Talk:Main Page/Archive 4: Difference between revisions
Talk:Main Page/Archive 4: Difference between revisions - Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games
Talk:Main Page/Archive 4: Difference between revisions
After ID'ing a couple of random flare launchers I was searching to see if they appeared in anything else and I came across [[Spriggan#Flare_Pistol|this gun from Spriggan]]. I am 99% sure this is a riot gun made by Hilton that has had the stock and scope removed and the barrel shortened as there are a couple of distinctive points about it (shape of the frame behind the barrel, design of the barrel pivot and the rear sight at the back of the frame). However I am not sure exactly what it is called, and I can't find a picture of it. I think it is just "multi-purpose gun" or "multi-calibre gun" or something like that. It had a 1.5" smoothbore barrel that accepted a variety of inserts including 1", 12 gauge and .223. Best I can find is [http://www.google.com/patents/EP0164351B1?cl=en some patent information], but this just talks about the barrel system and doesn't say what the gun was called or have a proper picture. Does anybody know the proper name for this, or even better have a picture? It definitely exists as I have seen photos of it being tested by the British Army, as well as a photo of it with all the different rounds it can fire lined up in a row. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 08:42, 20 June 2014 (EDT)
After ID'ing a couple of random flare launchers I was searching to see if they appeared in anything else and I came across this flare gun from [[http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Spriggan_(1998) Spriggan]]. I am 99% sure this is a riot gun made by Hilton that has had the stock and scope removed and the barrel shortened as there are a couple of distinctive points about it (shape of the frame behind the barrel, design of the barrel pivot and the rear sight at the back of the frame). However I am not sure exactly what it is called, and I can't find a picture of it. I think it is just "multi-purpose gun" or "multi-calibre gun" or something like that. It had a 1.5" smoothbore barrel that accepted a variety of inserts including 1", 12 gauge and .223. Best I can find is [http://www.google.com/patents/EP0164351B1?cl=en some patent information], but this just talks about the barrel system and doesn't say what the gun was called or have a proper picture. Does anybody know the proper name for this, or even better have a picture? It definitely exists as I have seen photos of it being tested by the British Army, as well as a photo of it with all the different rounds it can fire lined up in a row. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 08:42, 20 June 2014 (EDT)
Why haven't tank guns been added to any articles? I've noticed this and I'd kinda like to know why. (Sorry if I sound nosey)--TW6464 (talk) 12:27, 30 April 2013 (EDT)
In general tanks are only equipped with the gun they're actually designed to be equipped with; you're never going to see, for example, a Royal Ordinance L11A5 on an Abrams. Simply saying it's an Abrams in the caption means you've identified the gun (M256 Smoothbore unless it's an M1A-nothing, in which case Royal Ordinance L7). Also you can just say what the tank's coaxial gun is to identify the main gun with it. Evil Tim (talk) 14:33, 30 April 2013 (EDT)
alright, thank you. I was somewhat confused, considering we have the Bushmaster Chainguns and not MBT guns.--TW6464 (talk) 11:05, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
There is a bit of inconsistency with which tank and aircraft weapons have their own pages and which don't. The actual site rules state that a gun must be an "individual or crew served weapon that fires in a DIRECT FIRE role" to have its own page, but some gun pages have been added despite this. Technically I think the Bushmaster qualifies as it is a crew served weapon on US Navy ships, but there are some weapons that don't qualify that have their own pages, mostly aerial cannons. I believe the reasoning behind this rule is that generally if you ever see these heavy weapons in films or TV they will generally be mock ups, de-milled weapons that are essentially just a barrel or CG, as opposed to small arms where they are genuinely appearing. --commando552 (talk) 13:10, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
- Actually I believe some of the 'aircraft' weapons like the M61 Vulcan are not only available in a crew-served form but are also actually in movie armories (MPM has mentioned this), so some may also be eligible on that basis as well. StanTheMan (talk) 17:50, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
I agree that the Vulcan is eligible for its own page as it has physically appeared in some movies and is in the posession of at least one armourer. However this is by far the exception to the rule. Also slightly off topic, but has the M61 ever been crew served? The stock answer would be in a Spectre but I don't think they are trainable, they are fixed (even if they were trainable they are not aimed by a gunner at the weapon, but remotely aimed by a gunner looking down the FLIR). The actual aiming is done by the pilot who is nowhere near the things. The closest they come to being crew served is that a gunner has to shovel the spent brass out of the way. --commando552 (talk) 18:49, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
- Strictly crew-served/employed I'm not sure but it was mounted on a trainable turret with a special radar/homing setup in a variant of the M113 APC, classified as the M220(?) "VADS" (Vulcan Air-Defense System). As for the 'allowable' question, I believe the general idea was that each piece of that sort would be judged whether it was allowed or not individually on a case-by-case basis. Which I think is doable without much trouble - it's not like there are a whole lot of larger-class of guns like that, unlike the small-arms. For the most part, I agree that larger tank or naval guns shouldn't be included - they're always fake (except in documentary footage, which is minimal), usually not prominent, and as Tim said, not modified/changed to make them something they're not. I think the other stuff has been seen a lot and/or up-close in some media, enough for people to wonder what it may be. I could be wrong though, just a thought. StanTheMan (talk) 01:41, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
but tanks guns are crew served, technically, right?--TW6464 (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
It depends on what definition you use, but not really. A crew served weapon is generally standalone or on a carriage, if a tank gun was taken out and fitted to a carriage it would be a crew served weapon. --commando552 (talk) 09:42, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
- Indeed, a crew-served weapon by my understanding is just a weapon system served/employed by a crew of personnel. The weapon may be towed for transport/set-up or even put on a vehicle perhaps, but like commando said, it's still capable of use as a standalone unit - it isn't solely or even mostly mounted on a vehicle from which it is used like big guns on tanks and ships. In that regard, the vehicle is the central piece - not the weapon itself, and the vehicle isn't simply considered a 'mount' from which the weapon can be used. In a way you are right that it is served by a crew, but the crew serving the tank's main gun isn't serving the weapon so much as serving part of the vehicle - it's a tank crew, not a M256-gun-mounted-on-an-armored-self-propelled-chassis crew. As said, some of the automatic cannons that are listed are capable of being employed as independent standalone pieces as I understand, and not strictly only part of a particular vehicle or mount. And as I also stated, some of those other weapons have been or are in movie armories, tank guns not so as far as I know. StanTheMan (talk) 16:59, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
alright thank you for the clarification.--TW6464 (talk) 08:55, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
- What, you read all that crap? I was just trying to sound impressive! ;) StanTheMan (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
BTW, I know I'm late to this discussion, but for the record, I'm against listing auto cannons that are only aircraft used, especially fighter jet aircraft. They can be identified on the individual movie, tv, VG page, but they don't deserve their own pages. No movie armory has one, as they would have to have the fighter jet to begin with. Sure we have "some" older fighter jets in private hands and if a movie armory has has that weaponry in their inventory, it counts. But all the new stuff does not qualify. Just like the big guns on Naval vessels. NO armory would have one of their own. You guys are pretty much on the mark as per this stuff. MoviePropMaster2008 (talk) 02:35, 14 May 2013 (EDT)
Another late comment, but to answer the earlier question of whether or not the Vulcan cannon is employed as a crew served weapon, the answer is yes, or, at least a variant of it is. Japanese minesweepers of the Yaeyama class (and possibly others as well) mount the JM-61 'Sea Vulcan' as a crew operated foc'sle deck gun. It appears to be manually crewed and fired (or at least offers that capability) as it has shoulder rests for the operator to lean into similar to the older Bushmaster deck guns in the US Navy (which have, in some cases, been replaced by gyrostabilized, computer driven mounts). Imagine how awesome it would be to fire one of those!? Gau17 (talk) 14:04, 20 Nov 2013 (EST)
Main Page Changes
So the featured templates (article, quotes, trivia) are discontinued? Will there be a tutorial on how the automatic updating will work? --Ben41 (talk) 16:56, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
There is a little demo here of how pages will work after the update. This is only a mock up/demo but you can get a vague idea of how it will work. I have another question about the update, I can see that it makes doing a simple standard page with easy entries simpler and will help a load with standardisation, but will it still be possible to do slightly more complicated things or will the template system restrict it? For example will the size of the gun images be set to a standard width meaning that images in a different aspect ratio like grenades will be huge, or will there be a way to manually set it? Also, will you be able to do more complicated gun links using the templates, and by that I mean links to sections within pages or having the link use different text (like a link saying "Springfield Armory XD9 V10" taking you to the "Springfield Armory XD" page)? --commando552 (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
@Ben41 - As explained on the forum, this is only temporary.
@Commando552 - all good questions. Let's just say there is a reason it has taken us so long to get the software to this point, and why it will take us longer to get it up and running. The short answer is yes. The templates will account for the defaults, but there will be ways around it when necessary.
--Zackmann08IMFDB Chief of Operations (talk) 19:41, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
I am excited and totally supportive of the suggested revisions, but I have an obvious question. I don't participate in the forum and the above demo on YouTube seems to be protected so I am still a bit 'in the dark' if there are any changes regarding page creation from now. Can I still use the 'infobox' format or do I need to run my text through a different format? I just finished coding a movie and I want to get it on IMFDB in a future-proof format. Thanks for any suggestion (will make financial contribution tomorrow!), PeeWee055 (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2013 (EDT)
@PeeWee Not sure what the heck is going on with the YouTube video. It is the same video that is on the RocketHub page. We are looking into the issue right now. For now, continue to use the site exactly as you have been. The reason we need funding is that we haven't actually developed the complete back-end yet. We have been tinkering with it for a few months now in our free time. The video is a proof of concept that shows what we plan to do. In the video you see it working with a shotgun. At the moment, we ONLY have it for a shotgun. In other words, if you tried that for a pistol, it wouldn't work (and its not on imfdb, we are working on a sandbox server so as not to mess up what works on here). You would not believe how complicated some of this backend stuff is. Anyway, assuming we get funding and are able to impliment this stuff, we will talk more about the process of converting the site over the new format. It is something we have thought a lot about and are still figuring out. Bottom line: for now, just keep using the site as you always have and keep up the good work, everyone!
--Zackmann08IMFDB Chief of Operations (talk) 23:18, 4 May 2013 (EDT)
I allways create pages offline (in simple text editor) and put them on IMFDB when they are ready. Will I still be able to continue such practice, or only online editing will remain after revision? The latter will make great difficulties for my future contribution on IMFDB because I have access to internet not allways when I have free time for working on a page. Greg-Z (talk) 03:07, 5 May 2013 (EDT)
Just made a contribution through RocketHub and an idea came up. Due to economic reasons I am temporarily somewhat short on money but plenty on time, so how about I, and possibly others, contribute that 'time' to support IMFDB? Maybe some people can get lists of pages with broken links, or that otherwise need cleaning up, and we allocate a few hours to do boring but essential manual correction work? I know from my own professional experience that any database basically is as good as the worst contribution. Am interested to hear what you think, PeeWee055 (talk) 08:52, 5 May 2013 (EDT)
A 'tongue-in-cheek' notice to all IMFDB members...
- I love this site and what it represents. To be honest though, two years ago, I wouldn't have been able to support the project even if you had Arnie himself threaten me. But now I'm employed again so hopefully I might be able to contribute a bit in a couple weeks or so. Now I certainly won't get attitude with those who don't though, and will frown upon those who want to force the issue - I'm not saying it's not important, but some may not be able to contribute for a number of reasons, and I won't give them guff about it. In all fairness, I would think most people could give something - hell even five bucks adds up if quite a lot do it. I won't be able to go for the grand prize unless I won the lottery, but damn I'd love to check it out. Anyway, I would say just do what you can. I do like the picture though, that was a nice choice to go with original T800 Arnie. StanTheMan (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2013 (EDT)
Need help with pistol ID.
I need some help IDing a pistol. These are from The Man in the Brown Suit from 1989. The scenes were shot in Spain. --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:59, 15 May 2013 (EDT)
That is the Astra A-50, the SAO variant of the Constable. There are three different Constable variants (Constable is just the US import name), the base A-5000 which is the original version which is on the Constable page, the A-50 which was SAO and had a frame safety along with omitting the slide release catch for some reason, and the double stack A-60. --commando552 (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2013 (EDT)
I don't know if a SAO pocket pistol is that great of an idea. Thanks again! --Funkychinaman (talk) 00:45, 16 May 2013 (EDT)
It does seem to be a bit of an oddity. I'm not actually sure if it was even imported into the US, as all the pistols you see are either just described as a "Astra Constable" for the standard or "Astra A-60 Constable" for the double stack. The A-50 was also strangely used as the basis for a couple of .22 LR target pistols, the Astra A-50 Sport and the Astra TS-22. The TS-22 is particularly bizarre, as due to the fact that it uses a compact frame with full size target grips, the standard A-50 magazine needs a wooden spacer stuck on the bottom of it to fill the gap. --commando552 (talk) 05:18, 16 May 2013 (EDT)
SAO makes a lot more sense for a target pistol. I don't know why anyone would get a SAO pocket pistol if there was a DA/SA version available as well. --Funkychinaman (talk) 09:55, 16 May 2013 (EDT)
Magpul iPhone Case
I saw that Magpul has been added as a sponsor and that their iPhone case is now available. It's an excellent choice, especially for our users who live in places were they can't own guns or are too young to own guns. I have one of their iPhone 4/4S cases for my work phone, and I love it. It's made of the same material as their PMAGs, and the finish and ribbing allows a fine grip. It comes in a variety of colors (mine is flat dark earth) and is easy to remove if you want to slip it into a dock or something. And my favorite "feature," is that it doesn't have that obnoxious cutout for the Apple logo on the back that some cases have. --Funkychinaman (talk) 01:31, 18 May 2013 (EDT)
Halo Games
Why aren't any of these included on here? I mean, Bungie has said themselves that some of the guns are based in real-life weapons. For example, the MA5 rifle series was said to be based on the F2000 rifle, and the M6 pistol series was said to be based on the Desert Eagle. What I'm asking is this: would it be okay if I added a page for Halo?--TW6464 (talk) 09:10, 3 June 2013 (EDT)
It's generally been decided that the Halo weapons aren't sufficiently realistic; while this hasn't been helped by all the people who've tried to make Halo pages being (a) terrible at making pages and (b) trolls and / or idiots, very few of the weapons have much more than a vague resemblance to a real world firearm (about the only one I can think of offhand that definitely is a specific IRL weapon is the sniper rifle, which is an NTW-20 with the magwell rotated 90 degrees). Evil Tim (talk) 09:27, 3 June 2013 (EDT)
alright, fair enough. Thank you very much for the clarification--TW6464 (talk) 10:33, 3 June 2013 (EDT)
Target P38
I ran across the pistol below tonight. It's obviously a Walther P38/P1 or some sort, but I can't seem to find any information on it. It looks like a target version, with a longer, thicker barrel, and adjustable sights. (As if a P38 mated with a Wildey Hunter.) Is it a production model, a custom job, or maybe a kit with a different slide and barrel. Is it even a real gun? (It's never fired onscreen.) The slide appears to be devoid of markings. --Funkychinaman (talk) 02:30, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
My only guess is a version of Erma 882, a .22 long-barreled sporting pistol based on P38. But it is a very weak guess. Greg-Z (talk) 04:30, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
I think this same pistol was used in Dempsey and Makepeace, which was shot around the same time. It was IDed as a Wildey Hunter. You can't see the left side of the gun, where all the controls are, but the rear sight appears to match. --Funkychinaman (talk) 10:08, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
I've been searching on Google for a while now, and it's very frustrating, because you would think something like this THEORETICALLY SHOULD exist. The P38 was a service weapon for a major power for almost sixty years, you'd think there'd be some demand for a target version. --Funkychinaman (talk) 12:26, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
French Manurhin also produced long-barreled sporting versions of Walther, based on PP and P38. But none of them matches the screen pistol. Greg-Z (talk) 12:53, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
I saw the Manurhin target PP, and the fact that it even exists means there should be the equivalent for the P38. The fact that I can't find a thing on it is very frustrating. --Funkychinaman (talk) 22:48, 9 June 2013 (EDT)
Seems the mystery of this gun is solved! I have been in contact with one of the authors of a recent reference book about P38/P1 who's also involved with the museum and study center of the German Army. As the one person who can confirm, he informed me that there has never been any official version as visible in the images. He confirms it's a pure armorers job based on a P1, to make the gun look like a Wildey Hunter. Case closed, PeeWee055 (talk) 11:59, 29 July 2013 (EDT)
That explains why we couldn't find anything on it. Thank you very much for asking. --Funkychinaman (talk) 12:07, 29 July 2013 (EDT)
Project Reality: Normandy
Is this gonna get added or something? Because this has been out for like a year now...--TW6464 (talk) 10:18, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
If someone is willing to put in the effort to create AND COMPLETE a page, they are more than welcome to do so. --Funkychinaman (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
How do we name actor pages in case of different actors with the same name? I have such problem with several Russian actors and need help to avoid confusion. Greg-Z (talk) 13:29, 29 June 2013 (EDT)
Just a suggestion but one way is if they have different middle names (As in the case of both Vanessa Williams), you could add the middle initial to the name of one or all the actor pages to distinguish them apart. If it's the same initial but different middle name you may have to go for the full name on the actor page or something. As for if they have identical FULL names (not that likely but certainly possible), well then that would be a bit of a conundrum. StanTheMan (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2013 (EDT)
In the US, union rules prohibit the same name, thus the initials. For example, Michael J. Fox had to add the "J." because there already was a Michael Fox. (His real middle name is Andrew). --Funkychinaman (talk) 18:13, 29 June 2013 (EDT)
Thanks for advices! But the problem is that Russian language differs from English in the case of middle names. We use patronymics but they are recorded in different way than English middle names: Ivan Petrovich Sidorov ("Ivan" is a given name, "Petrovich" is a patronymic, and "Sidorov" is a family name) can be shortly recorded as Ivan Sidorov or I.P.Sidorov but never Ivan P. Sidorov. So adding numbers will be a better solution. An actor who started his career earlier will get a I, and the one that appeared on screen later would be number II, right? I cannot take numbers straight from IMDB because they use a continuous numbering for directors, actors and other cinema people and we here need only actors, so the numbering would be local. Greg-Z (talk) 03:38, 30 June 2013 (EDT)
With the Robert Taylors, it was just a matter of who had a page here first. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:19, 30 June 2013 (EDT)
I ran into that issue with two Robert Taylors. The second one was marked as Robert Taylor (II) like IMDB does. I also added a little explanation on top of the page. --Funkychinaman (talk) 18:10, 29 June 2013 (EDT)
Captcha
I've been trying to upload screenshots recently and I keep running into a captcha challenge. What's going on? I've been trying to access the site on both Firefox and IE. --Ben41 (talk) 23:13, 14 July 2013 (EDT)
I've been getting that at work in the mornings and around dusk. --Funkychinaman (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2013 (EDT)
Ugh, captcha's back. I've got a bunch of caps to upload, but I guess I'll hold off till later. --Funkychinaman (talk) 23:29, 18 July 2013 (EDT)
The same problem. I run into captcha when uploading files, creating and editing pages and even when I click "Show preview". Tested in Firefox and Chrome. Greg-Z (talk) 08:51, 19 July 2013 (EDT) UPD: when editing this page, I don't encounter captcha. Greg-Z (talk) 08:53, 19 July 2013 (EDT)
Site Running Slow
The site is taking a long time to load pictures. Is there maintenance going on? --Ben41 (talk) 04:39, 18 July 2013 (EDT)
It seems ok to me loading-wise, and I myself have been having internet issues generally. But I have noticed a hiccup or two, but again, I can't tell if that's the site or me. One thing though, I've been getting security code entry pages at times when I've had to edit. Again, I'd say it might just be me, but I know Ben's had those issues too. Maybe something is going on. StanTheMan (talk) 21:29, 18 July 2013 (EDT)
Checking on a recent work I did.
Need a check on this work of mine to see if the sniper rifle used in the Sakura Taisen: École de Paris OVA is the M1903 Springfield, although I'm getting a feeling that it's one of the variants with a Unertl scope. Ominae (talk) 10:40, 26 July 2013 (EDT)
The last cap has me thinking Arisaka. --Funkychinaman (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2013 (EDT)
Holy crap, you could be right. After all, Sakomizu is the Japanese ambassador to France that he could use his immunity to get his hands on an Arisaka rifle. Now I need to do research. Ominae (talk) 02:21, 28 July 2013 (EDT)
Donate time instead of funds to IMFDB?
Unfortunately the recent funding project has not resulted in enough funds to realize a more user-friendly interface on IMFDB and bring the quality of the site to a higher level. I was just wondering if we could bring together a couple of motivated contributors who would be willing to spend some time on a structured clean-up of IMFDB. The idea is to make the best of IMFDB as it is, and all take a list of pages (say 100 each?) where we correct obvious spelling mistakes and revise broken/missing links. I know there's a few admins who work very hard on that but if we make this a combined effort, we could somewhat bring IMFDB to a bit higher quality level. It's not very spectacular (and probably quite boring), but I guess a little maintenance doesn't hurt once in a while. Let me know what you think, PeeWee055 (talk) 09:37, 4 August 2013 (EDT)
I'd like to think members are constantly trying to make improvements. Spelling and grammar fixes are easy, everyone should be able to lend a hand in that. Formatting fixes are a bit harder, since you'd have to know code, but once you learn it, it's nothing. A bit harder than that is converting pages to tables. There are a some actor pages out there that still haven't been converted, and even if you don't know how, I suppose users can always make note of that on the talk page. Converting weapon pages to tables tends to be a bit more tedious, since dates may be missing and will need to be cross-referenced. New users might also want to check out our Incomplete pages, it might be easier to finish a partially built page than to build one from scratch. We've published a style guide and a screencapping guide to help new users along. --Funkychinaman (talk) 12:42, 5 August 2013 (EDT)
The vast majority of my contributions consist of formatting/organization edits and occasionally reworking/adding some of the table formats on pages. One thing I try to do is add and interconnect media pages with entries on both the respective gun and actor pages, but I admit that's tedious work and I certainly don't do it throughout the site. But I do what I can, I too would like to think others do as well. StanTheMan (talk) 22:02, 5 August 2013 (EDT)
Any type of help in cleaning up would be great. If users can convert the pages to tables that would be great, especially the weapons pages. --Ben41 (talk) 01:29, 6 August 2013 (EDT)
403 Forbidden error...
... on ...And Justice For All page. My bet is that three dots in title cause this - if Admin could fix this, that'd be great (page can't be reached, and edited, via the Wiki CMS). --Chris22lr (talk) 06:55, 8 August 2013 (EDT)
Whoa, what is with the LOUD pop up commercial that appears on this page?!?!?!?!?
The default should be silent. Most folks don't appreciate a LOUD audio of a pop up commercial on a page. Sure, I understand the fiscal need for advertisements, but loud audio as the default is almost universally disliked. MoviePropMaster2008 (talk) 16:36, 22 August 2013 (EDT)
Something to check up on
Did this page, but I need another set of eyes to help me complete it for now. Ominae (talk) 21:48, 28 August 2013 (EDT)
If I can only flip a coin. So hard to distinguish which one, but the design is initially leaning on the Beretta Mini Cougar though due to the manual safety on the slide. Ominae (talk) 23:42, 28 August 2013 (EDT)
Are you sure it's not some crazy pistol made up for the series? It appears there's a lot of them in that franchise. --Funkychinaman (talk) 23:54, 28 August 2013 (EDT)
Could be. Another theory I came up with is that it's a mixup of parts from the Mini Cougar and the 941 Compact. But since the movies came out recently, probably it's best to wait for a visual book or something? Ominae (talk) 00:00, 29 August 2013 (EDT)
If it is based on a Jericho, it is the compact, slide safety, polymer framed RBL. However even with this there are several differences, most notably the shape of the slide which is open at the top like the Beretta 92FS. --commando552 (talk) 04:45, 29 August 2013 (EDT)
Empty space on top of page caused by 'unidentified gun' template
I just noticed that whenever I use the template for 'unidentified gun' on top of a page, it seems to cause a relatively big white space (appr. 2" on a regular 15.4" laptop screen) between the symbol and the rest of the page. For examples, check my most recent entries Torrente and The Baytown Outlaws. I remember a discussion about a year ago about spaces on the top of pages caused by advertisements, but this seems to be related to the 'unidentified gun' template as the space disappears when I remove the template. Thanks in advance for your feedback about how to fix this, PeeWee055 (talk) 04:04, 11 September 2013 (EDT)
I see such space on every movie/TV/game page, with or without any template on top though it doesn't appear on actor or weapon pages. Greg-Z (talk) 05:05, 11 September 2013 (EDT)
It isn't to do with the banner templates like Unknown or WIP, it is the infobox. The reason is that it wasn't working with the banner adds at the top of the page (I think the infobox ended up next to the add on the left of the page or something and messed the whole thing up) so spaces were manually put in on the template to allow room for the banner add at the top. If you have an ad-blocker or are using a skin other than the default you won't see the adds, so this is the space where they otherwise would be. I might have a fix though, but as I am not sure what the original problem was as I use a different skin will need to check with other people that it solves it. --commando552 (talk) 06:08, 11 September 2013 (EDT)
Try logging out and looking at the same page as an anonymous user, and it's spaced perfectly. --Funkychinaman (talk) 07:58, 11 September 2013 (EDT)
I don't see how it could be, the space is built into the infobox template. Do you mean that when you log out adds fill the space, because if so that means you have a non default skin meaning the adds don't show up. The space isn't going away, it just gets filled with an add. My idea for a fix is to just replace the 14 blank lines in th etemplate with a <br clear=all>, which would create only one blank line if using an ad-blocker or non default skin, or if not just start the page immediately under the conflicting add. Have run it past Bunni first though, as he was the one who put in the lines in the template in the first place. --commando552 (talk) 08:07, 11 September 2013 (EDT)
I've changed the templates to (I think) get rid of the gap and they seem to be behaving with and without adds. If anyone notices anything weird please let me know. --commando552 (talk) 13:57, 11 September 2013 (EDT)
It's all fine now! I was not using any add blocker but for some reason the spaces are gone now. Sorry to take your time, a big thanks from Holland, PeeWee055 (talk) 04:09, 12 September 2013 (EDT)
That fundraiser from earlier
I remember what at the beginning of the year or so, there was a fundraiser to upgrade IMFDB, or something of the like. When will we expect that upgrade to be implemented? - User:1morey September 20, 2013 9:16 AM (EST)
Unfortunately we fell very far short of our goal. We are currently looking for other options of how to move forward with the upgrade. It is something that we certainly want to do, but at present is not possible. --Zackmann08IMFDB Chief of Operations (talk) 15:21, 20 September 2013 (EDT)
Help with ID
I ran across this weird carbine in both Seasons 1 and 4 of Mission: Impossible. Within the show, it's not a real gun, but rather some sort of launcher for non-lethal munitions, a small rocket in one episode and a HEP/gas grenade in another. It certainly looks like it was built from a real gun though, like if an M1 Carbine mated with an MP40. Any ideas? --Funkychinaman (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2013 (EDT)
It shows up again in season 5, this time to fire a grappling hook. I'm beginning to think it's not based on a gun, but some sort of projector. The wooden rifle stock is very confusing though. --Funkychinaman (talk) 14:05, 19 December 2013 (EST)
I recently bought a special edition of Visier (the leading gun magazine in Germany) that I think might be of interest to you. It’s all about movie weapons (‘Filmwaffen’) and even though it also has info about blades and pyrotechnics, the majority of this special edition focusses on guns in movies, check the summary. It was originally published in 2008 and if you don’t mind the German and are looking for a Christmas gift, I can really recommend it. Happy reading, PeeWee055 (talk) 11:24, 6 October 2013 (EDT)
six gun afficionados on IMFDB?..
I have recently screencapped all three seasons of Hell On Wheels, which is a great show by the way.
A couple of ex-Confederate soldiers had these revolvers in an episode, and I don't know whether they are Colt 1851 Navy revolvers or Griswold & Gunnison revolvers.
The brass frames have me thinking that these are Griswolds, but the octagonal barrels have me thinking these are Colt Navys. Or perhaps some weird combination built on parts from both of the aforementioned revolers... I'd really appreciate if you could help me out here, I'm no expert on six shooters. --Warejaws (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2013 (EDT)
I'm not really a revolver guy, however I wouldn't rely on the frame material to ID one of these old revolvers. It is highly unlikely that a modern production will be using a genuine original revolver, and instead they will be using some kind of replica. For example, this is a modern Pietta blank fire reproduction of the Colt Navy 1851, and as you can see it has a "brass" frame. Also, note the step on the cylinder which wasn't there on either the original Colt or Griswold. From what I have seen (again, definitely not an expert on these) this is indicative of them being chambered for a different caliber, either cased blanks as is the case with the above Pietta, or they are in .44 caliber like this CVA reproduction. --commando552 (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2013 (EDT)
Thanks for the insight. I know that most of the older guns we see in media are reproducton pieces from Uberti etc., but how does one label them? The Griswold is a copy of the 1851 Navy with a round barrel and a brass frame, and these guns are probably modern replicas with brass frames. But they also have octagonal barrels, so do you put it on the page as Colt 1851 Navy, and explain in the text that these are reproduction models, or?... I don't think I've ever done a western here on IMFDB, so this is all very new to me... --Warejaws (talk) 20:26, 6 October 2013 (EDT)
Marvel One Shot Film inclusions
Question though. Is it fine to include Marvel One shots such as the Agent Carter film released in the Iron Man 3 Blu-Ray? Ominae (talk) 00:11, 18 October 2013 (EDT)
I'm discussing this with FCM. These will probably be added to the discussion pages of the films that they were included with. (Ex. Agent Carter will probably be put in the discussion page of Iron Man 3). --Ben41 (talk) 04:24, 18 October 2013 (EDT)
Agent Carter is up on the IM3 discussion page. --Funkychinaman (talk) 12:34, 18 October 2013 (EDT)
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor's Hammer is up on the Captain America discussion page. The Consultant didn't have any weapons outside of footage from The Incredible Hulk.--Funkychinaman (talk) 22:33, 3 November 2013 (EST)
Item 47 didn't have any weapons in it other than a fictional alien weapon. I have a cap of that if anyone actually wants it. --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:05, 31 January 2014 (EST)
I Am Legend
What happened to the I Am Legend page? I was editing it and now it's completely unreachable. --Ben41 (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2013 (EST)
Seems to load up for me, I haven't tried editing it though. StanTheMan (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2013 (EST)
Working now. -Ben41 (talk) 21:31, 5 November 2013 (EST)
Including the Type 91 MANPAD
Should I put it under the FIM-92, since it looks similar, but it has a different guidance system and they're used since the late 1990s by the JSDF? Ominae (talk) 09:41, 7 November 2013 (EST)
It doesn't actually appear to be a development of the Stinger, and the similarities are merely cosmetic. I think it can go on its own page if you want, but I don't know how many of these we'll ever see. --Funkychinaman (talk) 09:56, 7 November 2013 (EST)
I'll probably name it as the Type 91 MANPAD since there's a page for the Type 91 UBGL. Ominae (talk) 10:40, 8 November 2013 (EST)
Although it seems a bit counter-intuitive, there should be an "S" on the end even for a singular launcher (meaning that it is MANPADS not MANPAD), as the "S" stand for "System". --commando552 (talk) 11:00, 8 November 2013 (EST)
All done at last. The page is here, but I don't know if the warning should be added about the cosmetic similarities between the Stinger and Type 91. Don't know if Saikano qualifies for this. Ominae (talk) 11:15, 8 November 2013 (EST)
Editing Pages
Should these pages (here and here) still be edited in terms of the headings? Ominae (talk) 09:40, 12 November 2013 (EST)
Time for images to update
Updating the screen caps of the 1st season of Grimm. Currently have only a Blu-Ray 720p copy with me for the meantime. How long do I need to wait for the server to update since the old and new screen caps have the same 1280x780 resolution, but have different KBs? Ominae (talk) 00:51, 21 November 2013 (EST)
You don't, just increase the image sizes by 1 pixel and it'll force the server to generate new thumbnails. Evil Tim (talk) 02:30, 21 November 2013 (EST)
IMDB listings generally take precedence, though if you have official production info that I think comes first - if you have an official DVD set that confirms the IMDB info, I think you can go with that. StanTheMan (talk) 23:08, 21 November 2013 (EST)
I'm rather mixed on this. For most things, IMDB trumps everything, but I went with intended air order with Firefly rather than actual air order (as specified on IMDB.) For the Avengers, it appears that series 6 was extra long and thus split up when it aired in the US. --Funkychinaman (talk) 23:18, 21 November 2013 (EST)
Good points. However I know we use the American release title for pages, perhaps we just apply that to the Season list as well? That seem to be the only real distinction. StanTheMan (talk) 23:58, 21 November 2013 (EST)
May I create article "Improvised firearm"? As variant of the title "Homemade firearm". In my country this weapon calls Самопал (Samopal) or поджига (podzhiga). This firearms are present in:
and others. What do you think about this? Please, answer me. Pyramid Silent (talk) 06:28, 4 December 2013 (EST)
Absolutely NOT. Pages are for actual firearms, and "improvised firearm" is too broad a category. If there is something worth mentioning, you can add a comment about it in the movie page's discussion section. --Ben41 (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2013 (EST)
It seems to me that Swedish film makers are following the James Bond principle; use material from a series of spy books (by Jan Guillou instead of Ian Fleming) and use whatever actor looks cool at the time to portray the lead character. For this reason, I feel these movies should be linked, in a way similar to the James Bond movies. Would it be okay if I added ‘See Also’ in the infobox of every ‘Hamilton’ movie page and created (Sub) Categories as well for resp. ‘Hamilton Actor’ and ‘Hamilton’? I have never done something like this so I would appreciate your feedback, PeeWee055 (talk) 06:50, 15 December 2013 (EST)
I literally just watched and capped both of them yesterday after Funky reignited my interest in Hamilton films :D
--Warejaws (talk) 07:05, 15 December 2013 (EST)
Great timing! I won't be finished with Hamilton: In The Interest Of The Nation until the end of this month so please go ahead and upload your material, it seems you are ahead of me. If necessary I will add screencaps and I will check with you to agree what's the most logical way to organize all 'Hamiltons', okay? Take care, PeeWee055 (talk) 07:16, 15 December 2013 (EST)
Instead of making a category for Hamilton actors, take a look at the "See Also" table for the Superman, Bourne, or Bond series. That's probably to best way to categorize the different actors who played the character. --Ben41 (talk) 22:09, 15 December 2013 (EST)
Excellent suggestion! The only 'See Also' format I knew contained just movies but this way we can cover all (movies + actors). I made a new format and have it checked by those who have already done a lot of work on 'Hamilton'. Thanks, PeeWee055 (talk) 03:53, 18 December 2013 (EST)
Double Barreled Shotguns
Should Percussion Double Barreled Shotguns get a separate section in the 12 Gauge Double Barreled Shotgun page? There is a distinct difference between the Percussion and later shotguns. --Ben41 (talk) 19:53, 17 December 2013 (EST)
Article for the DayZ Standalone?
Is there going to be an article written for it? The game has technically been released, as it is in alpha, and already features an expansive amount of guns, so it could be justified.
If someone is willing to put in the effort to make a complete page for it, then by all means, go for it. And please remember to sign your posts. --Funkychinaman (talk) 18:37, 21 December 2013 (EST)
Identeficate revolver
I have a few conerted to blank ammo revolvers. It's two Nagant 1895 and one turks (made in Turkey by ATAK Arms) revolver. It's named LOM-S, but I can't find any military revolver with this name. If anyone know, what was a real prototype of this revolver, please tell me about that. Pyramid Silent (talk) 18:03, 31 December 2013 (EST)
The revolver appears to be similar to a Smith & Wesson Model 340 (but with a regular hammer), but it's not a "converted" revolver, but rather one built to only fire blanks. --Ben41 (talk) 18:25, 31 December 2013 (EST)
This revolver is designed specially to fire blank cartridges 5.6x16 (.22NC) (such cartridges are used in powder-actuated nailguns). It is made of zink and aluminium and cannot be converted to fire live ammo. Greg-Z (talk) 03:10, 1 January 2014 (EST)
I thing, that's a some model of Heckler&Koch or something like this, but I'm not sure. If I'm wrong, tell me about that and I shall tell this to my friend. Pyramid Silent (talk) 12:22, 5 January 2014 (EST)
Are you serious or just trolling, that's what I'm wondering? :D --Warejaws (talk) 12:43, 5 January 2014 (EST)
The business end seems to be taken from SPAS-12. Greg-Z (talk) 12:50, 5 January 2014 (EST)
It is a really obvious photoshop of 3 different guns. Front is a SPAS-12, receiver is from a G36, and stock is an Ace Skeleton Stock which normally mounts on an AR-15. I'm going to call it a "Franchi AR-36". --commando552 (talk) 12:52, 5 January 2014 (EST)
I'll add that the receiver and especially the SPAS part seems to be considerably 'squished', I suppose to make it look a bit more compact and like an SMG. But as C552 said, that's a blatant photoshop job, and a rather weird one at that. That thing might be a real gun in someone's imagination, but otherwise, uh, no. StanTheMan (talk) 14:56, 5 January 2014 (EST)
Question on "The Gatekeepers" Documentary
I assume that it's not qualified even though it was released as a movie on Shin Bet? Reference is here. Ominae (talk) 04:42, 16 January 2014 (EST)
The subject shouldn't really matter, it's still a documentary. There are a lot of eligible titles that can be covered in its stead. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:50, 16 January 2014 (EST)
This pistol is used by the main character in French film De bon matin (2011). In the film it is called "Model S300, caliber 9 mm" (a pure fictional name). Thanks in advance! Greg-Z (talk) 12:17, 29 January 2014 (EST)
Thank you, it seems to be a correct version. Greg-Z (talk) 13:03, 29 January 2014 (EST)
Please help with identification-2
And again I have to ask for help. This revolver is carried by the main character in French film Le convoyeur (released in USA as Cash Truck). It mostly resembles Smith & Wesson Model 15 but, first, it lacks the rear sight while the front sight is a target one, and second, the cylinder looks too small as compared with the frame. Maybe a Taurus Model 80?
Thanks in advance! Greg-Z (talk) 11:00, 8 February 2014 (EST)
A Taurus is the more likely revolver. --Ben41 (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2014 (EST)
I agree with Ben, the Taurus looks right. StanTheMan (talk) 17:17, 8 February 2014 (EST)
Thanks! Greg-Z (talk) 08:56, 9 February 2014 (EST)
Unknown gun and an article for Get Smart (TV)
I was watching an old episode of Get Smart on DVD and one of the KAOS agents had a gun I've never seen before. Fortunately someone put it on Youtube, as I only get a black square when trying to take screenshots. The episode aired February 25, 1967, so I'm guessing it's a Cold War era Soviet SMG.
Would you believe there isn't an article on here for the TV show? So, I'd like to start one and would appreciate any tips for making one, especially on differences from Wikipedia. I think some of the guns in the CONTROL museum in the 2008 Get Smart film are from the original show, so it's somewhere to start. (Also want to say thanks, bunni, for helping me look for pistols used in The Duel.) -- JustanID (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2014 (EST)
The weapon kind of looks like an M1 with a pistol grip (below), but I'm not a 100% on this. --Warejaws (talk) 04:53, 14 February 2014 (EST)
Error creating thumbnail: File missingM1 Carbine manufactured by Plainfield, with pistol-grip, post-WWII paratrooper stock and vertical foregrip - .30 Carbine.
I think this is the gun you're looking for. --Ben41 (talk) 06:02, 14 February 2014 (EST)
It's a lot of work to do a TV series, especially an older one like Get Smart. As a relatively inexperienced user, I would recommend something easier, like a movie, as a first page. --Funkychinaman (talk) 08:31, 14 February 2014 (EST)
Thanks for the feedback; it looks like that one, with a wooden upper piece that can be seen in some of the other pictures on the M1 page. @Funkychinaman: I doubt I'd be able to do the entire series at once, maybe one episode at a time. Though there are 138 of them, there's probably a lot of recurring weapons. I guess I could start with the two tie-in movies and see how that works out. -- JustanID (talk) 09:43, 14 February 2014 (EST)
In my experience, much of the work is documenting the firearms usage of the various guest stars that show up. --Funkychinaman (talk) 09:51, 14 February 2014 (EST)
Starting The Nude Bomb article and, wow, I remember it being bad, but not this bad. --JustanID (talk) 19:16, 17 February 2014 (EST)
Highlander II
I remember someone had put up some screen images for Highlander II, but I can't remember where they are. Does anyone? --Ben41 (talk) 20:00, 19 February 2014 (EST)
Unknown revolvers
The Prisoner of Zenda page that was here previously was a blend of two version of the film, the second of which was merely a lazy color remake of the first. The odd thing is, I'm having trouble IDing the revolvers used in the same scenes in both films, although they are two different models.
For background, the films are supposed to be set in the 1890's in a fictional central European monarchy. Neither of the revolvers actually fire in their scenes. Any help would be appreciated. --Funkychinaman (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2014 (EST)
The revolver in 1952 version bears resemblance with Belgian LeVaux; the frame is similar though the barrel looks a little different. Greg-Z (talk) 15:12, 28 February 2014 (EST) Another guess is Danish M1891 Navy revolver. Greg-Z (talk) 15:17, 28 February 2014 (EST)
I was going to go with the Danish 1891 Navy revoer as well. The one from the 1937 version is some variation on the Webley RIC - probably not an actual Webley product, but copying the RIC was something of a cottage industry in Belgium prior to 1914, and to a lesser extent in Spain and Germany a well. - Nyles
Finally found a good image of the Danish revolver. Thank you both! --Funkychinaman (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2014 (EDT)
Help requested to identify SMG
In my first movie for months, I have run into below SMG that keeps me wondering. The SMG held by the bald guy on the right looks pretty much like an Heckler & Koch UMP9, but it also bears some resemblance to the Heckler & Koch MP5K-PDW. If you enlarge the image you will see what I mean.
The muzzle is slightly wrong for an MP5K-PDW, and the front grip is too long. My guess is that it is some kind of "pistol" clone with a UMP stock which has a forward grip attached by a low profile rail system, like this Bobcat Weapons BW89. --commando552 (talk) 13:23, 7 March 2014 (EST)
Thanks both for your input. There's something to say for both, but after taking additional screenshots (see below) I am leaning towards assuming this is a MP5K-PDW fitted with a UMP stock. Even though the quality is quite blurry, if you enlarge the images you can see that the muzzle and front grip are indeed consistent with the MP5K-PDW. For some strange reason, the front grip seems to have become shorter from the 1st image!
Before going into it, I'm not sure if this is worthy of discussion here.. maybe the forum might be a better place to posit that question. Just a thought. StanTheMan (talk) 16:00, 7 March 2014 (EST)
Agreed. Please use the forum. --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2014 (EST)
I'm sorry, but I can't registrate on the forum. Only log in, but my username and password are useless for the forum. Pyramid Silent (talk) 06:05, 8 March 2014 (EST)
It's a different log in. Go here and follow the directions. --Funkychinaman (talk) 12:30, 8 March 2014 (EST)
Old unknown
I still can't ID two pistols from the original version of The Debt. It's an Israeli film, but was shot in Ukraine. The guns in question are never fired. The first three are of one gun, and the fourth may or may not be the same model. --Funkychinaman (talk) 19:26, 20 March 2014 (EDT)
I've recently been recieving re-directs on random pages that tell me to download Java. I know for a fact I have the latest version installed, so I suspect that this Java download is actually spyware or some other virus. I don't know what's causing this, but I thought I should let everyone know incase it's an issue with the website.--Thomas (talk) 19:50, 4 May 2014 (EDT)
From the URL it is redirecting you (www.dofhwjsd.com) I believe that it is a Browser-hijacker virus, here is some info along with instructions on how to remove it (I don't know if this works, it is just the first result that came up when I googled it). I doubt it is from IMFDB as the only way it could be is if a malicious add found its way in to the rotation but I do not think this is how this virus is spread, rather it is accidentally downloaded as part of pirated software/media, freeware, spam email attachments or from malicious websites. Just to check though, I take it nobody else has been having this problem? --commando552 (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2014 (EDT)
I've never encountered anything of the sort here on IMFDB. I think it's something this fella got on his system from elsewhere honestly, like C552 said, from either a bad site or illegitimate download or something. Though I admit some of the ads get me a bit wary, but no problems of this sort. StanTheMan (talk) 16:21, 5 May 2014 (EDT)
I've seen those recently, wikia had kind of a plague of them for a while. They're malicious ads, I think. Evil Tim (talk) 09:13, 5 December 2014 (EST)
Found a MRAP in Agents of SHIELD with a M2HB
Saw it when I watched "The Beginning of the End". The MRAP reminds me of Hawaii Five-0, being that it may just be a privately-made MRAP that hasn't been sold to any military/PMC yet. Anyone know about this since I didn't name it in the article?
Here's a pic of the said MRAP case you need a visual reference.
The MRAP used in the first episode of Hawaii Five-0 was originally made for G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra, and subsequently used in a number of other things including Battle: Los Angeles and Looper. It is owned by "Armytrucks Inc." and they call it the "Devinator" and have it in black and tan. The one from MAOS was different though, but I believe it is still provided by the same people. It looks to be a match for their Freemanator MRAP with some slight modification such as repainting it black and fitting those rocket pods on the front wings. I don't know if either of these MRAPs are built from real commercial MRAPs or are total made for film/TV mock ups, but either way I cant' find any other real vehicle that matches them. --commando552 (talk) 11:02, 20 May 2014 (EDT)
Just noticed, I think the latter is supposed to be a mock up of the BAE Caiman MTV (upgraded version of the Caiman with same crew pod but different chassis) as it is pretty damn close. However there are differences that suggest it is a mock up, such as the wheel arches, the shape of the "chamfer" on the top of the engine compartment, the size of the radiator grill and the design of the slats, the simpler bolts on the hull of the show version, the shape of the rear doors and other stuff like that. It is a pretty descent mock up regardless though. --commando552 (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2014 (EDT)
Intermediate user level?
I've noticed that several popular pages are (and some have for some time) been locked out to SysOp/Admin editing only. Now I know in these cases the vast majority are because of problems with page being heavily or even constantly vandalized or otherwise edited wrongly and problematically by folks (Some are WIPs being done by one of the admins and other such stuff, but those are special cases).Now I know regular users can always suggest edits in discussion pages and just await a response/action from an Admin but I gotta figure that's annoying and problematic. Of course changing protection level back risks the page getting fucked up again and sometimes just isn't worth it. But I feel locking out all members, including several like myself who have been around a while and have no problems with making erroneous edits and such (or minimal problems, anyway) is irksome and makes contributions difficult.
After all that yap, my question is has there ever been consideration for some kind of intermediary user level between regular users and
Admins for senior users/users in good standing that pages could be open to editing while still retaining lock-out for other newer/questionable users? Or is such a thing not able to be implemented and/or worth the effort to implement? I know there's not a lot of locked pages but there are some, plus probably some that could be locked to that intermediate level to avoid edit warring and problems with new members who may not be vetted yet. Any thoughts? StanTheMan (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2014 (EDT)
What pages do you have in mind? I've been catching and stopping edit warring early on. I'm okay with unlocking most pages. If someone is being a pain in the ass, we can always ban them or roll back the changes and/or relock the page. --Funkychinaman (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2014 (EDT)
Well, in my case it's not really anything major but usually little things, hence why I never wanted to bother about it. That said, The Dark Knight was definitely one, I think also Saving Private Ryan. I know there were a couple others but I'll have to re-check them again, for all I know they may be unlocked at this point and/or not need the edits. Otherwise, my original question still kinda stands - You mentioned edit-warring and my point was that that usually happens with newer members so if they can be locked out of a page but the rest of us not, well, could that be possible, to avoid having to lock it to admins and then having to go through unlocking it again and all that. It was just a suggestion, though perhaps might not be doable. Either way I guess that might be something for bunni or Zackmann to address so in the meantime, I'll just go through my re-check and note the appropriate pages as I go. StanTheMan (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2014 (EDT)
A lot of these locks are due to one bad user, who has now either been banned or is inactive. I do think keeping some locks on some CoD pages makes sense due to the younger users. --Funkychinaman (talk) 00:30, 23 May 2014 (EDT)
I would say with the account request system we have in place now it's much less likely we'll get run by vandalism edits like we used to. I'm for unlocking most pages. --bunni (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2014 (EDT)
Looking at it a bit now, I notice there are basic and 'autoconfirmed' users so I guess what I'm talking about exists to an extent anyway. I do agree that normally your more basic users are just that or even guests, and since the site has clamped down on that kind of thing with closed/request-only full-signups and usually only allows editing on that basis I suppose my idea is actually kinda moot (Though I have to ask, do all approved new members start as 'autoconfirmed'?). I will say I agree with FCM in that I also notice a lot of problems seem to be on VG pages, and my thought was that keeping the other users out would allow for established users who follow page format and standards to continue work on them as needed and all that. That said, I guess I'm addressing a problem that is non-existent - Seems you guys don't have that much trouble keeping check on the locked pages (and there probably aren't that many anyway) and all that so again, guess my suggestion is a bit much perhaps. Anyway, thanks for the replies fellas. StanTheMan (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2014 (EDT)
Help with rifle ID
For the most part, the same weapons keep showing up in Mission: Impossible, but I got a curveball recently. It does look a bit small, but it should be noted that Michael Conrad was 6'5", so who knows. Any ideas? --Funkychinaman (talk) 03:23, 23 May 2014 (EDT)
History Channel is airing a 3 Part Special: "The World Wars". Would that be considered a Documentary?
So no then?
Documentaries with reenactments are a grey area. There are many other project to work on other than this one. --Funkychinaman (talk) 20:46, 26 May 2014 (EDT)
Inclusion of cannons
I assume that inclusion of cannons in a IMFDB article is a big no no? Ominae (talk) 03:56, 27 May 2014 (EDT)
It depends on what your definition of cannon is. I allow a lot of leeway when it comes to trivia on media pages, however. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:08, 27 May 2014 (EDT)
I usually talk about cannons in terms of being a fixed weapon and the other with a wheeled undercarriage mount. Hopefully it can clear things up. Ominae (talk) 08:49, 27 May 2014 (EDT)
Eligibility requirements are gone over in the RSP. But like I said, you can include a lot of things under Trivia. --Funkychinaman (talk) 11:28, 27 May 2014 (EDT)
The Deathstroke gun looks like an Uzi, and Captain America looks like he has a Smith & Wesson Model 10. --Funkychinaman (talk) 00:16, 29 May 2014 (EDT)
The pistol on the third image can be a Luger P08 but it's only a guess. Greg-Z (talk) 00:20, 29 May 2014 (EDT)
Thanks.Now,the updated ones please.
Romanov has a holstered Glock 26 and some kind of AR-15 (probably an M4). Other two are harder, Wintergreen's rifle looks like it might be a SCAR-L with a short barrel and the stock folded, but it is really hard to tell from that image. Do you know what episode this is a promo for, as it isn't listed on the Arrow - Season 1 page. Canary has appears to have a tranquillizer pistol but I don't recognise the model, it could also be a mocked up from a CO2 air pistol. --commando552 (talk) 19:26, 29 May 2014 (EDT) Edit: Last image of Viper is a COP 357 Derringer, and Dr Doom has a Goncz GA-9. --commando552 (talk) 19:27, 29 May 2014 (EDT)
Roque, are you going to make any pages that correspond with these images? --Ben41 (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2014 (EDT)
Ben41 No,i'm Brazillian and my English is very limited. --Filipe Roque
Thanks,Commando552,but how about the revolver used by Luthor in the 6th photo? --Filipe Roque
How to make a page
I was a new member of this webside and i dont know how to Edit page (how to edit contant and Insert image) if you know please contact me on User talk:Tienpat
and by the way I dont know how to contact with another User please ask me all question
Some kid kept creating the same half-assed page over and over. If anyone is willing to make the effort and create a good page, I'll unlock it. --Funkychinaman (talk) 22:07, 8 June 2014 (EDT)
Sword Art Online Season 2 "Gun Gale Online"
So this anime, Sword art Online has a second season coming out called "Gun Gale Online." From what I have seen in some previews and the manga, it looks like there will be several firearms. The Five seveN, PGM II, L11A3 and Type 54 are what I can remember. I am wondering when I have the go ahead to make a page for it, as there are lots of previews but it hasn't started yet.
Is this an anime or a game? As long as you can create a decent page for it (screencaps are mandatory), and it is an eligible title, then go ahead. --Funkychinaman (talk) 00:58, 16 June 2014 (EDT)
Help with Hilton riot gun
After ID'ing a couple of random flare launchers I was searching to see if they appeared in anything else and I came across this flare gun from [Spriggan]. I am 99% sure this is a riot gun made by Hilton that has had the stock and scope removed and the barrel shortened as there are a couple of distinctive points about it (shape of the frame behind the barrel, design of the barrel pivot and the rear sight at the back of the frame). However I am not sure exactly what it is called, and I can't find a picture of it. I think it is just "multi-purpose gun" or "multi-calibre gun" or something like that. It had a 1.5" smoothbore barrel that accepted a variety of inserts including 1", 12 gauge and .223. Best I can find is some patent information, but this just talks about the barrel system and doesn't say what the gun was called or have a proper picture. Does anybody know the proper name for this, or even better have a picture? It definitely exists as I have seen photos of it being tested by the British Army, as well as a photo of it with all the different rounds it can fire lined up in a row. --commando552 (talk) 08:42, 20 June 2014 (EDT)
Raid 2 pistol ID
I'm going to create the page tomorrow, but I figure I'd let you guys take a crack at IDing this pistol first. I'm stumped. You never get a really good shot of it. I have a feeling that the fourth shot may actually show a different weapon due to a continuity error. It is almost definitely an airsoft copy. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:20, 20 July 2014 (EDT)
Hey, I have some guns on the talk page for Postal. Mostly revolvers and a hunting rifle. I was wondering if someone could help ID them (On the talk page if possible)? Thanks. --Clonehunter (talk) 17:53, 24 July 2014 (EDT)
Working from iphone
Hiya, tried reading screen capping guide but i just wanted to know how to uploads images onto a page?
Im working from an iphone so not sure how the image files etc..work?
Any "imfdb for dummies" would be greatly appreciated
Thanks
--Forrest1985 (talk) 11:59, 11 August 2014 (EDT)forrest1986
Posted this here cuz forum is closed and idk where it should go for now.
"Силы специальных операций Министерства Обороны РФ (ССО МО РФ), одними из первых принявшие перспективные автоматы АК-12 для тестирования, с недавних пор тестируют еще одну модификацию АК-12. АК-12 БК (Ближний Компактный) провел у бойцов ССО почти два месяца и за время прохождения испытаний проявил свои традиционные качества : надёжность, неприхотливость в использовании. Подняли, по словам спецназовцев, и универсальность, которой так не доставало : планки, крепления и складные части традиционно являлись проблемой на предыдущем поколении автоматов - АК-74М. Кучность стрельбы в режиме автоматического огня стала на порядок лучше и вплотную подошла к образцам зарубежного оружия. Так же в распоряжении бойцов ССО в данный момент находятся автоматы АК-12П под боеприпас стандарта НАТО 5,56х45мм."
Bing's translation:
The special operations forces of the Ministry of defence of the Russian Federation (the RF MOD MTR), one of the first who prospective AK-12 for testing, recently tested another version of AK-12. AK-12 BC (Middle Compact) held by fighters of the MTR for almost two months and during the course of trials showed its traditional qualities: reliability, simplicity of use. Raised, according to commandos, and versatility, which lacked: planks, fastening and folding part have traditionally been a problem in the previous generation of machines-AK-74 m. Grouping in the mode of automatic fire was much better and came close to the models of foreign weapons. Just before the fighters of the MTR are AK-12 p under the NATO standard ammunition, 56h45mm 5.
I'm having some trouble IDing the musket below from Anchorman 2. I'm guessing it's either a Springfield 1861 or an Enfield 1863, but I'm not sure how to tell the difference. Any ideas? --Funkychinaman (talk) 02:55, 1 September 2014 (EDT)
Without seeing decent closeups of the receivers it's kinda hard to tell. As the below images show the Springfield 1861 has a slightly curved hammer while the Enfield and 1863 Springfield have straighter hammers. The trigger is (just) slightly further forward on the 1863 Springfield than the Enfield, while the '61 has a trigger somewhat more toward the rear. In terms of general appearance though, they're all pretty damn close - Looking close at the second screencap, the one rifle in the back looks to have a straight hammer and the rifle the woman is holding looks to have a trigger that isn't as far back as the 61 Springfield. So I'd have to say neither is a '61 Springfield but it could be either the newer Springfield or the Enfield - Admittedly not too much help I grant. I might lean to an Enfield myself - I think they were more common in film, but I'm not certain of course. StanTheMan (talk) 13:37, 1 September 2014 (EDT)
If you look a the rear sight of the rifle being held by the woman, you can see that it is relatively long and that there is a high point at the front of the rear sight block. This is a match for the Enfield, but the Springfield rear sight is shorter and doesn't have the raised portion at the front. The Springfield have a relatively simple two leaf sight, rather than the Enfield which has a more complicated sight that slides up a stepped ramp for shorter ranges (this is the high part at the front), or flips up as a ladder sight for longer ranges. The hammer also looks more like an Enfield to me, but the rear sight is pretty definitive IMHO. Oh, and the sling loop is on the front barrel band which I think also IDs it as an Enfield. --commando552 (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2014 (EDT)
Many thanks gentlemen! --Funkychinaman (talk) 19:53, 1 September 2014 (EDT)
With that image I agree about the sights, didn't mention them before though since you couldn't really see them in the other images. With this, I concur with Commando about them being Enfields. StanTheMan (talk) 22:28, 1 September 2014 (EDT)
Duration before deleting unused image files
Got a question if image files that aren't linked to a page are deleted after a few days. I may have some image files uploaded before that aren't linked to a page. Ominae (talk) 06:40, 17 September 2014 (EDT)
Recently uploaded images are in complete safety. The unused images that I delete now were uploaded more than two years ago. Greg-Z (talk) 06:54, 17 September 2014 (EDT)
Some interesting articles about guns in movies
I found some interesting articles about guns in movies. It doesn't translated to English, but we have Google Translator, so this information may be usefull. Pyramid Silent (talk) 11:07, 18 September 2014 (EDT)
Suggestion: Changing article title from "CAA Tactical RONI-G1" to "CAA Tactical RONI"
Found some stuff lately that I was able to document, such as a RONI pistol carbine attachment for a P226 in the 2nd season of Agents of SHIELD. Ominae (talk) 09:31, 2 October 2014 (EDT)
Let's Be Cops
Here is a list of the guns I've seen in this movie that has yet to be found on this website: Beretta 92FS; carried by LAPD, (what appears to be) a tactical H&K51 assault rifle fitted with a fixed stock found from crates of SWAT equipment, an M4A1 Carbine with a shortened barrel and a scope, an H&KG36K with a long barrel and a bi pod attached, and Ithaca shotguns on the gun racks. I'll report back the moment I get more information.--Gunnerboy (talk) 20:00, 11 October 2014 (EDT)
Without any supporting screenshots, these IDs are useless. --Funkychinaman (talk) 22:56, 11 October 2014 (EDT)
Forgive me, but I'm not getting what you mean by this post.. I don't think you're saying that pages for the weapons you mentioned don't exist (as they do) so I take it you're noting appearances of weapons for a piece of media. If there is an existing page for that title, I suggest making these notes in that title's respective discussion page. If not - If you're just listing off weapons in something where there isn't a page, perhaps you should see about making one. Making a post like that here on the site's main talk page seems to me like you're desiring or expecting someone else to do this work for you, which is something that's kinda frowned upon and unlikely to happen. StanTheMan (talk) 21:53, 11 October 2014 (EDT)
Revolver ID help needed
So I've capped the first eight episodes of the first season of Brooklyn Nine-Nine, and I still can't ID Captain Holt's service weapon. It appears to be stainless/nickel, has six shots, service sights, and MAYBE a Colt-style cylinder latch. If I was forced to guess, maybe a Colt SF-VI/DS-II, but the barrel seems a bit too long for that. Any thoughts? --Funkychinaman (talk) 15:00, 12 October 2014 (EDT)
My guess is that it is a DS-II but it is hard to tell for sure. They did make it with a longer 3" barrel, but i think that it is just a normal 2" one and the lighting/angle/combination of both makes it look longer in some shots. I do not think it is a 2" barrel Lawman, as I think the ejector shroud on these was smoother and more rounder and not so squared off like on this gun. Also, the front sight on the snub nosed Lawman Mk III was the full length of the barrel like on the later model Detective Special, whereas the front sight on this is only half length like on the DS-II. --commando552 (talk) 19:06, 12 October 2014 (EDT)
I think C552 is spot-on, and I'll add that the revolver doesn't look quite as big as a Lawman MkIII. Plus, if you examine the trigger guard closely in that first image, you'll notice it looks like it continues straight and level at the top part along the bottom of the frame - Lawmans and the other bigger Colts have a slight downward 'hump' or 'point' midway though the trigger area at the bottom of the frame. I concur with it being a DS-II rather than a Lawman or even a Magnum Carry (the front sight looks a scant bit too small). As for barrel length, the only place it looks long is the one cap with the sideview of it, and I too think that's a angle/lighting trick (could also be a motion trick on top of that, if the gun was still moving slightly in that frame). StanTheMan (talk) 00:27, 13 October 2014 (EDT)
Hi, I am new and I want to create a new page for a video game and I know that it hasn't been made yet. Would someone kindly tell me how? Thanks.
Rather than going in blind trying to create a poorly formatted page that will be deleted, I suggest taking some time to learn the basics, like formatting, code, signing your name to posts, etc. Please consult the help pages here. Thanks. --Funkychinaman (talk) 07:29, 23 October 2014 (EDT)
Criterion Collection Category
Should I create a category to sort the movies available on The Criterion Collection? There's more than enough works and I'd be willing to put in the effort to organize them by spine number. --ZaneTheDudeMan (talk) 00:00, 1 November 2014 (EDT)
TV season-episode number syntax
I've seen several pages relating to TV shows that list episodes with double digits on the season number (Example - S01E01) but the shows themselves don't have ten seasons or more (indeed, many only have just a couple/few seasons). I assumed that going for double digits in such listings was only necessary in that instance, when shows that are actually in double-digits on seasons, while ones less than ten seasons the listings don't need it (They can be just S1E01, for example). Am I wrong in this regard or is it just a personal preference that has no real standard to it? I only ask because, I'm not sure if it even means anything or not, and if it does how it should be gone about. I myself don't think the extra digit is necessary unless a series has hit that milestone - I recently added the extra '0' in the season number to episodes listed on pages pertaining to Criminal Minds, as it's now in its tenth season, but I'm not doing it on my X-Files pages, as that show only made 9 seasons. So basically, am I ok and/or it's no big deal or what? StanTheMan (talk) 17:41, 7 November 2014 (EST)
I have always done double digits for season (S01E01), because there are series that run into double digits, and I'd like to keep things consistent across the board. So if Law & Order gets double digits, then Mission: Impossible gets double digits. The only time I deviate from that is when a show runs for only one season, or is a miniseries, and I'll just put E1 or something. --Funkychinaman (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2014 (EST)
Fair point about uniformity, and in terms of database entry I suppose adding the zeros would be more proper for all shows, whether the shows themselves run into double digits on seasons or not. Personally I myself would only do it on the shows that actually run that long, as having it on other shows may be a tad misleading (double digits on a show that's only two or three seasons long for example just seems a bit off). Ultimately I don't really care either way, I just wanted to know if it was something that actually had to be done or more a 'to each their own' thing where it's not really required. Seems to be more the latter here, but its fine either way. StanTheMan (talk) 18:43, 7 November 2014 (EST)
Adding in the zeroes is also by far the more common way that people tend to do it in general. For example, googling the randomly picked "S02E03" returns 5,040,000 results, whereas "S2E03" has a mere 280,000 results. I always add the zeroes even for shorter running shows, not only to keep some kind of standard here, but also in terms of trying to keep more of a standard with the rest of the net as a whole. Just another point about standardisation: supposing you have a weapon listing table for TV series, as you scan down the Note/Episode column if we were to use the zero on a case-by-case basis it would look like they were just coming and going at random for no reason. --commando552 (talk) 18:58, 7 November 2014 (EST)
I eliminated the zero for the seasons due to space issues, especially when entering data in actor and gun tables. --Ben41 (talk) 19:32, 7 November 2014 (EST)
The one extra character is negligible, however, and spacing for tables is always subjective based on screen resolution and the size of your browser window. --Funkychinaman (talk) 19:41, 7 November 2014 (EST)
All fair points - I admittedly never gave this any real thought until recently. Again, to me, the shows with zeros/double-digits just indicate right away there are more seasons than the others - Plus I also agree with Ben's point about the space the extra characters make (I often shorten a lot of links to gun pages on articles for the same reason, if they have redirects anyway). I didn't really consider that it was the more popular way of doing it or not. Not that I necessarily care about whats more popular on the rest of the net, but I concur on the point about uniformity, and any bits that aren't can be problematic in regards to even just this site. Bottom-line, I just wanted to know if that was an extra bit of work I absolutely had to do with any pages I work on or not - and again, it doesn't seem like I have to do so persay. At least that's what I'm getting here. StanTheMan (talk) 19:40, 7 November 2014 (EST)
Is First Blood holiday themed? And I think you had more traditional films last year, like It's a Wonderful Life. --Funkychinaman (talk) 22:23, 3 December 2014 (EST)
I agree with fcm - I'm not sure First Blood is really 'Holiday Themed', either. The traditional stuff sounds good though. Bad Santa I think would qualify if it isn't included already. Might wanna look to more comedic stuff as well. Just some thoughts of course. StanTheMan (talk) 22:47, 3 December 2014 (EST)
First Blood might not look it, but it does take place around the holidays, as evidenced by the Christmas lights around the city and the Santa Coca-Cola sign. --Ben41 (talk) 02:03, 4 December 2014 (EST)
What movies are exactly in? TrickShotFinn (talk) 04:57, 4 December 2014 (EST)
...As in "what movies are featured" so that I don't bring up stuff like Die Hard 1 & 2 and Scrooged - that already are. TrickShotFinn (talk) 05:27, 4 December 2014 (EST)
I did forget First Blood took place around the holidays, but I think c552 made a point about Christmas-themed caps and such on some of those movies. That being said, you could rework some existing titles with 'holiday'-type screencaps - For instance putting in Band Of Brothers with some caps from the Battle of the Bulge part of the show, and such.. I think I saw Lethal Weapon on the main page as well, that would count I think, if not. EDIT - I think Edward Scissorhands and perhaps Enemy of the State could be added, as well. StanTheMan (talk) 18:10, 4 December 2014 (EST)
Security risk/problem?
I posted this on FB but I'll repeat my concerned comment(s) here. I was editing the Edward Scissorhands page and clicking on the link for the Colt Python, I suddenly got a security alert on Google Chrome saying the site has or may have malware on the site. The 'Details' report I looked at actually stated it found no instance of malware so I'm not sure what's up really. I've been on this site for years on several systems with both Chrome and Firefox so I highly doubt there's any real problem with malware or anything like that there, but still, I'm wondering what's up now. Perhaps there's just an error or something behind this or, well.. I got it on a few pages but interestingly, not some other pages, so again, wondering what's up with this, basically. StanTheMan (talk) 18:15, 4 December 2014 (EST)
I got this on Firefox as well. --Funkychinaman (talk) 18:19, 4 December 2014 (EST)
Chrome seems to have this problem, but IE doesn't. --Ben41 (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2014 (EST)
Just got back on, now the report says there are 'suspicious' activities and now states a number of pages resulted in malware being distributed/downloaded/installed and such, being hosted on several linked domains (all euro/.eu links). Got a reply on Facebook stating it's probably off of the ads/ad provider(s) which makes sense, but lets just say this was still a bit disconcerting. Anyway, sounds like it's being looked into which is fine with me, again, just hope this isn't really something more serious. StanTheMan (talk) 22:39, 4 December 2014 (EST)
Chrome and Firefox use a blacklisting service provided by stopbadware.org, IE doesn't which is why you don't get it on there. Either we got some dodgy ads or it's a false positive, I've put a note on Bunni's talk page. Evil Tim (talk) 08:41, 5 December 2014 (EST)
Unidentified M1911A1 type pistol
I am in the process of creating a page for The Host (2013). It has a mysterious M1911A1-type competition pistol in it with a compensator, skeletonized hammer and typical front slide serrations.
Any suggestions as to what this could be? Can’t stand not knowing it. Thanks in advance for your help, PeeWee055 (talk) 09:29, 17 December 2014 (EST)
I believe this is that modded Strayer Voigt Infinity that appeared in Heroes - Error creating thumbnail: File missingA Strayer Voigt Infinity - .45 ACP. This is one of the actual guns that has been used by The Company henchmen on Heroes; this weapon was supplied to the show by Independent Studio Services and has been used on every season.
Yup, that's the one, thanks a bunch! I knew that I'd seen it somewhere on IMFDB :-) By the way, sorry for the trouble, I just noticed that this version appears on the discussion page for the M1911A1, the one page I forgot to check... PeeWee055 (talk) 15:45, 17 December 2014 (EST)
No trouble. Like you, I too remembered it quite distinctly, and the 1911 talk page was one of the first ones I checked as it turns out. Anyway, glad to be of help. StanTheMan (talk) 18:44, 17 December 2014 (EST)
Two different pages about one pistol
I found out that we have two different pages for a generally one pistol: Star Model 30 and Star 30M. Wouldn't it be better to merge them? Greg-Z (talk) 15:13, 19 December 2014 (EST)
Oh wow, go for it. --Funkychinaman (talk) 15:32, 19 December 2014 (EST)
Category for Metal Gear series?
Since there is like 7-9 Metal Gear games, shoulun't they have (sub-) category like Battlefield and James Bond Game(s) have? TrickShotFinn (talk) 06:06, 21 December 2014 (EST)
Would probably work best if we put a template together for it that included a category. They don't have one of those, either. Evil Tim (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2014 (EST)
