| 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:Excalibur01: Difference between revisions
(" WHO THE FUCK DID YOU THINK IT WOULD BE) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
== == | == == | ||
Right "calling people on their bullshit" is clearly a | Right. "calling people on their bullshit" is clearly a condescending way of saying a person has give an incorrect answer, you had to use the term "bullshit" didn't you. you can never give a respectful answer to anyone or about anyone and thats what i am trying to say but you clearly can't see that. | ||
Also if the headline of the comment is "REAL NAME" then who the fuck did you think it was going to be, the pope? | |||
If you're in an arguement with someone and then an "unnamed user" gives an answer about the subject the aforementioned arguement is based on, then its probably going to be them isn't it. | |||
Revision as of 16:42, 3 March 2011
Not sure if you saw this
I posted a question here (right under the heading) since I can't get a password reminder from the forums (the form fills out fine but I never get the email): there doesn't seem to be a specific policy anywhere on "Frankenguns" and how / if we cover them. What's your opinion? Vangelis 09:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- My personal take would be to treat the gun as if it's a movie prop and ask what it would be: for example, if you were building a movie version of the Pulse Weapon from FEAR 2, it'd probably be based on a resin cast of an F2000 or an actual F2000 reciever, with a lot of embellishments. On the other hand, if you were going for, say, the BLADE weapon from Vanquish, it'd just be a few gun bits stuck on a body made from scratch; you could probably ID the various bits, but they're bits of a gun, not a whole one.
If I was covering that gun in the picture I drew, I'd probably go for the section heading "Eryx" (in quote marks) with both weapon images below it, linking to both gun pages but probably not adding it to either list. Obviously this gets complicated with some game weapons that have more than two "donor" guns or a lot of fictional bits. The way I see it, if it can be clearly ID'd as a real weapon hybrid, it's within IMFDB's remit to inform people what real weapons it's a hybrid of.
One thing about the rules, though; they are rather tricky to find. They probably ought to be under the "General Information" link in the sidebar (where I first looked), but it seems they're only accessible from the front page.
Also, don't let what that anon guy said get to you; I've modded other sites and dealt with plenty of idiots like that. Anything that affects them is automatically someone abusing their powers, since clearly they can do no wrong themselves. [/sarcasm] Also, I think I've figured out where he got that name from, if you want me to tell you. Vangelis 08:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Valkyria Chronicles / fictional guns
Just finished cleaning up the Valkyria Chronicles page and re-adding the fictional firearms like you said to. But it got me thinking (and I'm just bouncing ideas around here, take them or leave them) that maybe the policy regarding fictional weapons in video games and animation (which right now is rather vaguely addressed in the policy guidelines) should be that a work should include at minimum at least one real design (that's current policy, I know, but it's worth rehashing since it's what keeps Halo and Final Fantasy away) and that fictional designs listed on the page should be either:
- (A) Realistic-looking enough that a layman could possibly mistake them for a real weapon (Example: Valkyria Chronicles, half of GITS's fictional guns)
- (B) Be important for trivia purposes (Example: the M41A's cameo in Excel Saga)
- (C) Be based off of the same mechanical concepts as firearms in the real world (i.e. could conceivably exist if someone was willing to sit down and make them) (Example: the other half of the fictional guns in GITS)
- (D) Be important/iconic firearms in that particular work (Example: Hellsing's Joshua and Jackal, Harlock's Dragoon)
Instances works where the only real firearm designs are "modified" versions of real world designs (like the guns in the F.E.A.R. games (that thing in F.3.A.R. is obviously just a UMP with a bunch of crap stuck on it) or the P90 is Solid State Society) are rare enough that they could be considered on an individual basis. Of course, like I said, this is just me bouncing an idea around. Think of it as me thinking out loud on the internet.
On a side note, the weapon pages for the Joshua and Jackal should probably be nuked. Everything there is already covered in the Hellsing article, and having pages for fictional prop guns is one thing, having pages for fictional guns that only exist in one (or two, however you wanna' count it) animated work is pushing it.
--PistolJunkie 23:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Joshua & Jackal
- They'll never appear in anything else, and there are too many admins/senior members who would like to see both the Anime and Video Game sections completely nuked (I may not use the forums much, but I do read 'em). Stuff like the Joshua and Jackal pages just make it look like the anime/VG sections are trying to worm their way into the rest of the site. I also think the two "America's Army 3" weapon pages (the grenades and Obran pages) should get nuked too. They're not real props, and there's nothing there that couldn't be covered in the games' pages.
- Also, I noticed that we have a category for anime TV shows ("Anime Series", it think it is?) but not one for Anime Movies and OVAs. Mind if I make them?--PistolJunkie 02:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Then should we get rid of the Series category? Seems a little strange to only have a category for one release method.--PistolJunkie 03:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Another quick question; what's the minimum amount of time that an article has to be around for before it gets the "Noeffort" tag due to sucky descriptions and no screenshots? I try and do cleanups every now and then, but I'm always hesitant to put that on a crummy page unless it's at least a year old.--PistolJunkie 05:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Right. "calling people on their bullshit" is clearly a condescending way of saying a person has give an incorrect answer, you had to use the term "bullshit" didn't you. you can never give a respectful answer to anyone or about anyone and thats what i am trying to say but you clearly can't see that.
Also if the headline of the comment is "REAL NAME" then who the fuck did you think it was going to be, the pope? If you're in an arguement with someone and then an "unnamed user" gives an answer about the subject the aforementioned arguement is based on, then its probably going to be them isn't it.