Talk:Main Page

See Talk:Main_Page/Archive_1 for older discussions

Team America: World Police

I was surprised to see that this 2004 marionet comedy movie does not appear on IMFDB. Would it be against any IMFDB 'rules' if I created such a page? I watched the movie again over the weekend and I was actually pleasantly surprised. Most guns used by the marionets were indeed somewhat fictional but the creators really seem to have been inspired by real-life guns and I'd love to get started on an IMFDB page for this movie. If nobody objects I will get to work on this. Thanks in advance for your feedback, --PeeWee055 15:02, 13 November 2011 (CST)

I wouldn't think so; due to the scale of the props, I'm not sure that the weapons would actually be based on actual weapons, just "moulds" of them. I've seen the movie, and I think that they are very generic, so I think that making this page would go against the IMFDb rule of actually identifying weapons. --Jackbel 15:09, 13 November 2011 (CST)

The weapons are pretty faithful to real guns. There is at least a Minimi, M134, M4 with 40mm grenade launcher, MP5K (with the stainless steel Navy suppressor), MP5A3, SKS RPG-7 and a few different varieties of AK-47 (identifiable, such as Norinco Type 56 with pig-sticker bayonet and Romanian AIMS). These are just off the top of my head and from a couple of clips on youtube. Even though the guns obviously aren't real I think it deserves a page, as they are all faithful representation of real guns. --commando552 15:55, 13 November 2011 (CST)

Thanks for your quick comments, I understand the initial hesitation. However, just check below screenprints and you will see that indeed the makers did their homework, maybe they even checked IMFDB! Commando552's memory serves him right!

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

I agree that the movie contains a lot of nonsense but I am actually tempted to go ahead, --PeeWee055 16:11, 13 November 2011 (CST)

And It will be deleted just like last time as the "Weapons" are just whatever generic 1/6th scale guns the directors could find. they are obviously not real. The page has been deleted before and will most likely be removed again. Rockwolf66 16:17, 13 November 2011 (CST)

The guns in anime and video games aren't real either. The guns aren't generic from what I can see, can identify them all (more so than some of the guns on pages like Crysis 2). If mods so no then fair enough, but I think it should have a page. --commando552 16:57, 13 November 2011 (CST)

I'm with Commando552 on this one, if it's not eligible because the guns aren't real then all video games and anime should be removed because those guns aren't real they're drawings or digital constructs. --cool-breeze 18:38, 13 November 2011 (CST)

New or original gun names?

When a gun was originally sold under one name but has since changed, which name should be used? A good example is that right now there are LaRue Tactical OSR and LaRue Tactical OBR pages. They are the exact same rifle (OSR image is the standard rifle while OBR is tricked out, both versions are currently shown on the LaRue website as the OBR), LaRue was just forced to change the name due to a copyright problem. In this kind of case, which name should be used? I would have just checked other pages to see what the norm is, but my mind is currently drawing a blank to other guns that have changed their name but remained otherwise the same. --commando552 16:52, 7 December 2011 (CST)

Oops... I was the one who made the LaRue Tactical OBR page. I sincerely thought they were different guns, one a Battle Rifle and the other a Sniper Rifle. --Zackmann08 19:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)

CSI

So I noticed that the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation page is really lacking. Anyone interested in helping me update it? I was thinking that if a few of us divided it up, each took a season or two, we could do it pretty quick. If anyone is interested give me a haller. --Zackmann08 16:11, 14 December 2011 (CST)

Sortable Tables

Zackmann08 had mentioned about modifying our current table format for weapons and actor pages to a version where the boxes are sortable. A sortable template is already made and can be seen on Amitabh Bachchan's page (I've now modified it to look a little more like our current table format). This definitely would be beneficial for the gun pages, but I noticed it takes a little bit longer to load and not sure if users will understand what the sortable icon is for. Would like to get thoughts from admins and users on this before a change is completely made. --Ben41 22:18, 16 December 2011 (CST)

You make a good point about users not knowing what the icon is for. It is in use on wikipedia a lot these days so i think a lot of people are familiar with it and worst case scenario, if they're not then the table is just left in it's default sort. Just my 2 cents on the matter...--Zackmann08 22:54, 16 December 2011 (CST)

It doesn't work with rowspaned tables (like the ones on the Heckler & Koch MP5 page) so it is a one or the other decision. --commando552 04:28, 17 December 2011 (CST)

another very good point, but how many rowspan tables are really in use? Other than the MP5 page i dont recall seing any others, though i havent really been looking for them. --Zackmann08 08:37, 17 December 2011 (CST)

I've used them a few times, but generally only when there are a number of people from the same show/movie using the same weapon, as I think it looks better than having 10 or so entries with the same title and date in a row. If people decide against the rowspaned tables am happy to get rid of them though, was just my preference. --commando552 09:50, 17 December 2011 (CST)

I feel ya. They are definitely preferable to listing the same thing over and over but if the choice is between that and sortable tables, personally I think the sortable ones are worth losing the rowspan. --Zackmann08 11:40, 17 December 2011 (CST)

I like the idea of sortable tables, especially for long pages like Beretta 92F/FS or Arnold Schwarzenegger. However, I have noticed that currently there's a number of page formats depending on the respective contributor. I may not be so experienced with IMFDB like most of you, but it seems to me that it would make more sense to concentrate on developing a way to create a more uniform page format before we spend time on accepting more 'sexy' features. Pretty much like working on a house and spend time on the roof when the foundations have not been properly laid yet. Take care, --PeeWee055 10:29, 18 December 2011 (CST)

I totally agree with PeeWee055. I think what we really need is a single page that we can look at that has a template for everything. A section showing how to make a gun page. A section for actors, section for TV Shows, a section for Movies. That way we all know that this is the page everything should be based off of. This would be far better than saying "look at the M1911 page" because even pages like that have inconsistencies with formatting. The special page could even be put in the toolbar on the left side of the page under "toolbox". That would be amazingly helpful. --Zackmann08 10:57, 18 December 2011 (CST)

Bunni made a template for gun pages: Template:Gun That's how a newly created gun page should look like. Of course, the gun specifications sections can be expanded with other stuff, like barrel length (if a gun comes with 2 or more different barrels, like the Remington MSR for example), country of Origin, Designer and Manufacturer (if it is not in the title of the page, e.g. 9A-91).

And about the sortable tables: I think it is a bad idea. Why would anyone wanna sort a table on an actor page by the notation or character the actor was playing. Sorting by year is the best option IMHO, on both actor and gun pages. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 11:37, 18 December 2011 (CST)

I can see why you wouldn't want to sort by notation, and character would basically result in sorting by movie, but I can see how you would want to sort by what guns an actor has used instead of just what year. Also, one of the benefits of the sortable tables is that some of the older pages that are NOT sorted can be fixed by simply changing the class="wikitable" to class="sortable". As for the template, it does need to be expanded but we also need to find a way to make sure people know it's there and that all pages should follow it. --Zackmann08 12:17, 18 December 2011 (CST)

This is proving to be a highly educational discussion for me as a rookie IMFDB user. Actually, this is the first time I learn about the template pages, and to be honest I fear I am not the only one. Instead of searching through the website, how about simply displaying links to the template pages everytime somebody clicks the button to create a new page? I am sure this will lead to increased uniformity and substantially lower the barrier for new people to get started on a page. Taking things one step further, how about the following? If somebody indicates to create a brand new page, a question box is displayed asking e.g. to make a choice between movie, actor, gun etc. so that after this choice the relating template pops up? Again, I am not sure if this is feasible but I am quite interested to hear your feedback, --PeeWee055 14:23, 18 December 2011 (CST)

I LIKE THIS IDEA!!! We definitely need to make a page that has all the templates listed. Right now its really hard to track down the templates. --Zackmann08 14:52, 18 December 2011 (CST)

Search for "Category:Templates" and it will show u all the templates. --bozitojugg3rn4ut 15:20, 18 December 2011 (CST)

That helps but still that page needs to be publicized better. It also needs to be better explained. How are A-Team, The or MacGyver templates? When I create a new page, I find a good page and I copy the 'wiki code' from it into my new page and then just edit the text. My guess is this is what most people do and I feel like that is what we need. A page with dummy titles, names and guns for people to copy to a new page and work from. Thanks for letting me know about the Template page though. Didn't know that was there. --Zackmann08 16:03, 18 December 2011 (CST)

I think that Zackmann08 is hitting the nail on the head. Building on above comments, how about the following? On the left side of all pages there's the master menu table in blue ('CATEGORIES/SPECIAL/TOOLBOX'). In 'CATEGORIES' one can choose between Movies/Guns/Actors/etc so why not add something simple like 'Templates for New Pages'? If you click that, you'd see just 7 options for new pages; (1) Movie, (2) TV, (3) Anime, (4) Video, (5) Actor, (6) Gun and (7) Others (for whatever else can be 'templated'). Any choice would lead to one single template with dummy info and a short explanation on how to use it. This way an immediate and easy access to the templates will be realized, rather than (I am sorry to say) searching through several menu's in the Toolbox option and finding dozens of random templates. Interested to know what you guys think, --PeeWee055 05:21, 19 December 2011 (CST)

This sounds perfect to me! --Zackmann08 08:41, 19 December 2011 (CST)

So, any volunteers willing and able to start on an addition to "Categories" with "Templates for New pages"? Am not too familiar with such revisions, but do we need authorization from anybody? --PeeWee055 09:25, 20 December 2011 (CST)

Merry Christmas!

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

--PeeWee055 14:22, 22 December 2011 (CST)

HAHAHA! I love it!

Merry Christmas guys :) --cool-breeze 16:05, 22 December 2011 (CST)

Gun Brands Pages

I had an interesting idea that I was curious what others thought of. I was thinking it might be helpful to have a page that listed all the guns made by a certain company. For example, a "Smith & Wesson" page that would list all the guns that they have. To clarify, it would only list guns that are on this site. As per the rules this is NOT a gun encyclopedia and gun pages are only on this site if they appear in a movie/tv show/etc. I feel that it could be quite helpful in trying to identify weapons. We could divide the pages into Pistols, Revolvers, Shotguns, Rifles, etc. just like a movie page and set it up as a table perhaps with some of the characteristics listed such as caliber(s), barrel length(s), etc. Would could even have a 'notes' column that list certain characteristics that help to identify it (for example for Taurus 92, "distinguished from the Beretta by its frame-mounted safety").

If this is an idea that people think might be useful, and if an admin will give me approval, I would love to create a trial page for one of the smaller companies. (I'd rather not do S&W to start with if it turns out people don't like it). I could perhaps start with Ruger which has a good number of guns. Please share your thoughts! --Zackmann08 10:07, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Sounds like an interesting plan. Thing is that quite often I see a gun and I have a general idea what brand it could be but then I find myself flipping through many gunpages in the IMFDB hoping that the gun I am looking for has been properly registered under that brand's name. In the case of e.g. Smith & Wesson (to name but a brand...) I can imagine such a page to be very useful. Will be following this discussion, --PeeWee055 10:18, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Yeah it seems like it would be a good idea.--Predator20 10:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Trial page is up and running! I went ahead and did Ruger. I threw in a gallery as well. I'm not sure whether it's better have it right after the table or to put it at the bottom of the page or what. Please share all your thoughts on the page! --Zackmann08 11:23, 23 December 2011 (CST)

I think there is no need for the tables and galleries. Just simply put the caliber after the gun's name in the gallery. Like: "Ruger LCP - .380 ACP". Sorting gun's by type if definitely good, and seeing the thumbnail of the gun's will really speed up the IDing process (at least for me it will). The whole idea of these pages is great, considering that some guns (mostly Russians) are listed without the manufacturers' names. If more pages like this will spawn, we will need a "Gun Manufacturers" category, or something like that. I definitely support this idea, but the mods will decide. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 12:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

I completely agree. The only thing is that some of these guns have 5+ calibers which could be cumbersome in the Gallery format... It would be great to have a 'Gun Manufacturers' category. --Zackmann08 13:25, 23 December 2011 (CST)

I also added the Barrett & FN Herstal pages. --Zackmann08 14:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)Zackmann08 13:44, 23 December 2011 (CST)

You could put them in table but have the far right column be a picture (put in [[Image:file_name.jpg|200px]]). Would take up more vertical room than a gallery, but you could then include calibre, magazine size (helpfull for identifying different 5/6 shot cylinder revolvers, and differences between double/single stack handguns for example), year introduced (which would also help with ruling stuff out for IDs in older films/TV) etc. I suppose a notes catagory could also ,be usefull, say if a gun is available in multiple finishes and stuff like that. I think these pages are a good idea, but I think having the specifications section is a bit irrelevent for a company, I would just tag it on the end of "About". --commando552 15:27, 23 December 2011 (CST)

This is what you mean, Commando?

Weapon	Caliber(s)	Capacity	Introduced	Image
Remington MSR	.338 Lapua Magnum .338 Norma Magnum .300 Winchester Magnum 7.62x51mm NATO	5, 7, 10	Late 2000s	Error creating thumbnail: File missing
Remington XM2010 ESR	.300 Winchester Magnum	5	2010	Error creating thumbnail: File missing

You are right BTW, the year and capacity can help a lot in IDing. bozitojugg3rn4ut 15:58, 23 December 2011 (CST)

THAT LOOKS AWESOME!!! I am sold... That is how I am doing it. Next question, what do we want to do about variants? For example with the FN FAL do we also list the FN LAR on the FN Herstal page or just the FN FAL and figure if you are trying to identify the gun you will go to the FN FAL page and look at the variants? Same goes for the FN SCAR. --Zackmann08 16:28, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Yeah, that's what I mean. I think this is more usefull than just a gallery, and also it would be a place where sortable tables would definitely be useful, as you could sort the guns by name or chronologically. For a while I've been meaning to do a table of all the Colt AR-15 variants for my own use, but would be good for the Colt page. AR-15s are kind of a special case as their are so many variants that are very similar at first glance, so would include more columns (like upper/lower receiver type, barrel length and profile, bayonet lug, stuff like that) so someone who didn't know much about different variants could sort the columns and work out what a gun is. Regardless if it ends up going on the Colt page, I'm going to make it and put it on my user page to see how it turns out.

As for different variants I would list them as they can look noticeably different, as is the case with the FAR and the LAR (these are pretty distinctly different weapons, more of a grey area would be listing different FAL variants such as the 50.00, 50.61 and 50.63). With guns like the SCAR, I think the split should just be between the H and the L, not the different barrel lengths. --commando552 16:43, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Fair enough. The other idea that I had was to add an additional column called "variants". This would be great for weapons like the MP5 which all have the same base. Got the idea from this wikipedia page: Heckler and Koch. Glad to see so many people are taking a liking to this idea. I defiantly want to make it happen. Also, the AR-15 idea is a GREAT one. Perhaps a 1911 page as well. --Zackmann08 16:56, 23 December 2011 (CST)

You talking like one page for ALL 1911 variants, or seperate pages for each 1911 company? But then how would we handle, say, an SW1911? Would it be on the S&W page, or the 1911 page? Or both?----JazzBlackBelt-- 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)

I've continued working on the three trial pages (Ruger, Barrett & FN Herstal). I have noticed that A LOT of these guns are missing the most basic information (no specifications). If anyone is looking for a task, that would be a great one. I will do my part once I get these pages fully up. --Zackmann08 20:32, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Loving the idea, I am considering making a SIG-Sauer trial page with the basics only, then going back later and adding in lesser known stuff. But I want to see how these pages come along!----JazzBlackBelt-- 23:31, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Please keep in mind that the mods will decide. DO NOT create additional gun manufacturer pages until an approval comes from them. It will be a waste of time if they delete them later. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 02:26, 24 December 2011 (CST)

That is why I said wanted to see what happened to these pages first.----JazzBlackBelt-- 14:19, 24 December 2011 (CST)

Another thing that would be great, is if anyone wants to go through the trial pages ((Ruger, Barrett, Heckler & Koch & FN Herstal) and make sure that each weapon has specifications on its page that would be great. As i was creating these pages I noticed that most of the weapons were lacking the most basic specifications and info. (This could be yet another use for these pages!) --Zackmann08 08:08, 24 December 2011 (CST)

We had this discussion in the forum a long time ago, and the consensus was that it was NOT a useful means of classifying weapons on the site. Hence why I deleted the page originally. I'm still not sure it's all that useful. -MT2008 08:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)

I respectfully disagree. For someone like me who is a still a novice with guns it is exceptionally helpful when identifying weapons. This will be particularly true when it comes to things like the Smith and Wesson revolvers. It is often easy to identify the revolver is a Smith and Wesson but harder to know which model. If there is a single page that list all the Smith and Wesson revolvers it saves us from having to go through page by page. I just find it is so helpful to have one location where you can see a picture and the basics of the possible weapons. If it is helpful for some of us is it okay to leave these up? I will personally make sure that the pages are done in a professional looking manner and are not sloppily thrown together. I truly believe that (as long as they are done in the proper manner) they can make a fantastic addition to this already awesome website. (ok so that was a bit of kissing up but it's true, this site freaking rocks! :-) ) I'm also using this 'project' as an excuse to update many of these weapons so that their pages are in the correct format with specifications and descriptions.

I appreciate that I am still a new guy here and I really DO NOT want to be that guy who joins and says "nice thing you got going here but you should really change it because I know better." I DO NOT know better, please don't take this in that light. I am merely saying that there are a lot of people who would like to contribute but don't have the knowledge that some of you experts do. I think that this addition would help us novices contribute. I welcome your feedback. Oh, and a Merry Christmas/Happy Chanukah to everyone! --Zackmann08 09:21, 24 December 2011 (CST)

I propose changing 'introduced' to 'produced' and having it be a to and from date. Basically how long the weapon was in productions for. 1995-2005 rather than just 1995 for example. Any thoughts?? --Zackmann08 12:24, 25 December 2011 (CST)

Would love to hear some feedback from the admins on this project. I would like to continue with it but don't want to do a bunch of work and then have the pages removed. --Zackmann08 09:13, 26 December 2011 (CST)

Looks good. I'm a mod here. I really like the Colt page. The S&W page is going to be an intensive piece of labor for you. I agree with bunni. We need a category for these new pages. --Jcordell 16:29, 27 December 2011 (CST)

I'm a mod as well and I really like what I'm seeing. This will be a lot of work but I think it will be quite an invaluable resource once it is finished, as long as it is done well. Kudos. - Speakeasy804 21:51, 6 January 2012 (CST)

I started the SIG-Sauer page, and am about 3/4 done. Any help would be appreciated! Oh, and if anyone knows how to change the name of a page I would greatly appreciate for it to be renamed SIG-Sauer Inc.----JazzBlackBelt-- 17:33, 16 January 2012 (CST)

SIG-Sauer is fine. According to Bunni we are not using "inc" or "LLC" in the page titles. --Zackmann08 19:34, 16 January 2012 (CST)

That's fine, I wasn't sure if it was necessary or not.----JazzBlackBelt-- 20:19, 16 January 2012 (CST)

Battle Los Angeles

I have a question that I cant seem to get a good bead on, in the movie Battle Los Angeles Aaron Eckhart is seen using an m9 Beretta as his pistol,which I know is the main side arm used by US military forces. However, it was my understanding that the Marines used the 1911 as their sidearm and were the only branch to keep it as the main side arm. Eckhart's character in the movie is a grizzled old vet and had just put in for his 20 at the beginning of the movie meaning that he must have joined back in 1990-1991 and it would make sense to me why he would hold on to something like that. Either way please let me know what you got, thanks NavyBoyd

For movie-specific discussions, please go to [associated talk page].--PistolJunkie 19:57, 23 December 2011 (CST)

Gun Page Templates

As part of the 'Gun Brands Pages' project (see above), I am also trying to make sure that each weapon included has specifications listed on its page. I am using the following as my template. If anyone thinks it is missing anything, please let me know. (Note that I made it a subheading with 3 '=' instead of the normal 2 '=' so that it wouldn't be its own category. normally it would just have 2.) I personally don't feel that Muzzle Velocity or effective range are necessary but I am up for input and critique. Just want to make sure I am doing this right! Merry Christmas everyone! Oh and under FireModes I am including DA,SA,DAO,DA/SA if applicable. --Zackmann08 15:38, 25 December 2011 (CST)

<-- start template-->

Specifications

(year - year)

Type: Handgun/Revolver/Submachine Gun/Sniper Rifle/etc.

Caliber(s):

Weight: lb ( kg) (empty)

Length: in ( mm)

Barrel length: in ( mm)

Capacity:

Fire Modes: Safe/Semi-Auto/Full-Auto (950rounds/min)

<--end template-->

Another question that one of the veterans can help me out with. With guns that have Variations (Heckler & Koch P2000 or Heckler & Koch USP for example), should each subcategory have its own specifications with the different length, capacity, etc. For example should the Heckler & Koch P2000 have just one specifications section for the page or should there be one for the H&K P2000 and one for the H&K P2000SK. (This is the way I did the page but I want to make sure that this is ok. If I'm supposed to just do one section I will gladly correct it.) --Zackmann08 16:03, 25 December 2011 (CST)

I can't create a new thread in the forum

I logged into the forum and tried to create a new thread, but I get a message that says I don't have permission to access the page. I'm using a different username than I have used before, so is my account "awaiting activation?"--Phillb36 11:06, 1 January 2012 (CST)

I had the same problem a few days ago. You want to talk to Bunni. He'll fix it for ya. Happy new year. --Zackmann08 13:28, 1 January 2012 (CST)

Thanks for your help. I followed your advice and left a message for Bunni over a week ago but he hasn't yet responded. Has he not been around lately?--Phillb36 10:12, 13 January 2012 (CST)

I think it's time to end the silencer/suppressor debate

I see this a lot, people correct other people "It's a suppressor, not a silencer. It doesn't silence the gun" and I think it really needs to stop. Way back in 1910, the first silencer was patented by Hiram Maxim as the SILENCER. Way back then, they weren't even that good compared to today's because the technology has been advanced on yet they were still called silencers. Them having the name silencer is just a name, after all there is a model of the Ithaca 37 called "Deer Slayer". It's a inanimate object which cannot slay deer. It can be used to kill deer however but the name doesn't fit it unless it operated on it's own to shoot deer. There are some people named Rose or Diamond but they aren't a flower or an expensive jewel. My point is with this is that it's just a name. Even today, the BATFE calls them silencers on the paper work and many companies that make them call them silencers. There is even a company called SilencerCO.

The reason why a lot of people call them suppressor is because in the 1970s the magazine, Soldier of Fortune, started calling them suppressors and giving the reason that I stated in the first sentence. Most people that I've seen that actually own them call them silencers and they have most likely done their research on them.

In conclusion, calling them silencers is not wrong and neither is calling them suppressors. You call them either and you're right. It's when you claim that silencer is the improper term. Silencer is just a name, it's the way it is. --FIVETWOSEVEN 10:20, 9 January 2012 (CST)

I personally prefer "suppressor", it's a nice, woody, sort of word. --Milkovich Error creating thumbnail: File missing 13:51, 10 January 2012 (CST)

Yes, "silencer" is a name, but it's a misnomer. "Silencer" suggests absolutely no sound is produced when a shot is fired; "Suppressor" properly states that the sound will be muffled instead of completely silenced. It's the same as saying bullet-resistant instead of bulletproof. --Ben41 17:52, 10 January 2012 (CST)

I don't see anyone complaining that their shotgun doesn't kill deer on it's own. IT'S A NAME and it's correct. .223 fires a .224 caliber bullet, are you going to complain about that too?--FIVETWOSEVEN 19:37, 10 January 2012 (CST)

I agree. I think "Suppressor" sounds more accurate and professional. If it were a silencer, there would be little or no sound at all, which unless you use a suppressed .22 with half loads and a plastic bottle, is impossible, and even THAT makes a sound. I say we go with Suppressor.--User:Scattergun

While "Silencer" is correct in general terms, the term "suppressor" is preferred largely because of the Hollywood concept of the "magic silencer" that literally makes a gunshot into the sound of a kitten sneezing. The "suppressor" term was coined to give a more realistic idea of what the device actually does; it suppresses the sound, it doesn't silence it. Evil Tim 11:05, 14 January 2012 (CST)

NCIS: LA gun change?

The latest episode of NCIS: LA "Exit Strategy" the guns don't see to be the normal Sig 228s. The guns are still Sigs, but with rails, and Deeks was not carrying his normal Beretta. Deeks' weapon may have been the same S&W used in the episode "Empty Quiver". -Tucker

Single or Double-Stack 1911?

Which is a better 1911 variant to have? A single stack or a double stack magazine. I heard somewhere that a 14-shot 1911 is more prone to jamming but I'm not sure. The reason is I am currently writing a script for an independent movie that me and my class will make and I have access to all kinds of guns, both blank-adapted and Japanese flash cap versions, and the main character is to carry a 1911 .45 and I was wondering what the more professional choice would be to carry.

Personally I would go for a Kimber Custom II TLE or a Springfield Armoury TRP, both are single stackers. --cool-breeze 12:58, 13 January 2012 (CST)

Novel guns?

I know this may seem like a stupid idea, but should we include guns that feature in books? I have several books in my bookcase that go into great detail about guns, albeit sometimes they call sub-machine guns machine guns for some reason. (Seriously, how can you mix it up?) I'm new here, please go easy, but please give it some thought. They could either be on the book cover or featured in print inside. I know it would be pointless to include a screenshot of the text, but there are some pages on IMFDB that are just lists of guns and pictures of the guns themselves. Alasdair

Check out the Rules, Standards and Principles page. It will help set your straight. Good thing for new users to read (I found this out the hard way just a few weeks ago when I joined). --Zackmann08 11:35, 15 January 2012 (CST)

Ah, I see. Thanks. Alasdair.

Manufacturer Pages

With more people starting to work on Manufacturer Pages, I'm working on making a template for the pages (Manufacturer Template). I am going to add a link to it from the [[Category:Manufacturer]] page. I figure this will help to make sure that they all stay consistent. (Note: not all of the pages that I have already made conform to the standards that I listed on the template, I will be fixing that in the next few days.) My goal is to make sure that these pages look professional and are useful! If anyone, particularly admins, has things that would like to add to the pages or to correct with future pages, please edit the template accordingly. Thanks! --Zackmann08 13:41, 19 January 2012 (CST)

Glock Manufacturer's Page

I was getting ready to make the Glock page for the new Manufacturers category and ran into a small problem. The new page would ideally be called Glock but that is already taken by the Glock page which has all their guns. I definitely think this page would be helpful (at least I know it would I'd find it useful) as it will help you decide whether you are looking at a G17 or a G21. I welcome any and all ideas and suggestions. --Zackmann08 17:54, 19 January 2012 (CST)

The actual company is trademarked in all capitals as GLOCK so you could do that. Either that or you could put "manufacturer" in brackets after it, or make this the one exception where you put on the crap after the name, in this case "Ges.m.b.H.". If not that, I don't think a manufacturer page is as important for Glocks as other brands, as they are all already on the same page. --commando552 18:05, 19 January 2012 (CST)

All good ideas. I'll prolly just go with (manufacturer). I agree that its not as important but it could still be super useful. I think I'm going to add a 'frame' column like we did with the S&W revolvers. This time it will have "Compact" "Standard", "SubCompact", etc.. --Zackmann08 18:29, 19 January 2012 (CST)

Taurus

I am in the process of redoing all the Taurus gun pages. Giving them all specifications, converting to wiki-table, etc. If there are any Taurus aficionados in the house who are willing and able to fill in the information that I am having trouble finding (mainly production dates), that would be great! --Zackmann08 13:15, 20 January 2012 (CST)

Beretta

I'm in the process of making the Beretta page. My understanding is that for Semi-Automatic pistols we DO NOT include "Model" in the page title, Beretta 418 for example. There are a few pages that are not consistent with this pattern. Just want to make sure that they are all named correctly and follow the same rules. Could an admin look into this? --Zackmann08 23:52, 20 January 2012 (CST)

Proper name for CZ

It has been brought to my attention that the new Manufacturer page for CZ may not be properly named. The full name of the manufacturer is "Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod". I am hesistant to use this name for a couple reasons. 1) Its kind of a pain to type on a 'standard' keyboard. 2) Most people (I THINK) know the company as "CZ". One possible compromise I'm considering is renaming the page "CZ (Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod) and having "CZ" redirect there. I would love to hear some thoughts on the matter. --Zackmann08 10:45, 25 January 2012 (CST)

I would use the full name with a redirect, but if you are calling it CZUB rather than Česká zbrojovka, that would exclude at least a couple of guns, such as the vz. 24 which was made by Československá zbrojovka Brno. I'm no expert on CZ, but it was my understanding that any words after the "Česká zbrojovka" part were just different factories, or is this wrong? While talking about proper names for gun pages, what should the page be called if the manufacturer has changed its name or merged? For example, when I made the Royal Small Arms Factory page I used the original name rather than Royal Ordnance. However I was going to make a Denel Land Systems page, which was originally called Lyttleton Engineering Works, but the Denel name is much more commonly known so didn't know what to use. Any suggestions for a general rule on this sort of thing? --commando552 12:23, 25 January 2012 (CST)

I think we definitely need a CZ expert to take a look at this page... Any volunteers??? As for the different names, first and foremost, whatever the page ends up being, there should be redirects form all the others. So for example Royal Ordnance should redirect to the Royal Small Arms Factory. Also, whatever the final name of the page ends up being, there should be a short explanation about the fact that it is "Also Known As ______" or "Formally Known As ____". As for a general rule, while I think it would be best to go with what the company is most commonly known as, in the end, that is a matter of opinion. Personally, I think the rule of thumb should be to go with what the company is currently known as (use the company website?) and have other names redirect there. Just my 2 cents on the matter.

As a side note, while talking about redirect, I'm also trying to set up redirects for these pages that will help newcomers when searching the site. For example, if you search S&W now, instead of getting a page listing all the times that that the letters 'S' and 'W' appear on a page, you are now taken to the Smith & Wesson page. Just food for thought. --Zackmann08 12:36, 25 January 2012 (CST)

A question about a bolt

Off-topic, but could anyone ID this bolt? http://www.forgottenweapons.com/mystery-bolt Thanks, a relatively new and inexperienced user.

Site Policy On 'Made Up' Weapons

Could someone please clarify the site's policy on guns fabricated for films and videogames? I've edited articles on the Killzone games in the past only to have the articles taken down altogether because the guns featured aren't real. Now I'd accept that as fair enough, except other articles (e.g. Alien: Resurrection and Perfect Dark) deal with non-existent weapons at some length and nobody complains, even though some of the weapons they describe feature far less in common with real guns than the Killzone games' weapons did; at least many of those featured parts that were readily identifiable as belonging to real-world weapons. By deleting one and sparing the others, you're creating something of a double standard--Leigh Burne 09:56, 31 January 2012 (CST)

Gun Title Template

Is there any way to get rid of the <br clear=all> that results from using the Gun Title template? I noticed that it can cause some problems when the gun in question has multiple images as there will be a bunch of white space before the list of occurrences. For an example of what I mean look at Smith & Wesson Model 610. --Zackmann08 12:14, 1 February 2012 (CST)

Gangster Squad

Since I can't create a thread in the forum I decided to post this here.

The upcoming movie Gangster Squad will be released this year, and someone managed to record scenes being filmed, then posted the videos on Youtube. A couple of the videos feature shootouts.

This first one shows the "Gangster Squad" involved in a firefight and has a lot of M1 Thompson action:

Gangster Squad 1

The second video shows what I'm assuming are gangster-types, which is shot too far away to make positive ID's on all the weapons, but I think I know what most of them are. Two of them are using the usual Thompsons, but the guy kneeling between the cars seems to have a Sten, judging by the way he's holding it. There's another guy firing an smg, which due to the way he's holding it and it's rate of fire, I think is either an MP-40 or M-3. It's impossible to tell because he's obscured by a car. I'm pretty sure the guy up in the building is using a Lewis Gun.

Gangster Squad 2

I love these period crime movies, and this one looks really promising. What I'm seeing in these videos suggests there will be some great shootouts in this movie, and I just hope that's what we actually get in the final cut--Phillb36 09:04, 2 February 2012 (CST)

How do i add upload an image here?

I have gun to add, how do i add an image of it?

Also, how do i create a user page for myself?

Sorry if i am in the wrong section. If so, then please guide me to the right section.

Look to the left; under Toolbox is upload file. To edit your user page, go to the top of the screen, where it has your username, followed by My Talk, My Preferences, ect. Click your username (red means there is nothing there yet).--Jackbel 19:38, 4 February 2012 (CST)

Fictional Airsoft Guns

Just noticed that on the Milkor MGL page there is an entry for the CAW 40mm Grenade Launcher, an airsoft grenade launcher. It seems random that it is on this page as it is a fictional design that shares basically nothing with the Milkor. Are there many other fictional airsoft variants that appear in stuff (only one I can think of off the top of my head is that weird AKS-74U variant that is in Call of Duty), if so is it worth creating a page for fictional airsoft guns that do not have a real world equivalent? I previously made a similar page for Blank Fire Only Guns that are not based on any specific live fire weapon, would be like that. Anyone have any thoughts on this? --commando552 12:56, 7 February 2012 (CST)

- Personally, I think if it resembles the weapon, even if its fictional, it should share the page at the bottom. After all, the Bruni 1911 and the Bruni Python aren't real guns but they share a page with their real world Colt counterparts. At least thats how I feel about it. -User:Scattergun

That is different to what I am talking about though. The very reason that the two guns you mentioned are where they are (at the bottom of the live fire equivalent page) rather than on the blank fire page is that they are clearly based on real world guns. The Bruni Olympic 6 however isn't based on any particular real world design and is just a generic revolver, hence it being on the blank fire page. My idea was that airsoft guns that are not based on any particular gun, such as the grenade launcher I mentioned above, could be put on one page for ID and listing purposes. My question really was are there enough "unique", for lack of a better term, airsoft guns around to make a page like this worth it? --commando552 14:10, 7 February 2012 (CST)

Naming conventions for SIG guns

Now that I have finished the S&W pages, I am moving on to revamping the SIG Sauer pages. I wanted to get feedback, particularly from admins, about the consisten disagreement about SIG vs SIG Sauer vs SIG-Sauer and see if we could come to a consensus. Some of the page have the full SIG-Sauer in the title (SIG-Sauer P220 pistol series & SIG-Sauer P230) while other simply have SIG (SIG P210 & SIG SG 540). If for no other reason than to make sure that FUTURE pages are done correctly, which is the proper format? --Zackmann08 19:49, 9 February 2012 (CST)

It's not a matter of shorthand, the correct title depends on the firearm in question. The pistols with SIG-Sauer as the title were made by SIG-Sauer Inc., while the ones with SIG as the title were made by SIG independently, not with Sauer. Generally, the older guns (P210 & 510) are made by SIG only or Swiss Arms (which refers to themselves as SIG), while newer guns are SIG-Sauer. What I suppose I'm trying to say is that the titles are accurate as-is. As to whether the admins want SIG-Sauer or SIG Sauer is beyond me, although as they are two companies joined together I'm pretty sure there would be a hyphen.----JazzBlackBelt-- 22:27, 9 February 2012 (CST)