Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remington high wall

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 delete. Consensus to Delete unless solid sources can be found to prove existence (and hopefully encyclopedic value through notability). tedder (talk) 07:45, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remington high wall[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very short orphan article, no claim to notability, and no references. Unedited since creation 3 weeks ago. Nothing on Google. Shem (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ~~in its current form, unless someone can find some references for it. I'm not sure if this is a particular model Remington made or just a category.~~ Nonetheless, references are scarce. PDCook (talk) 14:54, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given the information below, I'm changing my opinion to an unconditional delete. It's clearly not notable and verifiable. PDCook (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. —PDCook (talk) 14:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If this gun actually existed back in 1885, it's a very early example of something like the CornerShot. I've got a encyclopedia of fire arms which might contain more info, but I haven't got it with me at the moment. I'll take a look when I can; please remind me if I don't within 24 hours. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 06:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Roy Marcot's History of Remington Firearms (isbn 1592286909) doesn't mention a high wall in its index, and I didn't see anything in the section on model 1882/85 rifles. The November 2000 issue of Guns magazine does have an articled entitled "The Model 1885 High Wall," which has this quote:

The 1885 Single-Shot was also found in both High Wall and Low Wall versions. These terms refer to the sides of the receiver and their position in relation to the hammer. With the High Wall version, built for the more powerful cartridges, just the tip of the hammer is visible when viewed from the side; the Low Wall, chambered for such pleasant shootin' rounds such as the .22 Rimfire and .25-20, exposes the entire side of the hammer.

You can see the article here; I verified it in a database as well. Clearly not a gun for shooting over the tops of walls as the article claims, according to this source. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 15:00, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: probable hoax; if the barrel slants upwards on an angle, the bullet will slope upwards on an angle as well. Admittedly this will allow you to fire over the wall in question, but you could do that with a perfectly normal gun as well with about the same chances of hitting the intended target (i.e. none).Vulcan's Forge (talk) 02:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.