Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wind Talker sound suppressor


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   no consensus. If there's consensus for anything, it's that this shouldn't be a standalone article, but there's no consensus to either delete or on a target for merge. Therefore, it is an editorial decision what to do with this material. A merge would not be unreasonable, but I am not going to close it as that due the issues with exactly where the material should be. Black Kite (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Wind Talker sound suppressor

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional material without encyclopaedic value. The article is nothing but an ad for the Wind Talker sound suppressor from Smith Enterprises Thomas.W   talk to me  18:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominator. Thomas.W   talk to me  10:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Please link the AFD correctly on the article page. These two sources seem to indicate notability:
 * 1.^ a b Leigh Neville (3 May 2011). Special Operations Forces in Iraq. Osprey Publishing. p. 60. ISBN 978-1-84908-826-8.
 * 2.^ Kokalis, Peter (2005). "M14 reborn: Crazy Horse and the Romanian Option". Shotgun News 50 (12): 20–22, 24, 26.
 * Unless someone demonstrates otherwise, Keep. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: The AfD is properly linked on the article page. Clicking on the link there leads to this page. Thomas.W   talk to me  18:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Further comment: The sound suppressor referred to in the references isn't the Wind Talker from Smith Enterprises that this article is about but an earlier sound suppressor named "M14 Direct Connect". The references might make the "M14 Direct Connect" notable enough to have an article, but the Wind Talker can't inherit that notability.  Thomas.W   talk to me  18:33, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment if you actually read the article in question, you would read that the WindTalker is the current evolution of that model.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:25, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, but I have read the article. But the Wind Talker being claimed to be the descendant of, or an evolution of, the M14 DC doesn't change the fact that the refs expressly talk about the M14 DC and not the Wind Talker. Meaning that mentioning the M14 DC in the M14 article would be no problem while mentioning the Wind Talker, especially as prominently as you do, IMHO is promotion. Thomas.W   talk to me  20:45, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * And those 2 refs support its history and the current US issued sound Suppressor for the M14 family of rifles is the Wind Talker. The M14 is not an easy rifle to suppress and I would have no problem mentioning both in the M14 article.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 21:29, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep this is a notable sound suppressor design and is part of the US Military Inventory. It is sold only to Military Units and government agencies, so I fail to see how that is an ad. I think I have seen exactly one for sale on the civilian market since its introduction.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 18:45, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: FYI Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ is the creator of the article as well as a number of other mostly promotional articles about Smith Enterprises, articles that might also be possible candidates for deletion. Thomas.W   talk to me  18:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - I am the coordinator of the firearms project and was improving articles about muzzle devices including sound suppressors, flash suppressors and their manufacturers. My goal is to improve the firearms resources of the encyclopedia. I do not think any of what I have written is promotional.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 18:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * redirect to smith page per WP:PRODUCT Gaijin42 (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Although the list of supporting sources is not especially impressive, it is sufficient to justify this page. My very best wishes (talk) 02:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete (add) or Merge Like the Vortex, it's a supressor - nothing special. Does not need a product-specific page - and yes, I've seen these in action too.  Info belongs on generic silencer page, but no product-specific info like this belongs in an encyclopedia (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 09:52, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: If the "Vortex" article is going to be kept, then this information could reasonably be Merged into that article. Otherwise, Merge into the Smith or silencer pages (✉→BWilkins ←✎) 11:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment,that's very interesting that you have seen a Wind Talker in action, Mr Wilkins. Where you serving in Iraq or Afghanistan with US troops that utilized a Designated Marksman in their platoon, because these are not a part of the Canadian Military system. Nor does the Canadian Military use M14 rifles. You do realize this is a silencer, whereas the Vortex merely suppresses flash signature and that the Wind Talker attaches on the exterior of the Vortex? That is one of the things that makes it unique. The M14 is a very difficult rifle to suppress. Mostly due to the GI flash hider containing the front sight and the end of the gas tube/operating rod behind it, coupled with the fact that the bolt rides under the hand guard and expels gas straight to the rear. If you were to remove the GI Flash Suppressor, you would find the threads extremely fine and not able to withstand the rigors of attaching and reattaching the silencer numerous times. Not to mention, you would lose the front sight. So the basic attachment issue was solved with the M-14 DC/Wind Talker by attaching to the exterior of a replacement Vortex. The second key characteristic is the rear plate which keeps the shooter from getting a faceful of gas from the blowback of using a can. Yet I'm sure you were up on all this despite the fact that the Canadian Government does not allow its subjects to possess sound suppressors and the silencer in question is pretty much only made for military contracts. So again, where exactly did you see one of these in action? I am genuinely curious.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 11:19, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Shame on you, Mike. Resorting to an ad hominem attack in order to try and detract from my very valid, and very policy-based !vote.  I'm a journalist, Mike - I have spent time with the military from various countries (usually allies, of course).  (Un)fortunately, it would be unwise for me to give you additional information about locations/times, but "yes" is an answer to at least one of your points.  Your disgusting PR-based crap has gotten in the way of both your humanity and your objectivity.  You should learn to have good faith, apologize, and stop your spam (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 17:01, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Apologies if you took it that way, it was not what I intended. I will take you at your word.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 17:06, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge to Smith Enterprise Inc. I think the independent coverage for this one is insufficient to justify a separate article. Someone not using his real name (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Change in target to the Vortex Flash Hider. See further below for rationale. Someone not using his real name (talk) 07:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't find where says they use the Direct Connect / Wind Talker, even though it might be true. The wiki article seems to rely on too much insider knowledge rather than verifiable material. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * they are pictured between pages 17 and 21 along with the Vortex Flash Hider, These are the only suppressors that mount to the Vortex. Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Like I said, requires insider knowledge, rather than clearly stated info. Someone not using his real name (talk) 21:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * And Shotgun News runs a lot of low-quality advertorials and other highly opinionated editorials in my opinion. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * To give you an example : "Kokalis says Ruger’s SR1911 CMD is fully loaded with custom features, making it a best buy selection that is selling like hotcakes." [Kokalis is actually the article's author, btw, talking about himself in the third person.] Or "Built from premium-grade saddle leather, the open-muzzle Yaqui Slide will accommodate a substantial number of M1911 models and sizes. It sells for only $64.95." I'm pretty sure they have ecstatic things to say about any product they review under the right incentives. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, the Shotgun News article cited is about the Crazy Horse rifle, which is also built by the Smith Enterprise Inc. It would be amazing if SEI didn't maximize the number of in-house components they put on that. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've got myself a copy of the actual Shotgun News article cited. (The mention of the IOR optics made curious enough.) There are about 5-6 paragraphs about the M14 Direct Connect (DC) sound suppressor (maybe 400 words) in SN, and I'm being generous, because there's filler material plus addresses in that. Since the SN article says the DC only threads over the Vortex flash suppressor, perhaps it could be covered in that article as well? I know that it says later that "Sales to qualified individuals and law enforcement agencies should be directed to Fisher Enterprises" but that could be made clear in Wikipedia. The SN article never mentions "Wind Talker", by the way. Someone not using his real name (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That SN article in question is actually freely available here, on Valdada-IOR's website. (The page leading to that says "Reprinted by permission"—their salesmen still need to work on their English ). Someone not using his real name (talk) 22:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Right because its about the M14 DC, which became the Windtalker in 2011 when Fisher and Smith ceased their partnership on the can. The WindTalker has an improved backplate and an all ti body as opposed to the DC's stainless steel body, but it uses the same NSN number of the M14DC. Maybe I should have named it M14DC instead, but I went with the current name. I'd call myself an idiot but would probably be accused of making personal attacks against myself.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I note that the book of Senich is not cited about anything related to this product, but for generalities about sniping and sound suppression. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It is citing that the platform is difficult to suppress and the main reasons why it is difficult. Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Finally, p. 60 of Special Operations Forces in Iraq, which is actually a page of plate captions/commentaries, has a rather trivial mention that "His 7.62x51 M14 Mod O Enhanced Battle Rifle (EBR) mounts an SEI sound suppressor, the M68 Aimpoint 'red dot' and a Surefire tactical sight". Not enough for WP:GNG to create a separate product page from that kind of coverage. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I would support a merge to the Smith article if it comes to that, I felt at the time I would overwhelm the main article if I included it and for notability, the Wind Talker has its own NSN, which is identical to the M14DC's NSN that it replaced. Unfortunately with the restrictive laws in the US regarding NFA items there is not more widespread coverage.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * After going through the present sources for this (only Shotgun News really has enough details) and checking with Mike it turns out that in practice both the old (joint-venture DC) and the new (SEI-only WindTalker) versions of this sound suppressor can only be installed over the SEI-series Vortex flash hinders. So it makes more sense to add this article as a section in the one on their flash hinder because (1) the latter is a more WP:Notable product, and (2) their sound suppressor series is currently an add-on option for their flash hinder, even if technically distinct. Someone not using his real name (talk) 07:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge to either Smith Enterprise Inc. or Vortex Flash Hider. My first preference would be Smith based on WP:PRODUCT, however I do see a fair amount of sense in the rational above for Vortex. That's a call that I would leave to someone more expert on the topic, but I don't see this as meriting it's own article. While the sources are reliable, and I don't think this is a promotional article, I don't believe that the coverage is "significant" according to our guidelines. - Wine Guy ~Talk  22:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: I promised to close this AfD, and I am going to close this AfD (unless someone else beats me, which is unlikely), but for the time being I do not see anything close to consensus, and I relist the nomination for a week. Please give more opinions and abstain from personal comments.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 09:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Someone not using his real name (talk) 11:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * For the sake of not deadlocking this discussion, I'm not opposed to merging to the main SEI page either. Someone not using his real name (talk) 12:26, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I see that the Osprey ref was replaced with a 2013 Lulu.com book by Emerson Lee. I've looked through the freely available draft (from 2009), and while the M14DC is covered there, so are practically all other M-14 sound suppressors: two prior models for the US military (by different companies) and something like 6 or 7 (also by different companies) for the "civilian" market. Someone not using his real name (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks like there is a consensus to merge from both sides - even given the heat of the debate I think people have behaved pretty well on this one, no assumptions needed of good faith. Given the difficulty with the sources and that this is a version of a product (spreading information very thin) I would say delete. However, as the name has changed significantly, and it's the only attachment of it's kind - a mention in the flash hider article seems reasonable . 217.173.108.103 (talk) 13:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.