| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
User talk:TitaniumAlloy: Difference between revisions
(→NowShowing: new section) |
Commando552 (talk | contribs) (→629 Competitor image: new section) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
The NowShowing template was designed to bridge the gap between pages for Upcoming films and pages that are incomplete. The banner specifically says "This article is for a film currently in theaters or ''otherwise unavailable for screencapping''." --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 11:06, 23 August 2013 (EDT) | The NowShowing template was designed to bridge the gap between pages for Upcoming films and pages that are incomplete. The banner specifically says "This article is for a film currently in theaters or ''otherwise unavailable for screencapping''." --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 11:06, 23 August 2013 (EDT) | ||
== 629 Competitor image == | |||
You recently uploaded [[Media:SW629C.jpg|this image]] with the caption "The same, but with classic regular rail - .44 Remington Magnum". Firstly, I doubt this is the "classic" rail as it is a more modern MIL-STD-1913 one as opposed to the Weaver one on the image above. If there was to be a new version it would use a MIL-STD-1913 rail (much like the current Desert Eagles) as this is more compatible with current accessories. Secondly, does this variant even exist, as I have never seen one and close inspection of the markings on the gun reveals it is simply a photoshopped version of the image above it. There is absolutely no need to add images that are photoshopped of possibly fictitious guns, that even if real have not appeared in anything. | |||
In general, can you please refrain from adding images of variants of weapons that do not appear in media, as it makes pages more confusing and takes up space on both the servers and the pages themselves. I am talking about stuff like all of the unused XD images, minigun variants which are indistinguishable from other ones and mystery Beretta variants that you upload images of despite the fact that you have no idea what it it. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 10:56, 26 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 14:56, 26 August 2013
Welcome to IMFDB
Before you do any editing please take the time to read the Rules, Standards and Principles. This is a very important document that explains how this website is setup as well as telling you what is and isn't allowed. If it is determined by an admin that you have not read these rules, your account will be suspended. Continued non-compliance may result in a permanent ban.
There are a number of pages that desperately need your help. You can find these Incomplete pages here.
If you have any questions, feel free to post them here but make sure to sign your post by typing --~~~~.
Finally, IMFDB has a forum set up here that is only available to registered members. There is lots of good stuff to see there. If you would like to join the forum, please post HERE and an account will be created for you.
Now, HAPPY EDITING! Zackmann08 (talk) 11:54, 4 February 2013 (EST)
Croatian Armed Forces page
We're clamping down on the number of armed forces pages, and unfortunately, the Croatian military has only been featured in three (by my count) pieces of media here. --Funkychinaman (talk) 12:10, 21 February 2013 (EST)
Gun Images
Please refrain from uploading pictures of guns that don't appear in any media - it is against our rules. I mean the Five-seveN MK2 and Benelli M4 images. Thx. bozitojugg3rn4ut (talk) 13:39, 14 April 2013 (EDT)
Actual Photographs are Preferable
Sorry, there are already plenty of actual photographs of the M4A1 that can be used for a page. --Ben41 (talk) 15:03, 14 June 2013 (EDT)
- It's more preferable to have an actual photograph of a weapon on the page that is just missing the accessory rather than to post a facsimile version. It can mentioned in the caption what was used in the movie or series. The only exception is when there are no actual photos of the weapon available, As stated before, the M4A1 is well represented on the site. --Ben41 (talk) 03:59, 15 June 2013 (EDT)
SPAS
Could you please stop uploading that picture of a SPAS with a stock? We've already got one, and the one we have is actually square-on to the camera rather than sloped at a really weird angle. Evil Tim (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
NowShowing
The NowShowing template was designed to bridge the gap between pages for Upcoming films and pages that are incomplete. The banner specifically says "This article is for a film currently in theaters or otherwise unavailable for screencapping." --Funkychinaman (talk) 11:06, 23 August 2013 (EDT)
629 Competitor image
You recently uploaded this image with the caption "The same, but with classic regular rail - .44 Remington Magnum". Firstly, I doubt this is the "classic" rail as it is a more modern MIL-STD-1913 one as opposed to the Weaver one on the image above. If there was to be a new version it would use a MIL-STD-1913 rail (much like the current Desert Eagles) as this is more compatible with current accessories. Secondly, does this variant even exist, as I have never seen one and close inspection of the markings on the gun reveals it is simply a photoshopped version of the image above it. There is absolutely no need to add images that are photoshopped of possibly fictitious guns, that even if real have not appeared in anything.
In general, can you please refrain from adding images of variants of weapons that do not appear in media, as it makes pages more confusing and takes up space on both the servers and the pages themselves. I am talking about stuff like all of the unused XD images, minigun variants which are indistinguishable from other ones and mystery Beretta variants that you upload images of despite the fact that you have no idea what it it. --commando552 (talk) 10:56, 26 August 2013 (EDT)