Talk:Uncle Fester (author)

Q: can phosphoric acid be used in place of redphosphorus in the initial reaction?

No, but Hypophosphorous Acid can be used in place of Red Phosphorus. Check one of the new rhodium mirrors.

Neutral
I just wanted to note that I originally created this page because Uncle Fester is a common name in Clandestine chemistry. I invited Fester to add some personal information, and he did. I noticed that when he added the information to the page, he did it in a not-so-neutral point of view. The neutral problem was at the fault of Fester, I should have explained to him more clearly about the rules of this online encyclopedia.

--Ddhix 2002 18:44, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It's cool. The article seems OK to me now at any rate. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:48, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Ditto, the article doesn't seem to have any major problems with POV now. I removed the POV warning. bethenco 01:33, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The entire article still seems to have, as Ddhix mentioned, a rather personal slant to it. I'm reinstating the POV warning.--Mmoople 05:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The new addition about Eugene John Wolf, the "real uncle Fester" seems out of place. If Eugene Wolf is legitimately deserving of an entry in wikipedia he should have his own page & a link to it from the disambiguation page. And, of course, appropriate citations.Kaiser Vinny 02:01, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the sentence in the Documentary section:

"Preisler was the object of the 40-minute documentary film "Friction", by Robert Ellman, made at a cost of approximately $300,000, whose premiere on Czech Television was cancelled after the September 11 attacks rendered the topic "politically incorrect".[3]"

While the term "politically incorrect" is in quotation marks, I'm not sure it represents a neutral perspective. The term is usually used in opposition to a stated perspective or as a condemnation. The referenced article does not say anything relating to the cancellation of the broadcast of the documentary and political correctness. Perhaps a more neutral phrasing could be employed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.40.115 (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Material not appropriate for an ecyclopedia.
What material here is not appropriate for an ecyclopedia?

Please explain or otherwise state objections to removing the notice. --ΔΜ (talk) 05:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Appropriate for an encyclopedia.
I don't see the problem with this article either, in fact I would love to see more of this sort. I suspect the motives of anyone that tries to remove articles of this nature

anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.243.216.19 (talk) 04:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I would characterize the quality of the writing as poor, and specifically much too conversational. The article should be better organized - several sentences criticize the various books' processes but are scattered throughout the main body of text. However, to say that this material is inappropriate for an encyclopedia is ridiculous. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 03:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

How are these books legal?
Please explain how such books can be legal. -- 92.229.152.64 (talk) 00:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Because of the 1st Amendment.. Also the DEA knows that these methods are largely out of date with virtually all the precursors being illegal and/or heavily controlled. Fester mentions on Usenet that nowadays one would have to steal or divert these chemicals from industry or import them from a country like Mexico. Fester is making complicated organic chem synthesis methods "easier" for a lay person to perform; the original synthesis routes can be found online, copied directly from the source and are significantly more scientific, precise and assume you actually have a chemistry background. I just read the Silent Killers book on the net and I don't think in a post 9/11 world (I dislike that term) this book would get published- the outcry from public figures would be great and severe; even OJ couldn't publish his "If I Did It" book... In the preface Fester seems to complain that murders reach for a "gun or club" and not the "sophisticated" methods like some of the world's deadliest compounds. The narrative of this book is just plain scary, but if States have trouble creating many of these exotic compounds I would bet a lot more people have died or have been seriously injured trying to make or consuming meth and LSD than people murdered using solely Fester's methods. However, a text like this could inspire an individual with the intent to kill to kill scores of people, probably not by creating any substance in this book, but from stealing readymade industrial chemicals like chlorine gas. I would die of sleep deprivation after I wrote or published just one of these books. 76.23.15.109 (talk) 06:21, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Vest Busters
"   * Vest Busters, Fester's smallest book, describes easy methods for creating Teflon coated bullets, and other vest penetrating ammunition. It has since been determined that the addition of a Teflon coating to a projectile has little or no effect on its ability to penetrate bullet-resistant vests.[citation needed]"

This line gives the impression that the book was only about applying a Teflon coating to bullets. On the contrary, it describes methods of turning down steel on a lathe and later coat it with Teflon, since bullets have to be jacketed with some soft metal or Teflon to keep from damaging the barrel. Steel bullets are known for significantly increasing penetration of various types of armor, including the Kevlar vests worn by police. Teflon has been proven to increase bullet velocity, which also increases penetration of armors. A lead cored Teflon coated bullet may not reach a high enough velocity to penetrate armor, but a Teflon coated steel bullet certainly would.

I'm getting the impression that whoever wrote this section of the article never read the book in question.--SlapChopVincent (talk) 00:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Name Change/inconsistent
The article switches back and forth between using his real name and pen name. This makes the article a bit confusing. I would change it but don't know which name would be best to use.

Notability?
Thoughts on if this meets notability under either WP:CREATIVE or WP:CRIME? Surv1v4l1st ╠Talk║Contribs╣ 00:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)