User talk:Dudster32 - Revision history

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */

2016-08-30T06:14:01Z

RE: Batman 1989

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:14, 30 August 2016
Line 106:		Line 106:
	== RE: Batman 1989 ==		== RE: Batman 1989 ==
	Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and to an extent, part of your first part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)		Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and to an extent, part of your first part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)
	: No prob man, ~~hope I didn't come off too~~ harsh there or anything. Like I said, often just better - or at least, simpler - to avoid some things. I've had to catch myself a time or two on that as well. ;) [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 02:13, 30 August 2016 (EDT)		: No prob man, not trying to be harsh there or anything (hope not, anyway). Like I said, often just better - or at least, simpler - to avoid some things. I've had to catch myself a time or two on that as well. ;) [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 02:13, 30 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */

2016-08-30T06:13:33Z

RE: Batman 1989

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:13, 30 August 2016
Line 106:		Line 106:
	== RE: Batman 1989 ==		== RE: Batman 1989 ==
	Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and to an extent, part of your first part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)		Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and to an extent, part of your first part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)
			: No prob man, hope I didn't come off too harsh there or anything. Like I said, often just better - or at least, simpler - to avoid some things. I've had to catch myself a time or two on that as well. ;) [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 02:13, 30 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */

2016-08-29T20:19:52Z

RE: Batman 1989

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:19, 29 August 2016
Line 105:		Line 105:

	== RE: Batman 1989 ==		== RE: Batman 1989 ==
	Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and your ~~second~~ part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)		Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and to an extent, part of your first part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */

2016-08-29T20:19:01Z

RE: Batman 1989

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:19, 29 August 2016
Line 105:		Line 105:

	== RE: Batman 1989 ==		== RE: Batman 1989 ==
	Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel~~. That and in this case, while the reasoning you give behind it is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid~~. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - ~~Again~~, ~~strictly speaking~~ it's ~~still speculative~~, ~~and~~ elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)		Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - while the reasoning you give behind it (and your second part) is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. And again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */

2016-08-29T20:15:25Z

RE: Batman 1989

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:15, 29 August 2016
Line 105:		Line 105:

	== RE: Batman 1989 ==		== RE: Batman 1989 ==
	Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That and in this case, while the reasoning you give behind it is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid~~. Simpler to just leave it out~~. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - Again, strictly speaking it's still speculative, and elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - It keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also ~~describing~~ what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)		Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That and in this case, while the reasoning you give behind it is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - Again, strictly speaking it's still speculative, and elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely, simpler that way. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - That wording keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describes what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */

2016-08-29T20:09:06Z

RE: Batman 1989

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:09, 29 August 2016
Line 105:		Line 105:

	== RE: Batman 1989 ==		== RE: Batman 1989 ==
			Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not all semiautos operate like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. That and in this case, while the reasoning you give behind it is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. Simpler to just leave it out. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - Again, strictly speaking it's still speculative, and elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. All-told, when in doubt, better to just omit such things entirely. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect) - It keeps it simple, shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describing what happens in that shot factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)
	Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not ~~every semiauto operates~~ like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. Simpler to just leave it out. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - ~~While the reasoning you give behind it is well-made~~, it's ~~also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. Again~~, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. ~~So all~~-told, ~~that top part is no good, while the other is questionable. When~~ in doubt, better to just omit ~~the lot~~. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect), ~~which~~ shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describing what happens factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Batman 1989 */ new section

2016-08-29T20:02:25Z

RE: Batman 1989: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:02, 29 August 2016
Line 103:		Line 103:

	Your welcome. Wanted to have the grenade image above the screencap that references it as it's the norm on the site. Doing two images side-by-side with the 'left' orientation on one is a little trick than can be handy but it doesn't always work (sometimes it can even mess some formatting up) - That and the instances it can even be used are rare, hence why it's done so very sparingly. Anyway, glad to be of help where I can. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 18:34, 19 April 2016 (EDT)		Your welcome. Wanted to have the grenade image above the screencap that references it as it's the norm on the site. Doing two images side-by-side with the 'left' orientation on one is a little trick than can be handy but it doesn't always work (sometimes it can even mess some formatting up) - That and the instances it can even be used are rare, hence why it's done so very sparingly. Anyway, glad to be of help where I can. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 18:34, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

			== RE: Batman 1989 ==

			Your text was "He actually cocks it first which is a bit redundant since as a semi-auto gun it cocks automatically after each shot." - Which in itself is wrong; Ignoring this particular instance this statement implies every semiauto 'cocks automatically' which DAO guns automatically refute, thus making it generally inaccurate and misleading. It does apply to 1911s but not every semiauto operates like 1911s. You could elaborate that, but that could get unwieldy in the text I feel. Simpler to just leave it out. That said, your other part, "The manual cocking was probably added for dramatic effect." ''could'' be left, but is still a bit problematic - While the reasoning you give behind it is well-made, it's also, strictly speaking, speculation - Something we try to avoid. Again, elaborating on it I think would only make it worse. So all-told, that top part is no good, while the other is questionable. When in doubt, better to just omit the lot. If you really want, the latter part can be put back, but I'd suggest more to the effect of "He holds his 1911 on Gordon, cocking the hammer as he does so (likely done solely for dramatic effect), which shows it as both an assumption (which again, strictly, it is) but also describing what happens factually. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 16:02, 29 August 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Red Dawn edit */

2016-04-19T22:35:21Z

RE: Red Dawn edit

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 19 April 2016
Line 102:		Line 102:
	== RE: Red Dawn edit ==		== RE: Red Dawn edit ==

	Your welcome. Wanted to have the grenade image above the screencap that references it as it's the norm on the site. Doing to two images side-by-side with the 'left' orientation is a little trick than can be handy but it doesn't always work (sometimes it can even mess some formatting up) - That and the instances it can even be used are rare, ~~which are~~ why it's done sparingly. Anyway, glad to be of help where I can. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 18:34, 19 April 2016 (EDT)		Your welcome. Wanted to have the grenade image above the screencap that references it as it's the norm on the site. Doing two images side-by-side with the 'left' orientation on one is a little trick than can be handy but it doesn't always work (sometimes it can even mess some formatting up) - That and the instances it can even be used are rare, hence why it's done so very sparingly. Anyway, glad to be of help where I can. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 18:34, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* RE: Red Dawn edit */ new section

2016-04-19T22:34:39Z

RE: Red Dawn edit: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:34, 19 April 2016
Line 99:		Line 99:
	That said, I don't know. While there are quite a few stunt performers who wield firearms (and many are seen across several films), I'm not sure if making a specific subcategory for them would help much. I don't see what it would hurt in itself, though, aside from making extra work for a tangential piece of the site. Ultimately, I'm indifferent, leaning to against. But again, I don't make the rules. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:35, 27 March 2016 (EDT)		That said, I don't know. While there are quite a few stunt performers who wield firearms (and many are seen across several films), I'm not sure if making a specific subcategory for them would help much. I don't see what it would hurt in itself, though, aside from making extra work for a tangential piece of the site. Ultimately, I'm indifferent, leaning to against. But again, I don't make the rules. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:35, 27 March 2016 (EDT)
	: Oh, well in that case, kind of you to ask, and thanks. Anyway, I'm not aware of any discussion being made about this in particular, but it's been well stated in the past we should avoid extraneous categories and such and keep things as condensed and simple as possible. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:10, 30 March 2016 (EDT)		: Oh, well in that case, kind of you to ask, and thanks. Anyway, I'm not aware of any discussion being made about this in particular, but it's been well stated in the past we should avoid extraneous categories and such and keep things as condensed and simple as possible. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:10, 30 March 2016 (EDT)

			== RE: Red Dawn edit ==

			Your welcome. Wanted to have the grenade image above the screencap that references it as it's the norm on the site. Doing to two images side-by-side with the 'left' orientation is a little trick than can be handy but it doesn't always work (sometimes it can even mess some formatting up) - That and the instances it can even be used are rare, which are why it's done sparingly. Anyway, glad to be of help where I can. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 18:34, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

StanTheMan: /* Re: Stunt Actor Category */

2016-03-30T05:10:44Z

Re: Stunt Actor Category

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:10, 30 March 2016
Line 98:		Line 98:

	That said, I don't know. While there are quite a few stunt performers who wield firearms (and many are seen across several films), I'm not sure if making a specific subcategory for them would help much. I don't see what it would hurt in itself, though, aside from making extra work for a tangential piece of the site. Ultimately, I'm indifferent, leaning to against. But again, I don't make the rules. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:35, 27 March 2016 (EDT)		That said, I don't know. While there are quite a few stunt performers who wield firearms (and many are seen across several films), I'm not sure if making a specific subcategory for them would help much. I don't see what it would hurt in itself, though, aside from making extra work for a tangential piece of the site. Ultimately, I'm indifferent, leaning to against. But again, I don't make the rules. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:35, 27 March 2016 (EDT)
			: Oh, well in that case, kind of you to ask, and thanks. Anyway, I'm not aware of any discussion being made about this in particular, but it's been well stated in the past we should avoid extraneous categories and such and keep things as condensed and simple as possible. [[User:StanTheMan\|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan\|talk]]) 01:10, 30 March 2016 (EDT)