Talk:Shooting ranges in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Additional information:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

1 First draft
2 Adverts in External Links
3 Merge?
4 Edit war
5 Environmental issues

[edit] First draft

This is the first draft of this article and is based on moving the formerly US-centric Shooting range article over and editing slightly. Yaf 21:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adverts in External Links

All of the links in the External Links are advertisments for gun ranges in various parts of the U.S., with the excuse that they are an "example" of such-and-such type of gun range. Yeah, right.

I've removed all but the link to the Florida Today article, but removed the sidenote about the "new public range". The Massachusetts Rifle Association and Knob Creek Range links have been removed as well, but references to the wiki articles have been inserted instead.

130.126.146.177 16:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

For whatever it's worth, I suppose I agree. But to put that in perspective, I didn't care that much when they were there. They were after all ranges in the U.S. Thernlund 22:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

They were originally included to provide country-specific information for Europeans and UK citizens intending to go on holiday in the US to see what gun ranges were like in the US prior to visiting, in response to questions that had come up on the original Shooting range article. The list had been kept relatively clean from spam, and the examples were not intended to be ads. I don't see a problem with them being restored. Anyone see a problem in restoring the list? Yaf 23:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

As 130 points out, they were sort of reaching the point of adverts, what with everyone wanting to add thier very own local range. Maybe it should be pruned to just some of the large ranges in major cities. For example, Ben Avery's in huge (and state owned). By contrast, the Phoenix Rod and Gun Club is fairly insignifcant by comparison (and it's mostly private, so non-members are for the most part out).

It would require some research on each. If someone else doesn't do it, I might later tonight. Thernlund 23:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge?

I find myself wondering if this article stands on it's own. When I first saw it, my initial reaction was to ponder if the U.S. is special/different enough on the topic of shooting ranges to merit it's very own article.

I'm not saying merge it with another article. But I thought I put the question out there. Maybe the U.S. is that different from the rest of the world on this topic. We certainly are where gun ownership is concerned. Thernlund 22:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This came up before, back in February 2006, and resulted in the split that currently exists. Have added

Main article: Shooting range

link. Yaf 23:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah. I see. Sounds good to me then. Thernlund 23:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war

The edit war between Yaf and 72.211.140.52/Burk8 made a hash of things. I reverted back to the last version before the edit war began. If I've counted correctly, neither editor can make another edit today (some, I'll discretely say, by a wide margin), so everyone go edit something else, and come back tomorrow.

I haven't reported anyone for 3RR yet. It looks like a bother, so I don't want to. But I will if it keeps up.

Believe it or not, from an outsider's perpective, you both have something legitimate to say. Is it really too much to ask that you hash it out in here, rather than revert each other to death?

Silliness. --barneca (talk) 21:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Environmental issues

The neutrality of this section is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.(March 2008)
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.

"mostly a result of legislators responding to gun politics issues" The main factor is potential toxic ingestion of lead by humans and wildlife and the resulting potential liability, which can result in large lawsuits. It is not about gun politics.