Talk:Gabilondo Ruby (pistol)

This redirect 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 articles

Military history: World War I

This redirect 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 articles

Associated task forces:
/
	World War I task force

Untitled[edit]

There appears to be quite a bit of incorrect information here, as well as a lack of sources.

I don't know enough to edit this page properly, but if I could, I would tag it for someone more knowledgeable than I.

1st section: Present tense. 2nd/3rd section: Past sense. Huh? which one is real?Samurai 004 07:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think only the first sentence is present tense, otherwise the page is written about an old gun from WWI. I don't know I made the page along time ago and I used a gun book as reference... I'll try and track it down for a source. What information is inaccurate? Thenewdeal87 18:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC) 12:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello... I started out by correcting a grammatical error in the other page about this weapon, and ended up expanding the article and documenting its citations. Like web surfing, only more dangerous. I noted the merge tag, and decided to go ahead and join the two articles; I redirected from here to there because Ruby pistol, as a more generic term, seemed appropriate, based on what I read in the sources. (Although it should probably be 'Ruby (pistol)'). The content of this article was joined, fairly successfully I think, with what I found there and what I researched.

Please make yourselves at home on the new article page, and feel free to reverse my decision if you have significant cause. I am neither a weapons hobbyist nor expert, and I lay no claim whatsoever to the subject matter. Although I am reasonably confident that there are no errors of fact, my lack of topical knowledge may well be reflected in errors of interpretation and focus. 69.49.44.11 18:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]