View Single Post
  #17  
Old 07-15-2011, 08:30 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
Actually, don't we already categorize firearms based on their relative barrel lengths and the type of role their cartridge plays? Just to take the G3 design, the basic firearm has been changed from the original battle rifle (the original G3 using 7.62mm NATO), to assault rifle (HK33 using 5.56mm NATO), to compact carbine (the HK53), to submachine gun (MP5 and its variants). Tightening up the PDW designation would allow for another manageable category.
Yes, we categorize firearms based on barrel lengths and types of cartridges, but "the type of role their cartridge plays"? No, not really. And you are stretching the definition of "role" here a little too far. The "role" of weapons like the P90 and MP7 is just not very different from that of submachine guns - they're basically CQB weapons that were designed to have slightly better range and penetration than submachine guns. "Analyzing" their ballistic performance is not necessary; try stepping back and looking at the bigger picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Tim View Post
The problem is, that assumes that everyone will actually visit Category:PDW rather than, say, seeing it at the bottom of one page and adding it to another it shouldn't be on thinking they're doing the right thing, or adding something incorrect to the SMG / PDW listing on a page, or suchlike. You wouldn't think to look for rules in Category:Assault Rifle before adding an M16 to a page, now would you?

It's far easier to just not use the term at all, that way people won't encounter it and so won't add it to things accidentally. You'd never put an XM8 compact or Magpul PDR into a category called "submachine gun," after all.
Exactly. When categories are vague at all, we're inviting these sorts of problems. And I'd rather not deal with them. Mazryonh is expecting people to be a little too much like him - which just does not seem reasonable.

And anyway, the bigger problem for me is that it seems a little too hard to take PDW seriously as an actual "category" of weapons that is highly distinct from "submachine guns". I know that there is now an article on Wikipedia which treats them as such, but IMFDB is not Wikipedia, and remember that while this site may strive to identify guns in the media, we are still ultimately not a firearms information Wiki per se.
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.

Last edited by MT2008; 07-15-2011 at 08:40 PM.
Reply With Quote