Talk:Colt AR-15

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Colt AR-15 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 3 months

Firearms Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Politics: Gun politics B‑class Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Gun politics task force.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Russell Brandom (March 6, 2018). "How gun buffs took over Wikipedia's AR-15 page". The Verge. Retrieved March 18, 2018.
Matthew Walther (November 7, 2017). "The adolescent cult of the AR-15". The Week. Retrieved March 18, 2018.
David Brennan (March 7, 2018). "A pro-gun group edited the AR-15 Wikipedia page to hide the extent of mass shootings associated with the rifle". Newsweek. Retrieved March 18, 2018.
Omer Benjakob (March 18, 2018). "Gun Enthusiasts Are Waging a War of Attrition on Wikipedia, and It Looks Like They're Winning". Haaretz. Retrieved March 18, 2018.

Magazine capacity

The first commercial/civilian colt ar-15s which this article is ostensibly about were the "sporter sp-1", which, being a sporting rifle, were sold with a 5 round magazine by colt. At the time, and even in many cases to this day for sporting rifles that is a standard magazine size, while of course, the first military contract colt AR-15s, being designed for military applications, were sold with 20 round magazines. The magazine section in the article seems to push a biased narrative, ignoring the history of the actual product line. 30 round magazines did get adopted by the military first and then the civilian market adopted them, particularly after the sunset of the awb, during which time, of course in the united states market, there were magazine limits iirc. The section as it is makes even less sense understanding that the original pinned 5 rd magazines were, presumably the same length as a 20 round standard capacity military magazine. Not to mention it would be more interesting to include information about the chronic unreliability of the 30 round magazine curved, the different follower designs used over time to address reliability problems and so on. As it is now the section is unsourced and seems to be biased and include original research. Fanccr (talk) 04:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliabel source for all of this? - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:04, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]