Talk:Browning Hi-Power

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Firearms WikiProject, a project devoted to the improvement of firearms coverage on Wikipedia with an emphasis on civilian firearms.

If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

(and imported into the US by Browning)

What does this mean? Did John Browning import them, or does a company of the same name? Twinxor 12:48, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think the weapon's more proper name is Browning HP (an acronym) rather... It was also produced as Browning GP (in French) Pibwl 16:11, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well it should be called Browning GP as they are made in Belgium, but Browning HP is a more popular term and so used more often. Also, printed on most guns. Wolfmankurd 18:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] King of Nines?

I have always heard the Browning Hi-Power referred to as the "Queen of Nines." How prevalent is the "King of Nines" nickname?


-I have never heard the Hi-power called "King of Nines." I am a Hi-power owner, and love the pistol, but this seems like partisan nicknaming. Fallshirmjager

-To the editor who keeps adding "King of Nines" nickname, please provide source. JG 08:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Sources by 155.84.57.253 13:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30153

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-88944.html

http://www.greatestjournal.com/users/ikealove/21173.html?mode=reply

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-8197.html

http://www.fictionpress.com/read.php?storyid=2069060

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-101928.html

You must be kidding...what kind of sources are "Evangeline's Metamorphosis chapter 2" or "Fiction » Supernatural » In the Eyes of the Tiger" and bunch of forumwritings...? --81.197.218.62 13:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

They are certainly better than your complete lack of sources to support your untenable position. 155.84.57.253 13:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Well I think that burden of proof is on your side Mr. Multipersonal. Its you who is adding some fictional "facts" to the article so YOU need to present some credible sources.--81.197.218.62 14:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

You only asked for one. Why reneg? 155.84.57.253 14:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

So you dont have any real sources, just the ones you have written.--81.197.218.62 15:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Several are from shooting sources, any one of them would do. Unlike you, I don't reneg. 155.84.57.253 19:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


So lets waste still some time to this... Your reliable sources of gun knowledge are:

  • Polk Audio: some radiostore forum where someone who uses alias jdhdiggs, Polkhead uses the phrase.
  • The Highroad.org: Someone who uses alias Rival uses the phrase in forum.
  • Evangeline's Metamorphosis chapter 2: some sort of a short story written by alias E for Emma (ikealove).
  • The Highroad.org: Someone who uses alias CZF uses the phrase in forum.
  • FictionPress: Fiction » Supernatural » In the Eyes of the Tiger, some sort of a short story by Author: Scooz
  • Internet Infidels: A nonprofit educational organization dedicated to the growth and maintenance of the most comprehensive freethought website on the Internet, the Secular Web Library, a virtual library of information on nontheistic worldviews, including agnosticism, atheism, freethought, humanism, and secularism. Our central mission is the defense and promotion of naturalism, the hypothesis that the physical universe is a 'closed system' in the sense that nothing that is neither a part nor a product of it can affect it, thus entailing the nonexistence of supernatural beings, including the theistic God. Someone who uses alias walking point uses the phrase in forum.

And you say "several are from shooting sources"...really.

Wikipedia:Verifiability says:

Self-published sources

Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources. Exceptions may be when a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist, has produced self-published material. In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information on the professional researcher's blog is really worth reporting, someone else will have done so.

Self-published sources in articles about themselves

Self-published sources, and published sources of dubious reliability, may be used only as sources of information on themselves, and only in articles about them. For example, the Stormfront website may be used as a source of information on itself in an article about Stormfront, so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by reliable, third-party published sources. Self-published sources may never be used as sources of information on another person or topic.

Burden of evidence

The burden of evidence lies with the editors who have made an edit or wish an edit to remain. Editors should therefore provide references. If an article topic has no reputable sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on that topic. --81.197.218.62 20:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


81.197.218.62, you are technically correct in your assessment of these sources. However we need to show some judgement. The nickname is hardly controversial. I don't think you are suggesting that it has been made up by any editor here, or that it is an elaborate hoax. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary sources". This is a pedestrian claim, and minimal sources are needed. Though no one of the sources that has been provided is fully reliable, in aggregate they are convincing. Oh, and here's another, a historical reproduction store, The American Historical Foundation. Chambered in 9mm, and because of its combat record, its been known for decades as “the King of Nines”.[1] I hope their gunsmithing is better than their grammar. Anyway, let's not strain at a gnat. -Will Beback 23:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Additionally, the June 2005 issue of the magazine Combat Handguns has the FM model (Argentine licensed copy) as its covergirl for that month. In the article the FM is described as the "Queen of Nines" as opposed to the FN (Belgian) as the "King of Nines." It would seem that the nickname must be widely accepted for gun writers to make puns about it. 155.84.57.253 14:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I figure we just keep the reference out this says it all really, the forum references aren't valid sources, and it seems that the nickname is used for multiple guns. In all though I agree with Will Beback, it's not a big deal, but saying it seems to have gotten heated for some reason I felt the need to add my thoughts. Galactor213 6:28, July 23, 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Separate article for DA?

IMHO, HP-DA (or BDA or whatever it is this year) should have its' own article, as it is essentially a different gun compared to old Hi-Power. Also, some clarification between all the different pistols marketed under BDA name but which have nothing in common between them (Beretta 84, SIG and HP-DA) would not hurt. --Mikoyan21 20:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Many and some???

Quote from article: "The P-35 Models (..) are considered by many to be Browning's finest pistols, and by some even the finest pistols ever." Who are many? Who are some? I doubt many people even know this gun exists. Also I'm sure they are considered to be pieces of crap by "some" as well, as there are many different people with differing opinions. This piece should either be removed, or the article should actually mention WHO thinks this. Also see Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words. Retodon8 08:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Popular culture

I have moved the list of references to films/tv/video games to a new pages and replaced the section with a link to it. Besides the arguments against such lists (see What Wikipedia is not, specifically "lists of trivia", WP:NOT) this is to keep the article clean and uniform with other similar articles and List of firearms in video games and List of firearms in filmspages. (see Heckler & Koch MP5 / Heckler & Koch MP5 in popular culture or MAC-10 / MAC-10 in popular culture) for similar ...in popular culture pages).

Deon Steyn 11:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Names

Anyone ever seen the terms "gran potencia" or "rosario/rosaria" used? 76.186.119.234 04:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confused... duplicate page?

How is this possible? Inglis Hi-Power seems to be an -exact- duplicate of this page, save the replacing of "Browning Hi-Power" with "Inglis Hi-Power", manufacturing location (Canada/Belgium) and associated changes (picture of Inglis HP versus FN or Browning) — even the talk pages are exact duplicates.

Also, there is an FN Hi-Power page which is an unsourced, seemingly "handwritten" page. If given the choice, I'd say FN Hi-Power should be the main page and Browning and Inglis should be redirects. But at the very least, unless I'm missing something, we have at least one near-perfect duplicate page.
71.235.66.254 19:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking through the history of Inglis Hi-Power and Talk:Inglis Hi-Power, it would seem that EX STAB just copied both the original Browning Hi-Power and its talk page, and pasted them. I don't know why someone would do that. Pride in Canada or Inglis, perhaps?
I think the main article should be named Browning Hi-Power and FN and Inglis should redirect to it. Browning Hi-Power is how most people refer to it. Also, even though there is the American company Browning Arms Company that makes the Browning, Browning Hi-Power is a neutral term that doesn't favor particular manufacturers. The Browning in the name refers to John Moses Browning, not to the Browning Arms Company.Pettifogger 20:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • FWIW: Browning Arms Company does not physically construct the Hi-Power, or much else in their product lineup. The manufacture of their firearms have always been farmed out to other companies such as FN. In this case, FN has always been Browning's source for Hi-Power pistols. D.E. Watters 03:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/r/o/Talk%7EBrowning_Hi-Power_5a2c.html"