Talk:electroshock weapon

RFD discussion: March–April 2018
electroshock + weapon. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't really want to open the batting here, but is that a reason? DonnanZ (talk) 14:12, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. Delete. Transparently SOP. bd2412 T 14:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, of course I disagree. You shouldn't think that no thought was put into this entry. Not only is it not obvious at, it is a collective term for this type of weapon, and can be regarded as a synonym also. If you think this doesn't qualify for an entry, nor does , in fact even less so. DonnanZ (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Any weapon using electric shock is an electroshock weapon, but electroshock therapy is specifically applied to the brain, and specifically to treat depression. Equinox ◑ 19:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It isn't made clear that electroshock means electric shock, that is left to the user to fathom out, whether it's used in therapy applied to the brain or in a weapon. At least this entry helps do that. And refers to an electric current, not electric shock, even if it's a shock to the brain. I wonder why the name was changed? To sound less threatening? That doesn't apply to the weapon of course, weapons are meant to be threatening. DonnanZ (talk) 20:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, our entry on electroshock was deficient. I've added the sense "an electric shock". - -sche (discuss) 20:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I have put some more work into this, and am voting keep. DonnanZ (talk) 17:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:40, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. DTLHS (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  11:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Strange vote, I'm tempted to RFD . DonnanZ (talk) 13:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Huh? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 13:23, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Nothing to do with LBD, but I guess is also SoP (and many other terms). In other words, there is no real reason why this entry has been targeted. DonnanZ (talk) 17:26, 17 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Can anyone find citations (e.g. in fiction) where this refers to a weapon used by soldiers, perhaps one that kills rather than stuns people? This seems SOP to me, but the fact that definition is relatively narrow gives me pause. - -sche (discuss) 02:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The quotations I added are reasonably well balanced, more by accident than design. But military use? They could be used by the military police, but I don't know about a weapon intended to kill, even in fiction. But you never know. DonnanZ (talk) 11:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * There's this self-published book but otherwise it's very rare. ←₰-→  Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep 86.143.4.133 15:10, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Why? --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 11:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * RFD failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:45, 15 April 2018 (UTC)