|
|
|
|
#1
10-02-2009, 01:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
"Everything is impossible until somebody does it - Batman RIP Kevin Conroy, the one true Batman 
|
|
#2
10-02-2009, 03:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
That is why I like to screen-cap movies with older firearms such as The Ghost and the Darkness and Crossfire Trail. I find that most fan boys aren't interested in older firearms so they stay away.
But we all make mistakes. MPM2008 corrected an error I made on The Stand when I screen-capped it. I identified a Mossberg 590 Mariner as a Winchester Model 1300 Marine. Whoops. But he stepped in and fixed it. Quietly and without being an ass about it. Gracias. If I see something that isn't correct I always try to include some info explaining why I changed something. I'm big into firearms and I also own many many books about firearms. That helps when I make a correction. But i have come across some "corrections" that are just amazingly moronic.
|
|
#3
10-02-2009, 03:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 I must admit that everyone gets a little 'punchy' when we've corrected a lot of errors. At least you've seen some of the "Corrections" that 'drive by" members do that are either sloppy or misinformed. I recently got irritated when some new unknown member changed a bunch of pages by renaming the gun, but the manufacturer didn't make that name change until a certain year, so he is wrong by renaming all the entries for that weapon before the year of the name change. Arghhhh. I can see where he 'got his information' (he looked it up on the mfg website, which of course only lists CURRENT models, not older ones). Anyway, anyone can make ANY change to any page, but that person MUST be right. People only get mad when the change is wrong. Seriously. Anyone can correct any info I put out as long as it's correct. I've been corrected in the past and we all build on our body of knowledge by absorbing new and correct data.
|
|
#4
10-02-2009, 05:07 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I totally agree with you MPM. I know that you have corrected me from time to time and frankly I'd love to put my Remington M-700P next to one of your M-700PSS models so that we can visually show the differance as I know that there are some 700P entries that look funny to me.
|
|
#5
10-02-2009, 10:01 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Also the noobs need to learn how to spell
I've seen people adding details or 'commentary' on photos or movie pages, but the spelling is atrocious. Nothing knocks down the professionalism of a page than wretched spelling like it is done by a 7 yr old.
|
|
#6
10-02-2009, 02:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
10-02-2009, 05:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
10-28-2009, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well as much as i hate misleading information, and "newbies" ignorant enough to post misleading information, i dont quite see your quarrel. Should every nerd who’s experiences with weapons doesn’t stretch beyond the basics of some half life gameplay refrain from creating pages? Id say that most people interested in weapons are enthused by computer games. In particular when it comes to the younger generation. And if you are to ban all these I think that IMFDB would end up being a rather empty page. We cant all be gun veterans.
Now ive never fired an m4 and I don’t own any Glock and frankly my only actually interest in weapons is inspired by computer games. But I don’t need any personal experiences if I can refer to relevant sources with the fact I need. I thinking about rewriting the page about Counter Strike Source.  Mostly by adding rather then changing. I think we could do with some more screen caps and criticism when it comes unrealistic details. Like the AUG firing the AK ammo or the 50 cal Deagle not being able to kill an enemy in two shots.
|
|
#9
10-30-2009, 11:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
And I don't believe we will become empty if we banned (which we don't do) newbie members from putting in crap info. There are plenty of members out there who would be happy to step up to the standards as set forth by the most senior and active membership & moderators. But having to constantly correct wrong entries become very tiresome.
|
|
#10
10-31-2009, 02:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Oh not at all. I do apologize if my message was unclear but we need to distinguish the difference between what users can do and what users should do. I am of course not suggesting that an experience with computer games would justify anyone to post unfounded information. But I do rather think that you should define good authors out of their ambition rather than their experiences with weapons (which I understand cant be matched with an erudite gun-Nestor like yourself) but might nonetheless be relevant. When reading your post one could get the impression that you are generalizing a category of users which, of course, is wrong. And there are times where an author has to draw a few conclusions himself without proper facts to back it up. And when It comes to these conclusions “noobs” might wanna think twice before writing anything down. A suitable elucidation might come from a more experienced writer this noob is to contact. That’s just one of many solutions. So instead of writing of all CoD-playing newbies as disparaging spreaders of “erroneous” information we could try posting another help-thread with guidelines to motivate new users. Yet another suggestion
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
