I think the goldeneye 007 64 should also be looked over>

I mean seriously
http://www.imfdb.org/images/b/b7/GE_Shotgun.png
allegedly a remington 870 but there are no features to identify it as such
http://www.imfdb.org/images/d/df/GoldenEye_Sniper.png
allegedly a L96A1 but I have no idea how they came up with that. it looks like a generic hunting/sniping rifle(a crappy one at that)
http://www.imfdb.org/images/7/76/GE_Rocket_Launcher.png
Type 69???? I don't get it. It looks like the devs just modeled a generic rocket launcher to me.

I tried editing the article to label all these as "fictional" but somebody (Dongs) changed it all back.

On an irrelevant note, how can anyone take a guy seriously who made his user name "Dongs"?:eek:

Yeah, I've been having problems with that guy as well.

Well that's the problem with older console games like Goldeneye. It was an awesome game of the time, but it is hard to ID the guns used in it.

Somebody was Orca1 9904 the first time, actually. I reverted your changes because he said they were vandalism the first time, and he's an admin.

Anyway to request a moderator review on these sorts of things rather than relying on their banhammer wielding whims?

for whatever reason someone made a page w/o bothering to put anything on it.

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Zombieland

I'd vote in favor of making a page for PDZ, as most of the guns there pretty close to real life counterparts.

I can easily pick out an HK P9, S&W 629C (I think that's what it's called) revolver, a Steyr TMP, an MP5, an Uzi, a P90, a CAR-15 with an M203, a Type-56, an M60, a FAMAS-inspired plasma-rifle, and a stockless SPAS-12.

Just going through the videogame category, here's a nice run of stunningly bad pages for the chop:

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Syphon_Filter_2
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/T2:_The_Arcade_Game [replica of http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Termi...he_Arcade_Game only even more crap]
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Socom:_Confrontation
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/SOCOM:_Confrontation [yes, there's two of these stupid things]
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/SOCOM:_Combined_Assault
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/SOCOM_3:_US_Navy_SEALS
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/MAG
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Let%2...sland_of_Spice
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Deus_Ex
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Dead_%27n%27_Furious
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Battl..._Bad_Company_2
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Battl..._Modern_Combat [We already have an article for one edition of the game at http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Battlefield_2 and this one has no screenshots]

Having looked through all of the game articles, Goldeneye is actually above average. Average for an article in the videogame category is a list of weapon names which are links, no images or only our existing stock gun images, and often no cover art.

Wow, those are impossibly bad.

Goldeneye isn't bad, I could do some work as I have it emulated, but no rush or anything.

PDZ is also not a bad choice, the guns in that one are fairly simple. I don't know if I can screen grab anything on that though.

EDIT:

WHHHHHAAAAAAAATTTT?
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Einhander
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Cross_Fire
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Soldier_Front
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Revolution_X

That last one is a fuckin' mess.

Wow, not sure how I missed Cross Fire. Soldier Front at least has a list of weapons [it's about as much as there was in the Far Cry article before I started on it] and I believe MPM has said the Einhander article is ok because it's written to a relatively good standard even if the content isn't exactly right for this Wiki, plus that at least some of the weapons are based on real ones. I didn't look at Revolution X that closely, and...wow. I never realised a firepower increase powerup was a type of gun.

Why do people even bother making arcade pages like Revolution X???

I saw a stainless Glock and a P99 for the first pistols. The Shockwave rifle is a Vektor CR-21, the SuperDragon IS a G36! The Magsec is an Auto-9.

I think there should be some sort of rule where you can't make a page unless you take the time to screencap
That way we won't have pages like this>
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Bottle_Rocket
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Snow_Dogs
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/2009:_Lost_Memories
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/317th_Platoon%2C_The
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/8MM
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/9th_Company
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Abyss%2C_The
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Across_the_universe
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Adam_Resurrected
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Air_America
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Airheads
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/All_Q...rn_Front_(1930)
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/All_Q...rn_Front_(1979)
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Along_Came_a_Spider
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Alpha_Dog
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Ambus...%C3%A4rven_tie)
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/American_Gun_(2006)
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Another_48_Hrs.
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Another_Stakeout
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Apocalypse_Now
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Armed_and_Dangerous
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Armored
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Assassins
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Assau...cinct_13_(1976)
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Atlan...he_lost_Empire

Seriously this would literally eliminate all those crappy pages and it would deter those people who come in and spend 3 seconds on a page and run off.

I disagree. Even if the page doesn't have screencaps, it can still be useful if (A.) The editor took the time to ID the guns and describe which characters use them, and (B.) If it's in proper format. Remember, the purpose of this site is to ID guns, and while pages without screencaps aren't preferable, they still have some useful function. Plus, the user still put SOME effort into them.

What I do hate - and what I continue to delete - are pages where the user obviously did only put 5 seconds into it. I've seen pages that feature nothing but a quick list of the guns used in the movie, without ANY description whatsoever of which characters used them, or gun photos, or page links. That is definitely laziness of a high order, and I don't tolerate that.

Screencapping Atlantis right now. That movie rules.

One of the few Disney animated flicks I can still stand to watch (no musical breaks to hate!).

I could tell the girl was using a C96 Broomhandle Mauser even when I was 11 and it kind of bugs me how the guy voiced by Tommy Lee Jones uses a Luger P08 and pulls the toggle directly back to cock it, instead of pivoting it up like it should. I remember the diggers also had a collection of SMLE rifles.

I personally Agree with MT2008. I have several videos on VHS that i can't screencap. With those I can either not make the page or I can make the best page I can and then see if i can find it on DVD or blu-ray and send the disk to GM45.

That being said as "Kiss of the Dragon" is being worked on by Excaliber. I am calling Dibs on the future page for the film "Nemisis".While I can't currently screencap the page I can at least get the boxcover art and put in the links and pictures.

I fixed it for you.

You still need to put it in proper format though. :o

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Rene_Russo

-edit nvm

Eh, again, my response is massively delayed because of my computer being gone, but I don't thing the Zombie Panic: Source page should be deleted strictly because it is a mod, especially since it's one of the few mods promoted by Steam, along with Insurgency and TrackMania. That is proof enough that the game is popular and therefore deserves to be on the site. Granted that in game there are names for each gun, and I have no idea what condition the actual page was in, just because it isn't an actual game doesn't mean we have to delete it. I think it should be put back up.

Well there are also alot of popular flashgames as well.
If Zombie Panic Source is allowed because of popularity then also will a load of flash-games like madness interactive and when crap like that is on the site
I personally think that the site has gone to hell.

.....

I think any legitimate game should be allowed so long as it has real weapons that can or need to be identified, including flash games. Sure there are a lot out there, and 95 percent of them are crap, but good flash gun games like Thing Thing (which was made by an actual gun enthusiast) should be fine. It's not like we don't or didn't have an influx of crappy pages before, so we should let the good ones through the filter and then delete the garbage like we have been doing. Also, stating that a more than legitimate game like ZP:S is a gateway to hell for the website is absurd. If that is the only argument against it, there is no good reason that the page should be deleted.

Well either Phoenixient or MoviePropMaster2008 said that user-made content will not be allowed on imfdb and the general rules are that if it does not appear on imdb it's not eligible to be in imfdb.

Yeah, legit Movies, TV shows, Anime, and Video Games are allowed. But not flash games. Those are crap, no matter how big of a gun enthusiast made them.

Things listed on IMDB only, with minor exceptions (like Rainbow Six: Vegas and Vegas 2 aren't listed on IMDB [properly], but they obviously have reason to be on the site).

I think you all are being a little too harsh in regard to flash, but I will set that aside because that isn't my point. ZP:S is still, as I have said before, a legitimate modification/game and the gateway theory as well as the fact that it isn't listed on the site we are mirroring is inconsequential. The site is for listing guns in various forms of media, and, thankfully, the mod/game I am arguing for has some ground to stand on and isn't total crap. It's on par with Insurgency, which is still allowed a page, and I know a lot of people who play it. We can bend the ironclad rules for it, I think.

Well I think a solution for the titles that are not listed on imdb would be whether or not it has a Publisher for video games.

When people are browsing the site I don't think they want to have to sort through all the amateurish 3rd party crap in order to get to the legitimate stuff.

We can restore the CS mod if neccessary, I see no problem with that. If the developers made the mod, it isn't a big deal.

It wasn't made by Valve, it was made by an independent team, but they have had this and a pre-source version and have done extensive work on their mods over the past few years, and their mod is recognized by steam so much so, it auto-updates on the steam page, just like all of the other games made by Valve. It's not 3rd party crap in the least.

Counterstrike has a Publisher and it is also listed on IMDB so it's eligible.

BTW Counterstrike is no longer considered a mod as it is standalone.

I was talking about ZP:S............

Well Zombie Panic Source......

*Is not on IMDB
*Is 3rd party
*Is a Mod
*Does not have a Publisher

That one definitely needs to go. I've spent a lot of time playing that game and I can assure you that even those few so-called likenesses are the results of overactive imaginations. All of the weapons in Deus Ex are fictional.

Oh come on now. :D

Oh hey, continuing on from my rant about wiki templates, when someone figures out how to code proper templates, we should create some of those maintenance tags to put at the top of articles signifying they need improvements of some sort. For example, a 'this article needs screenshots' tag. In fact, it could even be coded so it automatically adds whatever page it's placed on to a special maintenance category, like "Category:Pages without screenshots". That would make it a lot easier to find articles that need work done.

I think that can be said for a large amount of video game weapons.

"cough'PerfectDark'cough"

-This page has really crappy grammar

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Planet_Terror

I spent A LOT of time getting those screen shots for Perfect Dark and just to have it deleted because it was for "a 100 year old" console (the game was released in 2000) and because "Dongs is an idiot" is bit of a piss off for me. Granted it needed major clean up (especially after it was messed up) but it is considerably harder to fix when it no longer exists than it is to fix it and lock it.

GTA:VC came out in 2002 (by this boards math that's about 75 years old) should it be deleted?

And whats wrong with listing fictional weapons and GoldenEye 007 weapons?

Several fictional weapons have their own pages (i.e. "Terminators' " General Dynamics RSB-80 Plasma Gun) and if a gun is in a sequel list it. Should it say instead on Dr. No "The PPK was in all bond movies until Tomorrow Never Dies" and then remove the PPK from all movies in between?

Maybe creating an "Internet Video Game Firearm Database" and moving all the game stuff would be a good idea?

They were hideous emulator screenshots missing the background of the pause menu, so the weapon was sitting in a tiny box in the middle of a huge, useless black void. They're also still on the Wiki since nobody deleted them.

I asked several admins the same question, and they told me that only weapons which could possibly be confused for real devices should be covered; no ray guns unless they strongly resemble [or are] converted real guns. The fictional weapons with their own pages have either appeared in so many movies that people might consider them real devices, are real devices, or both. This hardly matches up with Perfect Dark's deformed dolphin railgun.

No, because Bond actually uses the weapon for something in later movies. The Goldeneye weapon section might as well just be a footnote in Perfect Dark since that's all the weapons are.

There is currently no known emulator (that I know of at least) that works "perfect" with this game and after all the screwing around people did on "GoldenEye 007" I figured a clear side shot (which can only be gotten in the menu) would be a better way to ID the guns than a rear view.

I plan to redo the entire Grindhouse collection in the future, so I'll fix that.