know of what caliber or reputation - but in any case, they would be likely candidates to write something perhaps. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I read through the "praise" section for the book here. Leaving aside the Law professors, etc, a lot of them - with the exception of Bowman, I think - are connected to the publisher in one way or another or are strong partisans in the gun control debate. Hunt Tooley, an editor for the Independent Review, has published on the history of Silesia in the Weimar era, however. We'll see, I guess, but it's doubtful that, over time, this book won't be addressed one way or another. FiachraByrne (talk) 03:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 November 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved - Consensus in favour of moving based on the present topic of this article being the primary one for this title and WP:DIFFCAPS. FOARP (talk) 17:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gun Control in the Third Reich (book) → Gun Control in the Third Reich – "Gun Control in the Third Reich" is currently a disambig page, even though it is a natural title for this book's article. A hatnote is already in place. I don't see value in maintaining the separate disambig page. Ich (talk) 16:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE 18:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skeptical. Depending on the difference of a single capital letter seems dubious and potentially confusing to readers. The book does not seem as notable as the actual gun control topic. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:30, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. No other article is titled Gun Control in the Third Reich. There's already a hatnote pointing to the only other possible article that a reader might be looking for. Station1 (talk) 08:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. WP:NOPRIMARYTOPIC. Theparties (talk) 00:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning support. The book does seem to be the primary topic of the phrase at this capitalization. BD2412 T 20:04, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Firearms, WikiProject Books, and WikiProject Germany have been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 18:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: The discussion is currently split on whether WP:DIFFCAPS sufficiently applies in designating the book a primary topic, and thusly not ambiguous with the general topic ASUKITE 18:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:DIFFCAPS. Classic case where a hatnote is the appropriate disambiguation rather than a disambiguation page. Mdewman6 (talk) 08:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:ASTONISH. Obviously anyone clicking on this would expect to see an article about gun control in the Third Reich. We are meant to be helping our users, not pandering to the smugness of Wikipedia insiders. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But they don't see an article about gun control in the Third Reich. They see a two-entry dab page. Station1 (talk) 17:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the point! Why is the book primary? -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's primary because it's the only topic on WP actually titled "Gun Control in the Third Reich". Readers wanting something else are far more likely to search for "gun control in Germany" or "gun control in Nazi Germany" or "history of gun control in Germany" or even "gun control in the Third Reich". And if a minority want something else, they're no better off with a two-entry dab page than they would be with the same link as a hatnote. Helping readers means getting them where they want to be quickly, without throwing unnecessary roadblocks in their way. Station1 (talk) 17:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So now you know what people are going to search for? Clever! -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. There is only one article here. The alternative is a DAB page that lists a section of a different article. Both the section and the other article have completely different titles. I also agree with Station1 that our readers will not search "Gun Control in the Third Reich" while looking for gun control in Nazi Germany (sadly the DAB's pageviews are too low for WikiNav to confirm this). The DAB page is completely unnecessary, as is the disambiguator after the book's title. Toadspike [Talk] 14:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(In hindsight my comment makes little sense. My point is that only one article/topic actually has this title, so a DAB is overkill and this can easily be solved with hatnotes.) Toadspike [Talk] 17:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for a few reasons: WP:DIFFCAPS technically solves this problem, but also because the DAB uncapped version fails WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT so it really shouldn't even be an issue. The DAB page is only getting single-digit views monthly. [1] - so that isn't how people are actually nagivating to either article. The existing hatnote in books is sufficient for people looking for the topic. TiggerJay (talk) 03:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.