Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/FN P90

FN P90
Again, too narrow a topic raising too great a risk of becoming a vehicle for advertising testimonials. Most quotes on this page are by a clearly non-notable advocate of the product, while the two that are from a marginally notable person are fairly technical descriptions of the product. — BD2412 T 17:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC) Armed conflict expert John Farnam reported the case of a South African police officer that shot and killed a terrorist. He was seen to scan left and right, and then lower his gun, apparently thinking himself safe at last. He was then shot in the back of the head and killed instantly by a second terrorist with an AK-47, who had been directly behind him and had gone unseen in the "half a circle scan" the brave officer had performed. - Massad Ayoob, The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery (2007), p. 151. The quotes don't have the iconic stature of the line from Dirty Harry, of course, but there are definitely a number of pithy and/or witty quotes about these weapons in works of fiction. The Charles Stross P90 quote I linked earlier could definitely be characterized as pithy: it's expressive and full of meaning ("A stubby, oddly melted-looking device little larger than a flintlock pistol") without devolving into a mundane technical description of the weapon. Here is another quote on the Five-seveN, from a Mack Bolan book, where two characters converse about the Five-seveN, its mata policias nickname in Mexico, and its status as a favored weapon with the Mexican drug cartels. Again, this is a quote I would characterize as being pithy and/or witty: the passage is full of meaning and it would conceivably grab the interest of a reader even if he/she had no prior knowledge of the weapon. Here is yet another quote in Unforgivable by Laura Griffin, wherein two characters converse about the Five-seveN and the "cop killer" nickname; again, I would definitely characterize this passage as being pithy: it's interesting and expressive, but not technical. ROG5728 05:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 18:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott 18:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and discussion at Village Pump. ~ Ningauble 15:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Topic is no less narrow than AK-47, which was created several years ago and only contains quotations from semi-notable individuals. Furthermore, the FN P90 article is only a stub at this point and it will be expanded at a later date. Note the media subsection. ROG5728 08:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Other arguments aside, I do not believe the comparison to the AK-47 article is a fair one. The difference is that the AK-47 (the .44 Magnum is another example) is a weapon that has been mentioned or cited in multiple works of fiction and is the subject of quotes from notable people. I believe the argument that was made at the Village Pump is that such specific examples of a product should not have a page unless they pass such a threshold and become a "household name" and are featured in other works or are specifically cited by several notable people. I agree with that argument. ~ UDScott 13:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The weapons in question (FN P90/Five-seveN) have also been mentioned in "multiple works of fiction," just like the AK-47 (the P90 is well-known for its appearances and mentions in the Stargate series, for example). Aside from that, the AK-47 article primarily consists of small blurbs from non-notable or semi-notable rap songs. It would be more than a bit laughable to suggest that those blurbs are notable but quotes by prominent gun author Massad Ayoob or the Brady Campaign president are not. ROG5728 22:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you provide examples of mentions in work of fiction? Also, regarding the AK-47 comparison, do you think it would be proper to include the following quote on the page for AK-47?
 * If it should be included, why? If not, why not? BD2412 T 15:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I can provide examples of mentions in works of fiction. The P90 has been discussed in the Stargate series (not only featured, but actually discussed by the characters in detail), and the Five-seveN was discussed in detail in The Hit List; in the latter example, a scene is devoted to detectives talking about the Five-seveN by name, discussing its caliber and features ("accurate", "high velocity", etc), and questioning why it was used by the hitman. These are just two examples, but there are others. A Google book search of FN P90 or FN Five-seveN turns up countless quotes in works of fiction, some of which would be appropriate. For example, this work of fiction by author Charles Stross. I am not particularly well acquainted with fictional writing or movies, so I started with non-fictional material in these articles; I do know there is no shortage of quotes on these weapons in works of fiction. As for the AK-47 quote you mentioned, it is probably not appropriate because the AK-47 is not actually being discussed in the quote; rather, the focus of the quote is the police officer's death, and the circumstances that caused it. If the author went on to discuss the AK-47 and/or the criminal's reasons for using it, then the quote would likely be appropriate. ROG5728 20:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Well, your observation about the AK-47 quote does distinguish it from the quotes on these pages. Still, if this same author had provided a description of the AK-47 and noted its ubiquity, I would still think that to be more in the realm of encyclopedic material rather than quote book material. Regarding works of fiction of the type that you have identified, can find and add pithy, witty, or poignant quotes about these from such works? Something along the lines of the iconic line from Dirty Harry, "But, being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?'" Something of that character would require me to reconsider my opposition to these pages. BD2412 T 22:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, for clarity, here are the quotes from those works as they would appear on the FN Five-seven page:


 * Wang pulled a pistol out from under his jacket. "You know what this is? Boland eyed the large, uniformly gray, space-gun-looking Belgian weapon. "FN Five-seveN." "No, it's a mata policias." "Cop killer." Wang nodded. "Every Mexican criminal wants one of these. [...]"
 * Don Pendleton, Devil's Mark (2010), chapter 3.


 * "Check this out," his partner said. "It's an FN Five- seven. Don't see these every day." "Good thing, too," Ric said. The gun was nicknamed the "cop killer" because of its ability to penetrate Kevlar. Black passed the pistol to Ric. He admired the olive drab finish, the tightly checkered grip, the tactical light beneath the barrel. Ric had never seen one of these up close, but he knew a lot of SWAT guys who liked them. "Nice," Ric said, although everyone in the room knew that was a gross understatement. He handed back the weapon.
 * Laura Griffin, Unforgivable, (2010), p. 110.


 * For the record, I do think these pass muster for quotability. Don Pendleton is a serious name in crime fiction. Laura Griffin is not so much (no 'pedia article, either), but has authored over a dozen books published by reputable houses. However, we consider articles based on the quotes they do contain, not the quotes they should contain. I am also not convinced that these can not be merged into Guns as a section (see Flowers and Birds for examples of this). BD2412 T 15:14, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and added those two quotes to the FN Five-seven article, and I'll look up the quote from The Hit List and add it as well. FN P90 may indeed warrant deletion (or cleanup, along with a merge into Guns) since the P90 quotes are mostly technical or semi-technical, and I can't find some of the other suitable examples. However, the content at FN Five-seven certainly does not warrant deletion. Merging it into Guns as a section is a possibility, so long as it can still be directly linked from the WP article (which is currently Good Article status, on its way to eventual featured status). I don't really think that is a big issue, either way, though; at this point FN Five-seven has several quality quotes, so I don't see any reason why it couldn't stand on its own. ROG5728 04:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The example from Dirty Harry illustrates the difference between "it's a quote," which means nothing, and "it's widely quoted," which demonstrates de facto quotability. The examples above might arguably be included in articles (or author sections) on sufficiently notable works, where there is considerable latitude for selecting quotes from a demonstrably quotable work even if the individual quotes are not widely repeated, but I remain unconvinced that such selections belong in a theme page (notwithstanding that other stuff exists). I am also not a big fan of including dialogues in theme pages, but there are exceptions and I recall doing it once myself—from an interview, not from a fiction. ~ Ningauble 17:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If you are suggesting that quotes must be "widely quoted" for inclusion at Wikiquote, that is a wildly unrealistic standard that your own contributions certainly don't adhere to. In fact, the vast majority of content on Wikiquote is not actually "widely quoted." We have already established that there are plenty of quality quotes covering the subject in question (FN Five-seven), although, perhaps not FN P90. ROG5728 03:21, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think every quote that goes into Wikiquote must be "widely quoted", but I do think that it makes sense that any theme that is to serve as the basis for having a page dedicated to it should have at least one "widely quoted" quote; a subject that has none is likely not one for which an individual page should exist. I do realize that, like Wikipedia, Wikiquote is not paper, and we can afford to have pages that most contributors to the project would find to be mundane. I am honestly struggling with this, but I am coming to think that a merge is the best solution for FN Five-seven; it is no problem to have the title remain as a section redirect, and have the Wikipedia article link to that (the formatting needs work, as we do not use reflist templates, and instead have the citation for each quote follow that quote directly, but that is not a deletion issue). BD2412 T 04:52, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * We can agree on a merge of FN Five-seven (as a section) into Guns, then, but while we're at it I see no reason the same shouldn't be done with AK-47 (aside from the empty excuse that other stuff exists). If we're going to include specific guns as sections at the Guns page (similar to the Flowers and Birds pages you mentioned), we should be consistent and do it across the board. ROG5728 08:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that not every quote must be widely repeated, for that is only one of the factors at WQ:Q that should be considered in concert. My own contributions have largely been limited to widely repeated quotes and selections from widely quoted works. There have certainly been exceptions, but I have rarely added something that was not brought to my attention by secondary or tertiary sources, only did so when I believed it satisfied the majority of the considerations at WQ:Q, and never created a standalone article comprised of such quotes. (This discussion is becoming hard to follow due to posts placed out of sequence and due to a lot of discussion of articles other than FN P90.) ~ Ningauble 14:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to also merging AK-47 into Guns; the article is a formatting mess as it stands now, anyway. I would note that Flowers, for example, encompasses most individual kinds of flowers, but not all. Roses is a separate page because of the large number of highly notable quotes on that specific type of flower, just as Eagles are separate from birds. There are, of course, many other kinds of flowers and birds that have some number of highly notable quotes, but roses and eagles stand out against the typical flower. In the same way, we could probably find a number of quotes about a wide variety of guns - the Walther PPK was a favorite of Ian Fleming, lauded in the James Bond novels and in some of the films - but guns that are iconic in the way that roses and eagles are iconic (while orchids and partridges are not) might merit their own pages. I also think we might benefit from spliting Guns a bit, perhaps breaking out a separate page on Handguns, since the broader concept could cover everything from blunderbusses to large battleship guns. BD2412 T 14:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: Regarding AK-47, yes, other stuff exists and there are both similarities and differences, but we are discussing this particular page. The nominator's remark about the risk of narrow topics attracting unwanted quotes should be understood in the context of his observation that the quotes in this article are just such. Unlike Wikipedia, where it is customary to keep stubs that contain little more than the identification of a notable topic to be written about later, what matters at Wikiquote is not only the subject of the quotes, but the quality of the quotes themselves. ~ Ningauble 14:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Contrary to the nominator's concerns (which you cited), the quotes in these articles do not in any way qualify as "advertising." Massad Ayoob is a well-known gun author; his statement that the Five-seveN "is one of the most controversial handguns of our time" is easily noteworthy; probably moreso than any of the quotes in the AK-47 article. The same goes for any of the Brady Campaign president's comments about the Five-seveN; for example, Barnes challenged NRA vice president Wayne LaPierre to "put on a bullet proof vest, and we'll fire the weapon at him, and see what happens," after which the NRA issued an article in response to his comments. All of this is noteworthy. ROG5728 22:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * "Noteworthy" is a standard or inclusion of material in Wikipedia, not in Wikiquote; we are concerned with whether things are quoteworthy. BD2412 T 23:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note that WQ:Q is a guideline, not a policy. Even so, note that its test for inclusion advises (#4) that if the quote is about a "narrow or mundane" topic (an example given in the guideline was porcupines), then editors should consider whether the authors quoted have "particular expertise on that topic." In this case, all of the authors being quoted in these two articles do have particular expertise on the topics. ROG5728 23:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's look at porcupines, then. If a renowned expert on porcupines were to say that a certain kind of porcupine has seven-inch quills, which are particularly offensive to predators, we wouldn't report it because the quote itself is still mundane. In any case, porcupines come in two dozen species, but we would not have an individual page on so narrow a topic as the Asiatic Brush-tailed Porcupine; if anything quotable were to be said about it, that quote would belong on the page about porcupines generally. Otherwise, we would have porcupine fanatics with tunnel-vision making two dozen articles on the individual species, finding whatever some marginally notable wildlife expert had to say about this one or that. What makes "porcupines" notable as a theme is that they are something that even a notable non-expert on the subject might comment upon in a witty or pithy fashion (and, indeed, such comments have been made). BD2412 T 03:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, your analogy is flawed. The quotes in question, for the most part, are not similar to the example quote you gave. Perhaps they are at FN P90, but definitely not at FN Five-seven. Rather, the quotes at FN Five-seven are mostly controversial opinions and/or reflections on the controversy surrounding the weapon. Both of these topics are undeniably narrow and you find them to be dull; that is understood. However, that does not necessitate deleting them. The WQ:Q guideline you linked earlier with regards to "quoteworthiness" does not in any way dictate the exclusion of quotes on the basis that the topic is narrow or even mundane. As for your comment that "we would not have an individual page on so narrow a topic as the Asiatic Brush-tailed Porcupine," we already do have an individual article on the similarly narrow topic of the AK-47, as I pointed out earlier. The quotes in that article consist primarily of brief rap/movie blurbs that are not nearly as notable (or "quotable") as anything in the FN Five-seven article. ROG5728 05:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The Sandy Wall quotes are by a non-notable individual, and would have to be deleted from the article even if the article itself were kept. The remaining quotes merely physically describe the product, and are no more quotable than a physicist's description of a water molecule. BD2412 T 14:57, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep — though I have no great affection for many "specific product" quotes, and any abundance of them can be somewhat banal, I do not believe they shoudl be forbidden or rigorously restricted— and had noted the AK-47 parrallels myself. One might not have much enthusiasm for quotes about specific firearms, and yet can appreciate that some people do, and they should be permitted to present them. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 09:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC) The article DOES need a format cleanup though — and I might attend to this within a week or so if no one else does... ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 09:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note to closer: Much of this discussion is concerned with Votes for deletion/FN Five-seven rather than FN P90. Both discussions might be reviewed together in order to assess the consensus on each article. ~ Ningauble 14:49, 14 June 2011 (UTC)