Talk:Jatimatic

Plagiarism?
A paragraph in this article is clearly exactly the same as the world guns.ru-article. Who ripped whom off, I wonder? 213.204.63.131 17:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Name of the gun
The |Finnish reference I added starts JaTiMatic-konepistoolin tarina (huomaa nimen oikeellinen kirjoitustapa) alkaa... Translated to english The story of JaTiMatic-machine gun (Note the righteous spelling) begins... While reading the article further it seems that the writer has followed closely the phases of the gun and maybe even known mr. Timari himself. --Easyas12c 00:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyway it isn't "YaTiMatik", same as Hämäläinen isn't Haemaelaenen...--81.197.218.62 00:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

phonetic form
Maybe we should add to the article the phonetic form written with International Phonetic Alphabet. Like in gnutella-article. --Easyas12c 00:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

service sub-machine gun
I don't know what service exactly means in this context, but I've heard some people have had JaTiMatics while going throught Finnish military service. Does this mean it is a service sub-machine gun? --Easyas12c 01:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

FDF has tested all kind of weapons (P90 for ex.), and possibly tested also Jati, but that someone has had it as his serviceweapon sounds just "tornihuhu". It has never been adopted to FDF, and it's in it original form rather unsuitable as militaryweapon.--81.197.218.62 15:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Well I heard it directly from a person who claimed he was carrying one during service. He also said with sarcastic tone that they did not shoot with them, because you could not succesfully hit anything with one. But ofcourse I have no idea how common they were. I wonder, if The Finnish Defense Forces would share statistic infromation about this, if we would ask them directly. --Easyas12c 15:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

In Kaliberi-magazine 2/96 is article about GG-95, and in it "Puolustusvoimat ovat myös osoittaneet kiinnostusta aseeseen, sillä se on tilannut muutamia kappaleita testeihin." (FDF has shown some interest to the weapon and ordered few samples for testing), so I think that your friend concluded result of that testing, in what he said.--81.197.218.62 15:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Anecdote: Here in Finland it is told, that Finnish Defence Forces tested the Jatimatic smg. during the 1990's, but the results didn't satisfy FDF. Still worse was coming, one over-weighted colonel sat on a chair, where the Jatimatic rested. The Jatimatic became smashed, that's why FDF selected a Heckler & Koch MP5 designated as "9.00 KP 2000". Otherwise, Oy Gold Gun Ltd. got bankrupted sometimes between 2000 and 2005. Already the second manufacturer! : 91.155.108.82 19:07, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Fictional Appearances
To Sus Scrofa, I would like to avoid an edit war, so I will provide a reason for why I believe the movies and games should be removed in the article.

It was decided that in order for a fictional appearance to be noteworthy, and included in an article, it must be well known, at least mention the name of in this case the firearm, and it must make an impact on the firearm. Such as, the F-14 Tomcat became very popular after the movie Top Gun was released. This would be a notable appearance. Or, the Walther PPK which became very famous due to James Bond's usage of the PPK. For more details, see Talk:Walther P 38, Removal of Fictional Appearances. LWF 22:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think an exception can be made in this case since it's such a rare gun that nonetheless appears in many games and films. I don't see a need to list every apperance of the JaTiMatic (that part is fine as it is), but I believe it's notable that a weapon that was manufactured in such small numbers retains such a high profile in popular media. However, if you want to remove it again, go ahead, it's not that important for me really. --Sus scrofa 00:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that since the average person can't identify it from its appearances that I'll remove it. The media probably chooses it for its looks anyway.--LWF 00:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)