| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:The Thing (VG): Difference between revisions
m (WZHBot moved page Talk:Thing, The (VG) to Talk:The Thing (VG): Bot: Fixing title according to new titling rule.) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Regarding the Mk 23 and Beretta 92FS, I saw the trigger guard and the muzzle of the Mk 23 in the game's pistol model, since the muzzle is clearly longer than that of the Beretta 92FS, but I agree it's too crude and old to positively ID as such. About the shotgun, I noticed several parts of the shotguns listed as possible inspirations for the game's shotgun, such as the folding stocks, receivers, pistol grips, barrels, etc. | Regarding the Mk 23 and Beretta 92FS, I saw the trigger guard and the muzzle of the Mk 23 in the game's pistol model, since the muzzle is clearly longer than that of the Beretta 92FS, but I agree it's too crude and old to positively ID as such. About the shotgun, I noticed several parts of the shotguns listed as possible inspirations for the game's shotgun, such as the folding stocks, receivers, pistol grips, barrels, etc. | ||
Please, feel free to modify the article accordingly if the guns in question are not worthy of being identified or if the models are too crude and ambiguous to bother with them. | Please, feel free to modify the article accordingly if the guns in question are not worthy of being identified or if the models are too crude and ambiguous to bother with them. | ||
: It's no problem, the article is worthy of inclusion more-or-less and we all gotta start somewhere. You've made a good effort for sure. And you didn't need to delete your reply either - A reply I bought back so I could respond to it which I hope you won't mind too much. Anyway, on earlier games IDs are tough because usually the detail just isn't there, I grant that for sure. That said, best thing is to go by what most of the piece resembles in terms of features - If it has mixed pieces (and some do in games) of to note it.. But try not to just 'guess' at a mish-mash if you can avoid it is all. That said, I can see where there are some other shotgun parts on there.. and I'm not even gonna touch that rifle as you've gotten it about as well as I would've. ;) [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) | --[[User:Ssantusky|Ssantusky]] ([[User talk:Ssantusky|talk]]) 13:38, 30 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
: It's no problem, the article is worthy of inclusion more-or-less and we all gotta start somewhere. You've made a good effort for sure. And you didn't need to delete your reply either - A reply I bought back so I could respond to it which I hope you won't mind too much. Anyway, on earlier games IDs are tough because usually the detail just isn't there, I grant that for sure. That said, best thing is to go by what most of the piece resembles in terms of features - If it has mixed pieces (and some do in games) of to note it.. But try not to just 'guess' at a mish-mash if you can avoid it is all. That said, I can see where there are some other shotgun parts on there.. and I'm not even gonna touch that rifle as you've gotten it about as well as I would've. ;) [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 16:44, 1 October 2017 (EDT) | |||
StanTheMan, thank you very much for your reply and your encouragement! This is embarrassing but I actually deleted my response because I'm still new to editing wikis and I didn't know how to exactly reply in the way you did, where it shows your username, time, date and time zone at the end of the reply (with the talk hyperlink I suppose?), and I didn't want to fill your personal discussion page with a somewhat useless topic. I really thought the article would be either deleted or heavily modified to eliminate what I posted anyway, so I'm glad to get this feedback. I've just gone over the article again, and included much more detailed descriptions of what I regarded as worthy of identification in the shotgun. | StanTheMan, thank you very much for your reply and your encouragement! This is embarrassing but I actually deleted my response because I'm still new to editing wikis and I didn't know how to exactly reply in the way you did, where it shows your username, time, date and time zone at the end of the reply (with the talk hyperlink I suppose?), and I didn't want to fill your personal discussion page with a somewhat useless topic. I really thought the article would be either deleted or heavily modified to eliminate what I posted anyway, so I'm glad to get this feedback. I've just gone over the article again, and included much more detailed descriptions of what I regarded as worthy of identification in the shotgun. | ||
Thanks again for the feedback! | Thanks again for the feedback! | ||
--[[User:Ssantusky|Ssantusky]] ([[User talk:Ssantusky|talk]]) 09:09, 2 October 2017 (EDT) | |||
:: No problem. For the record, my talk page is already quite big, one more section won't hurt it, hehe. But good to keep discussions in their proper place when you can. That said, to get your replies to show your username and so on, at the end of your reply/text just either click on the 'signature' icon in the toolbar at the top of the edit field or just type in four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) as described in your user talk page welcome message and it will place the info and links automatically. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 02:12, 2 October 2017 (EDT) | :: No problem. For the record, my talk page is already quite big, one more section won't hurt it, hehe. But good to keep discussions in their proper place when you can. That said, to get your replies to show your username and so on, at the end of your reply/text just either click on the 'signature' icon in the toolbar at the top of the edit field or just type in four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) as described in your user talk page welcome message and it will place the info and links automatically. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 02:12, 2 October 2017 (EDT) | ||
Got it! Thank you. By the way, another user eliminated the Pindad PM2 as a probable basis for the submachine gun and I agree, because it hadn't been developed in 2002, but haven't found the specific development date for this weapon (maybe 2006, 2008). Just out of curiosity, can you confirm this? There seems to be very little information regarding this particular Pindad submachine gun online. | Got it! Thank you. By the way, another user eliminated the Pindad PM2 as a probable basis for the submachine gun and I agree, because it hadn't been developed in 2002, but haven't found the specific development date for this weapon (maybe 2006, 2008). Just out of curiosity, can you confirm this? There seems to be very little information regarding this particular Pindad submachine gun online. | ||
--[[User:Ssantusky|Ssantusky]] ([[User talk:Ssantusky|talk]]) 09:08, 2 October 2017 (EDT) | |||
:::I'll have a look at the page and help solidify the weapon ID's and touch up like at links and stuff. [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] ([[User talk:Mr. Wolf|talk]]) 16:55, 3 October 2017 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 23:47, 28 July 2023
IDs - Mk23 and Shotgun
Not sure where you specifically see a Mark 23 anywhere in that pistol image.. just looks like a crude Beretta 92 overall to me. Ditto for the shotgun, really just looks like a crude M1014 overall, not seeing where any of the other shotguns come into play. I'll add to those by saying even in the crude model the grip follows the contour of the Beretta's grips and not the HK, while the extractor receiver and stock (albeit crudely) follows with the M1014. For the record, I don't believe we allow crude artwork liberties as any basis for saying there's a mix of weapon components or different finishes - Leave that for pieces which actually show stainless finishes and/or different elements from other weapons. StanTheMan (talk) 13:06, 30 September 2017 (EDT)
RE: Mk 23 and shotgun
Sorry, I'm no gun expert, just an amateur. I created this article because I thought it was relevant to identify some of the guns in the game. Regarding the Mk 23 and Beretta 92FS, I saw the trigger guard and the muzzle of the Mk 23 in the game's pistol model, since the muzzle is clearly longer than that of the Beretta 92FS, but I agree it's too crude and old to positively ID as such. About the shotgun, I noticed several parts of the shotguns listed as possible inspirations for the game's shotgun, such as the folding stocks, receivers, pistol grips, barrels, etc. Please, feel free to modify the article accordingly if the guns in question are not worthy of being identified or if the models are too crude and ambiguous to bother with them. --Ssantusky (talk) 13:38, 30 September 2017 (EDT)
- It's no problem, the article is worthy of inclusion more-or-less and we all gotta start somewhere. You've made a good effort for sure. And you didn't need to delete your reply either - A reply I bought back so I could respond to it which I hope you won't mind too much. Anyway, on earlier games IDs are tough because usually the detail just isn't there, I grant that for sure. That said, best thing is to go by what most of the piece resembles in terms of features - If it has mixed pieces (and some do in games) of to note it.. But try not to just 'guess' at a mish-mash if you can avoid it is all. That said, I can see where there are some other shotgun parts on there.. and I'm not even gonna touch that rifle as you've gotten it about as well as I would've. ;) StanTheMan (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2017 (EDT)
StanTheMan, thank you very much for your reply and your encouragement! This is embarrassing but I actually deleted my response because I'm still new to editing wikis and I didn't know how to exactly reply in the way you did, where it shows your username, time, date and time zone at the end of the reply (with the talk hyperlink I suppose?), and I didn't want to fill your personal discussion page with a somewhat useless topic. I really thought the article would be either deleted or heavily modified to eliminate what I posted anyway, so I'm glad to get this feedback. I've just gone over the article again, and included much more detailed descriptions of what I regarded as worthy of identification in the shotgun. Thanks again for the feedback! --Ssantusky (talk) 09:09, 2 October 2017 (EDT)
- No problem. For the record, my talk page is already quite big, one more section won't hurt it, hehe. But good to keep discussions in their proper place when you can. That said, to get your replies to show your username and so on, at the end of your reply/text just either click on the 'signature' icon in the toolbar at the top of the edit field or just type in four tildes (~~~~) as described in your user talk page welcome message and it will place the info and links automatically. StanTheMan (talk) 02:12, 2 October 2017 (EDT)
Got it! Thank you. By the way, another user eliminated the Pindad PM2 as a probable basis for the submachine gun and I agree, because it hadn't been developed in 2002, but haven't found the specific development date for this weapon (maybe 2006, 2008). Just out of curiosity, can you confirm this? There seems to be very little information regarding this particular Pindad submachine gun online. --Ssantusky (talk) 09:08, 2 October 2017 (EDT)