| 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:I'mallaboutguns.1: Difference between revisions
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
If you don't mind, I rolled back your edits. Here's my rationale: The "SP89 (mocked up as MP5K)" entry, and the picture of the gun that we use, is more appropriate when the weapon is a partial conversion (i.e., full-auto sear and MP5K vert grip installed, but all-metal lower receiver remains intact) - such as the guns from ''[[Speed]]'' and ''[[Die Hard with a Vengeance]]''. The MP5K seen in ''[[The Matrix]]'' may have started out as an SP89, as you documented on the page, but it is not a partial conversion - it's the full conversion with SEF trigger park, paddle mag release, etc. When an H&K gun started out as an HK94 or SP89 but is a full-conversion, we still refer to it by the model to which it has been converted (e.g., an MP5K, in this case). Any of the movie armorers on this site will tell you that the vast majority of the H&K MP5s that you see in Western productions - especially American productions - are transferrable HK94 and SP89 conversions. We'd have to use your approach for almost all of those guns if we do it for this page, and that's a rabbit hole that I'd rather we didn't go down. What I did do: I kept your comment on one of the screencaps noting that SP89 nomenclature on top of the receiver. Let me know your thoughts. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] ([[User talk:MT2008|talk]]) 19:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC) | If you don't mind, I rolled back your edits. Here's my rationale: The "SP89 (mocked up as MP5K)" entry, and the picture of the gun that we use, is more appropriate when the weapon is a partial conversion (i.e., full-auto sear and MP5K vert grip installed, but all-metal lower receiver remains intact) - such as the guns from ''[[Speed]]'' and ''[[Die Hard with a Vengeance]]''. The MP5K seen in ''[[The Matrix]]'' may have started out as an SP89, as you documented on the page, but it is not a partial conversion - it's the full conversion with SEF trigger park, paddle mag release, etc. When an H&K gun started out as an HK94 or SP89 but is a full-conversion, we still refer to it by the model to which it has been converted (e.g., an MP5K, in this case). Any of the movie armorers on this site will tell you that the vast majority of the H&K MP5s that you see in Western productions - especially American productions - are transferrable HK94 and SP89 conversions. We'd have to use your approach for almost all of those guns if we do it for this page, and that's a rabbit hole that I'd rather we didn't go down. What I did do: I kept your comment on one of the screencaps noting that SP89 nomenclature on top of the receiver. Let me know your thoughts. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] ([[User talk:MT2008|talk]]) 19:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC) | ||
:No worries; it's a valid topic of discussion, which is why we're putting our heads together. If you want my thought process: So far as H&Ks are concerned, when an HK94 and SP89 is fully-converted to MP5/MP5K specs, so that the only difference between the conversion weapon and a factory H&K weapon is the receiver markings, I don't think that the "HK94 (mocked up as MP5)" or "SP89 (mocked up as MP5K)" nomenclature is appropriate. We've historically only used that nomenclature for the partial conversion weapons that are recognizable as what they had been (due to all-metal trigger packs, lack of barrel lugs, no paddle mag release, etc.) If we were to take the same approach that you tried on ''[[The Matrix]]'', then pretty much every MP5K entry on IMFDB would have to be done the same way, since probably 95% of the MP5Ks that you have ever seen in movies started out as SP89s. I just don't see that as practical. | |||
:You do raise a good point RE the ''[[Furious 7]]'' MP5K - that's a weird one. My recommendation would be to classify it as "MP5K-PDW (mock-up)" and note the differences from a factory gun. And no, when civilian versions of firearms are converted to select-fire variants, I wouldn't say that they (quote) "turn into their actual select-fire variants," but I would say that we have to treat them as their full-auto breathren for the purposes of not overwhelming our readers with too much information. Doesn't mean that we can't note (in description/screencap captions/etc.) visual features which reveal their lineage, such as receiver markings, but we do have to mindful that there's a balance to be sought between detail and accessibility. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] ([[User talk:MT2008|talk]]) 12:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:39, 1 July 2023
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. After that you should also read the IMFDB Screencapping Guide and the IMFDB Style Guide to familiarize yourself with the image and formatting requirements for pages you create.
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! bunni (talk) 15:02, 4 January 2016 (EST)
Actor pages
For images on actor pages, it's more important to get a clear images of the actor's face, unlike on a media page, where it's most important to get a clear image of the weapon. So if you have the movie on hand, get a good image of the actor's face, and he or she is holding a weapon at the same time, all the better.
And are you actually going to do a page for Community? --Funkychinaman (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2016 (EDT)
- Have you taken a look at the IMFDB Screencapping Guide? --Funkychinaman (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2016 (EDT)
Walking Dead
The reason I changed the pistol ID is because someone on Facebook apparently took a photo of the actual pistol. Please don't change. --Ben41 (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2016 (EST)
Walking Dead game
Will you be adding screenshots? As it is, it's at best merely incomplete, and I don't like first day in completes. --Funkychinaman (talk) 07:28, 24 December 2016 (EST)
Paul Walker
Please back up all IDs with visual evidence, like screencaps or promotional stills. --Funkychinaman (talk) 07:47, 31 January 2017 (EST)
Contract to Kill
In the future, please find a higher quality source for your screenshots. Your screenshots for Contract to Kill are so blurry that it is very difficult to confirm the identity of the weapons. --Ben41 (talk)
Name mistake
Hey, I didn't realize the actor's name is Daniel Sharman, not Sherman. That was my mistake and didn't realize it until I searched his name. Then you are ready create the page. --User:Thestormjamieson (talk) 03:03, 7 June 2017 (CST)
Deletion
Only admins can delete pages. If you want something deleted, just tag it and one of us will delete it soon. --Funkychinaman (talk) 04:15, 2 July 2017 (EDT)
Reef Break edit
your edit: No. The gun was drawn and already was in the 'stovepiped' position, it was not stovepiped. It was a gas pistol that was out of gas. MoviePropMaster2008 (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2020 (EST)
State of Decay 2
Why are you editing an article I created? Wait until I'm done. After that, you can modify it.--Emto_PL (talk) 10:36, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
I don't need any help yet. :)--Emto_PL (talk) 10:46, 23 June 2021 (EDT)
Thank you!
I saw your corrections on Hostage X page! Yup got a pair of things mixed up about the Glocks! I checked back Glock page and you are alright! --Dannyguns (talk) 11:28, 16 July 2021 (EDT)
Your Gunpowder Milkshake edit
I understand that you want things in alphabetical order, but I really think that ordering weapons in rough order of appearance and user relevance is a better idea. Don't want to get into an edit war, so I figured I'd drop you a line about it first.--Mandolin (talk) 09:59, 14 September 2021 (EDT)
- Okay, if it's just you being mildly annoyed I'm going to revert it, my original layout was actually organized--Mandolin (talk) 05:20, 15 September 2021 (EDT)
The Matrix SP89/MP5K
If you don't mind, I rolled back your edits. Here's my rationale: The "SP89 (mocked up as MP5K)" entry, and the picture of the gun that we use, is more appropriate when the weapon is a partial conversion (i.e., full-auto sear and MP5K vert grip installed, but all-metal lower receiver remains intact) - such as the guns from Speed and Die Hard with a Vengeance. The MP5K seen in The Matrix may have started out as an SP89, as you documented on the page, but it is not a partial conversion - it's the full conversion with SEF trigger park, paddle mag release, etc. When an H&K gun started out as an HK94 or SP89 but is a full-conversion, we still refer to it by the model to which it has been converted (e.g., an MP5K, in this case). Any of the movie armorers on this site will tell you that the vast majority of the H&K MP5s that you see in Western productions - especially American productions - are transferrable HK94 and SP89 conversions. We'd have to use your approach for almost all of those guns if we do it for this page, and that's a rabbit hole that I'd rather we didn't go down. What I did do: I kept your comment on one of the screencaps noting that SP89 nomenclature on top of the receiver. Let me know your thoughts. -MT2008 (talk) 19:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
- No worries; it's a valid topic of discussion, which is why we're putting our heads together. If you want my thought process: So far as H&Ks are concerned, when an HK94 and SP89 is fully-converted to MP5/MP5K specs, so that the only difference between the conversion weapon and a factory H&K weapon is the receiver markings, I don't think that the "HK94 (mocked up as MP5)" or "SP89 (mocked up as MP5K)" nomenclature is appropriate. We've historically only used that nomenclature for the partial conversion weapons that are recognizable as what they had been (due to all-metal trigger packs, lack of barrel lugs, no paddle mag release, etc.) If we were to take the same approach that you tried on The Matrix, then pretty much every MP5K entry on IMFDB would have to be done the same way, since probably 95% of the MP5Ks that you have ever seen in movies started out as SP89s. I just don't see that as practical.
- You do raise a good point RE the Furious 7 MP5K - that's a weird one. My recommendation would be to classify it as "MP5K-PDW (mock-up)" and note the differences from a factory gun. And no, when civilian versions of firearms are converted to select-fire variants, I wouldn't say that they (quote) "turn into their actual select-fire variants," but I would say that we have to treat them as their full-auto breathren for the purposes of not overwhelming our readers with too much information. Doesn't mean that we can't note (in description/screencap captions/etc.) visual features which reveal their lineage, such as receiver markings, but we do have to mindful that there's a balance to be sought between detail and accessibility. -MT2008 (talk) 12:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)