Quote:
Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008
The problem in the past is that people have split apart pages and did a crap job of fleshing out the page. IF there is a large number of people who hold a 'misconception' that they are related, then you are obliged to write some sort of coherent introduction for the gun page to EXPLAIN why this is so. For one, tons of people put PPSh-41s and PPS-43s in the same lineage. So much so that tons of folks for years erroneously called them PPSH-43s (myself included).
As for the S&W pages, it's all about people finding the right gun when they are looking for it. No one intuitively knows that a certain line of guns are just improvements of the previous models. WE KNOW that because we've been researching it. But the lay public doesn't. We are working against IMFDB's craptacularly BAD search function. It doesn't do fuzzy searches like IMDB does. So remember that a gun can't be un-findable to the general public when you think long term about doing a massive reformat.
|
At the first part, I agree that it needs to be done right, so let him do it right, and if he doesn't do it right, revert it all back, or have someone do it correctly. At the end of the day, the change should still be done if we're going to be continuous with a certain format of keeping like guns together and unlike guns apart (the definition of "like" being guns that are clones or mechanical descendants or something like that), kind of like the M16 and 1911 pages.
As for the S&W pages, yes, finding the gun is the most important thing, but that just means we need to do proper redirect pages after they have been combined. We do this on the M16 page, the 1911 page and the Beretta 92 page, to name a few, so why should the S&W Automatics, which all share mechanical lineage with a few original pistols, be split up?