Talk:Microwave gun

is this something that exists?

Is this article about some identifiable technology that really exists? Or is it just speculation? We can't have an article made up only of unsourced speculation. Friday (talk) 17:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I guess I answered my own question. Google is my friend: [1] [2]. Friday (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

It is probably best to redirect to Active Denial System. That article is accurate and sourced; and has a specific and realistic focus. Until there are any other examples of this technology, it is best not to write a speculative article. Nimur 17:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have performed this redirect. Contact me at my talk page if there are any comments. Nimur 17:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I unredirected it and improved the article because I believe there is more to microwave guns than the active denial system, and you couldn't put that information in the ADS article. [Mαc Δαvιs] ❖ 17:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Copied from User talk:Nimur).

The "Amateur Projects" section is very dangerous and unencyclopedic. We should not have a How-To section, especially if it's likely to injure the participant. Nimur 17:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everything here except Active Denial System does not count as a "gun", and should be addressed in the main Microwave article. Nimur 17:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MacDavis, since you intend to develop this article, please address these serious issues. If they are not addressed, I strongly recommend replacing the redirect. Nimur 18:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One closing note - I think that this article should be regarded with great care, since the primary contributors do not appear to have any experience with millimeter wave or microwave research or applications. External sources should be carefully cited in all cases. Nimur 18:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nimur, a few things.

I think it is fairly obvious that this article is not a How To, nor are any sections. If you're concerned about describing or supplying information on possibly dangerous or illegal acts on Wikipedia, you probably shouldn't read Heroin manufacturing, Ricin manufacture or Nuclear weapon design in that case (and one of my favorite, Chemical synthesis.
Everything here in the article does count as "gun" because all of these are called "microwave guns," whether they fit naming conventions or not, and we can't help that. If it is a proper gun or not, directed-energy devices for microwaves are called microwave guns.

You do seem to be very against the development of this article.

It does not matter if I do or do not have any experience with millimeter wave or microwave research applications. For all you know I could be absolutely an expert. But I hope you know by now, on Wikipedia, that doesn't matter. "Anybody can edit," and appeal to authority is ignored. If I did have experience, which, as a matter of fact I do, that should in any case be ignored—just like scientists submitting their articles to journals, you need to cite your sources. References are found, and I am carefully citing my sources as you asked. [Mαc Δαvιs] ❖ 18:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes i was in the process of inputing sources when all the editing started. the microwave gun is being tested in the arts and crafts as sort of a glue gun. its quite intresting. im sorry for not citing my sources right away in the begining but well i was still reading the articles about the uses for it. User:Maverick423 If It Looks Good Nuke It 19:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you mentioned, some devices other than the ADS have been occasionally called "Microwave Guns." This is a very non-standard terminology; the devices you listed are better known by other names. I have thus created a disambiguation page. Please add relevant information to the correct main articles. I have moved your cited sources to the relevant articles as external-links so that your work is not lost. Nimur 22:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ah well that was nice =) at least the work wasnt lost. once the subject starts expanding with even more relyable information on the arts and craft and other practical uses then we can talk about placing this back to the way it was. untill then well ill keep looking. when more stuff comes out i hope your there to help us out =) User:Maverick423 If It Looks Good Nuke It 23:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. Working cooperatively, we will make a better and more complete (and above all, a factually-correct) article. Nimur 23:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not so happy about this conclusion. Why don't we just redirect to Active Denial Systems then, because klystrons, magnetrons, and whatnot else on the disambig aren't microwave guns at all. [Mαc Δαvιs] ❖ 02:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mac Davis, the problem is that there is no such thing as a "microwave gun." I suppose it would be "a thing which shoots microwaves," ...so the closest thing would be a microwave-frequency amplifier or resonator (such as a TWT or klystron. Incidentally, one such device is used in the Active Denial System. But you have self-identified the problem with this article - there is not a widespread scientific usage of the term "microwave gun." Nimur 18:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

same here Mac but i assure you i will keep looking for any data that suggest that this kind of tech can be used for anything other then stopping bad guys. youll see! i will find something even if i have to search every last webpage or go to college professors to do so =) User:Maverick423 If It Looks Good Nuke It 15:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]