imfdb.org

imfdb.org (http://forum.imfdb.org/index.php)
-   imfdb (http://forum.imfdb.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Recent Weapon Page Descriptions (http://forum.imfdb.org/showthread.php?t=2533)

StanTheMan 09-26-2017 06:11 AM

Recent Weapon Page Descriptions
 
It seems some weapon pages lately have had very lengthy descriptions added onto them. Too lengthy I daresay, at least in regards to the general site ahestetic and more importantly the RSP section on the matter. Granted I personally enjoy the reads and appreciate Tim's work on 'em but otherwise I think it's maybe going overboard a tad. At least to be shown on the main pages.

Made a note about this on one page but noticed a few others had the same thing lately - Was about to make a post in the Main discussion page on the site.. and *then* remembered I can just post about it here. So.. here we are.

Evil Tim 09-26-2017 07:17 AM

Well what I'm trying to do with these is mainly have a section regarding what the weapon should be shown doing to try to educate people on what it's usually not shown doing: before I started researching it, I honestly thought the M47 Dragon was just a dumbfire launcher like the AT-4 (because it's usually shown that way), and had no idea about the ridiculous space magic they tried with the missile.

I've split up the Ross page a little, but I don't think the other two give more detail than what's required to explain what they are and what they ought to be doing if they're there: there's a myth that only the .30-06 Chauchat was bad, whereas actually they were both bad and the .30-06 was so instantly recognisable as such that it was hardly even used.

StanTheMan 09-26-2017 05:12 PM

As usual for me I fall back to what is explicitly stated - That being to keep background info brief and not have too much information stated on pages.

That said, it is certainly valuable info worthy of note, not saying anything to the contrary. Just saying it looks a bit excessive by comparison to most pages. Of course we could work those other gun pages up, but that would be daunting effort and I think doing so would cross more into 'gun encyclopedia' territory.

I've seen other cases where there's been big historical info for weapons and it's been kept on talk pages, with the front being considerably more condensed - JCordell has done it this way with the Searcy/Double Rifle page and some revolver pages. Eh, just a thought.

S&Wshooter 09-26-2017 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StanTheMan (Post 43812)
Granted I personally enjoy the reads and appreciate Tim's work on 'em but otherwise I think it's maybe going overboard a tad

I'm pretty sure it's in the rules that Tim can do whatever he wants

Evil Tim 09-26-2017 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S&Wshooter (Post 43819)
I'm pretty sure it's in the rules that Tim can do whatever he wants

Oh, the Paul Verhoeven rule, yes.

(Famous behind-the-scenes quote from Basic Instinct, directed at Joe Eszterhas: "Joe, I am the director and you are the writer. Which means that I am right and you are wrong, ja?")

StanTheMan 09-27-2017 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S&Wshooter (Post 43819)
I'm pretty sure it's in the rules that Tim can do whatever he wants

Must have missed that section. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Tim (Post 43820)
Oh, the Paul Verhoeven rule, yes.

(Famous behind-the-scenes quote from Basic Instinct, directed at Joe Eszterhas: "Joe, I am the director and you are the writer. Which means that I am right and you are wrong, ja?")

As a RoboCop nut I am quite aware of that Verhoeven fellow. That said, to paraphrase a John Goodman character, the Dutchman is not the issue here.. :p

Evil Tim 09-27-2017 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StanTheMan (Post 43824)
Must have missed that section. :rolleyes:



As a RoboCop nut I am quite aware of that Verhoeven fellow. That said, to paraphrase a John Goodman character, the Dutchman is not the issue here.. :p

Well, I'd point out large gun descriptions aren't without precedent and there's ones I didn't write too. My interpretation is some of the standards (which you'll note is separate from the "rules" at the top) is they're not inviolable laws: if there's a decent reason to have more text, there should be more text (much like there might be a good reason to have 11 images of something, but you shouldn't try to have more than 10). If you look at pages like the one for the TEC-9 (which MPM wrote), there's six large paragraphs of description text which include basically the entire history of the weapon, and there's a lot of pages like MG42 and StG44 which have had more than two paragraphs up top for ages.

StanTheMan 09-27-2017 06:24 PM

Indeed, in fact I'm sure there's other pages around as well I either forgot to mention or just plain forgot.. Minimi/SAW has a good bit of stuff, I think some shotguns also.. no doubt others - all told, fair enough there. In the case of the TEC-9 page I have to point out it's not a entirely apples-to-apples comparison -It has what would otherwise be a essay of info spread out the page in multiple sections whcih makes it subsequently look a lot cleaner - but that said no way to do that on a page with only one weapon variant/type so there it is there.

Appearance aside, I suppose the only other issue is that with many other pages looking quite sparse next to these there will be a push to build up these other weapon pages with info (that in fairness can be almost as easily found elsewhere) and thus take away attention at listing and IDing weapons on the media - that is, the point of the site. Even then though.. perhaps that's being a bit much. I and others have bitched about that kinda thing elsewhere and it seems to not end up being that big a deal. I still think there's something to the whole KISS concept to be said here, but end of the day, not like I can't live with it. Indeed like I said I enjoy the info.

Was hoping to get some other admin input on this but perhaps Tim does run everything and the others just pop in and out for fun. :p

Jcordell 10-02-2017 05:39 PM

I'm guilty of creating a few weapons pages with lots of historical information. However that's okay because it's interesting and I just know that everyone wants to read that information.:)

However, in all seriousness, over the past few years I've become more judicious in what I put on the weapons page. As was pointed out I've moved much of the neat to know stuff to the discussion page.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.