Talk:Gun Control in the Third Reich (book)
 | 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 The result of the discussion was withdrawn.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 (book) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
First sentence
editThe 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
Requested move 6 November 2024
edit
 | It has been proposed in this section that Gun Control in the Third Reich (book) be renamed and moved to Gun Control in the Third Reich. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. |
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)