imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > imfdb

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 07-16-2011, 05:27 PM
Evil Tim's Avatar
Evil Tim Evil Tim is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The surface of the sun
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MT2008 View Post
True, but I just feel that the list of grenade launchers is short enough that this isn't a problem.
22 GLs, 12 underbarrel launchers. I'd say that's a reasonable enough size for a sub-category, and it is useful to have since there are a lot of imitation underbarrel launchers floating around. Though it does strike me as a little counter-productive to put UBGL and Grenade Launcher cats on each entry, rather than having UBGL entries on their own sub-page.

I think the fundamental question for any gun category looking to justify its existence is "will this help people search for weapons that look similar?"

Though I have removed the UBGL cat from less-lethal firearm, because it doesn't make any sense at all for that to be listed as a subclass of the UBGL category.

Last edited by Evil Tim; 07-16-2011 at 05:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-16-2011, 05:37 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Tim View Post
22 GLs, 12 underbarrel launchers. I'd say that's a reasonable enough size for a sub-category, and it is useful to have since there are a lot of imitation underbarrel launchers floating around. Though it does strike me as a little counter-productive to put UBGL and Grenade Launcher cats on each entry, rather than having UBGL entries on their own sub-page.

I think the fundamental question for any gun category looking to justify its existence is "will this help people search for weapons that look similar?"
When you put it that way, I guess it's not all bad. Bearing in mind that the purpose of this site is to identify guns in media (an endeavor that is based upon visual perception), I suppose grouping weapons by similar appearance isn't a bad way to go. Plus, we also have categories such as "bullpup", which serve the same purpose.
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-16-2011, 05:53 PM
Evil Tim's Avatar
Evil Tim Evil Tim is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The surface of the sun
Posts: 740
Default

Just to explain further, this is the heading text to Category:UBGL:

Quote:
If you are creating a page for a UBGL (Under Barrel Grenade Launcher) make sure to add [[Category:Gun]],[[Category:Grenade Launcher]] and [[Category:UBGL]] to the the page so that it is listed in this category.
Now, the way I see it, we shouldn't add Category:Grenade Launcher to these; rather, they should only be on Category:UGBL, which is a sub-page of Category:Grenade Launcher. That way we have one list for underbarrel launchers which is a sub-category of the main one, and a main list of everything that isn't in the sub-category.

The current setup would be like if Category:Cat was a sub-list of Category:Feline, but there was no list of only felines that weren't cats. Fine if you want to find a housecat, not so useful if you're left sifting through housecats trying to find a type of lion.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-22-2011, 10:43 PM
Mazryonh Mazryonh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 264
Default

If I may, one way to solve a potential category problem between Machine Pistols that could qualify as Compact Submachine Guns (and therefore inclusion into the "Submachine Gun" category) is to post a quick rule that could clarify this problem. The classic MAC-10 and Skorpion, for instance, have been called both a submachine gun and a machine pistol at different times. A solution to this fuzzy area would be to posit that a true submachine gun has both a buttstock and a dedicated space to put your offhand out of the box--without both these features, the MAC-10, the MP5K, the TEC-9, etc. are machine pistols.

Of course, if you decided to buy an elongated upper receiver that includes a vertical foregrip mounting point for your MAC-10, then you could call it a full-fledged submachine gun. I'm driven to wonder if the finished product could compete with its more modern cousin the HK UMP45.

(Does anyone else feel that this discussion about categories in general be split into a new thread?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Tim View Post
You wouldn't think to look for rules in Category:Assault Rifle before adding an M16 to a page, now would you?
No, but I did happen to read the definition of Assault Rifles and Battle Rifles on wikipedia before versions of those defining features were posted on this wiki. In any case, when someone drafts up a comprehensive "how to edit or create new pages" guide on this site, there should definitely be a reference to how "when you look to add a firearm to the various categories, please consult the defining features of that category before adding it."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MT2008 View Post
But anyway, separating PDWs (which represent a comparatively minor trend in firearm history) from SMGs would be almost as ridiculous as insisting that we come up with three new categories for revolvers. If you wish to argue for that, too, then be my guest.
No, I don't believe that revolvers should be split into old forms and new forms (though I think there could be a supercategory for "Black Powder Firearms" that could be useful for someone who quickly wanted to find firearms that were made and used before the smokeless powder revolution). However, revolvers have not changed their role since they were introduced, that being very short-range defense, and in a pinch, offense at that range. Submachine guns have changed from being very mobile support weapons for slower-firing battle rifles in WWII, to being relegated to police or special forces work in modern times due to the rise of body armour and assault rifles amongst modern militaries. The PDW in this sense is supposed to update the submachine concept by virtue of its new rounds, and would fulfill that CQB role now more effectively against targets wearing body armour proof against pistol rounds.

I don't see what you meant when you said that I "bought into the hype." I would think that purely on the basis of their shorter cases and lighter bullets, PDW rounds give less muzzle flash/blast and less recoil than most 5.56mm carbines would. Isn't that simply a function of the physics behind the firearms in question? I didn't say anything like "second-line personnel in First-World armies should ditch their 5.56mm ultracompact carbines for FN P90s" or the like. The costs for PDW guns and ammunition could easily come down if more competition was introduced as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MT2008 View Post
Um, making incorrect edits is hardly grounds for banning by itself.
I was under the impression that we might introduce "privilege levels" for users on the wiki. For example, the forum currently distinguishes between "Senior," "Junior," and other levels of members right now, but doesn't award differing levels of posting privileges. A site like GameFAQs does, however--users gain "Karma" points by posting or contributing within the rules, and gain a bigger post limit the more karma points they accrue. A similar system governing the number of edits or picture contributions could help to cut the unwanted "noise" by unscrupulous users, such as limiting the amount of edits to pages they can make, followed by (temporary) revocation of such privileges if they prove undeserving.

In any case, I'd like a verdict soon on this. I'm glad we've had a civil discussion about this so far, but I'd like to know if we're going to live and let live for this category, or euthanize it.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-23-2011, 07:27 AM
Evil Tim's Avatar
Evil Tim Evil Tim is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The surface of the sun
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
A solution to this fuzzy area would be to posit that a true submachine gun has both a buttstock and a dedicated space to put your offhand out of the box--without both these features, the MAC-10, the MP5K, the TEC-9, etc. are machine pistols.
Um, I've never heard the MP5K called a machine pistol before. Machine pistol is another one with no fixed definition since every standard definition has something that doesn't qualify when it should or should when it doesn't. Really it's only a useful term to describe fullauto versions of existing pistol designs, as soon as you start using it to describe things like MACs and TECs you enter a world of headachery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
A similar system governing the number of edits or picture contributions could help to cut the unwanted "noise" by unscrupulous users, such as limiting the amount of edits to pages they can make, followed by (temporary) revocation of such privileges if they prove undeserving.
Realistically speaking such a system solves a problem we don't really have. We're a pretty close-knit group, we all know who everyone is without needing a little icon to tell us, and newbies shouldn't take that long to learn the ropes if they keep their eyes and ears open. People who want to cause trouble will cause trouble under any system, and we have a good group of people who watch the recent changes for that kind of thing as it is.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-23-2011, 03:27 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
However, revolvers have not changed their role since they were introduced, that being very short-range defense, and in a pinch, offense at that range. Submachine guns have changed from being very mobile support weapons for slower-firing battle rifles in WWII, to being relegated to police or special forces work in modern times due to the rise of body armour and assault rifles amongst modern militaries. The PDW in this sense is supposed to update the submachine concept by virtue of its new rounds, and would fulfill that CQB role now more effectively against targets wearing body armour proof against pistol rounds.
The key word here is update the submachine gun concept. "Updating" does not mean some fundamental re-definition of the role. The P90 and its ilk were meant to fulfill the exact same role as 9mm submachine guns (close-quarters battle), except with an improvement in capabilities. This is, as I have argued repeatedly, not an ability that is worthy of constituting an entire new class of firearms. Especially since PDWs haven't caught on with either law enforcement or military. And that's why I don't want them to have a new category unto themselves.

Also, a discussion of how SMGs' role has changed since WWII is completely irrelevant to the SMG/PDW distinction. I have no idea what the hell you're on about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
I don't see what you meant when you said that I "bought into the hype."
It's simple: Manufacturers have promoted the PDW as some revolutionary new class of firearms that are so innovative that they don't deserve to be called mere "submachine guns". You seem to agree.

And please do not give me another response where you quote all sorts of ballistic info and stuff. I'm getting a little tired of hearing it. It's not relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
I was under the impression that we might introduce "privilege levels" for users on the wiki. For example, the forum currently distinguishes between "Senior," "Junior," and other levels of members right now, but doesn't award differing levels of posting privileges. A site like GameFAQs does, however--users gain "Karma" points by posting or contributing within the rules, and gain a bigger post limit the more karma points they accrue. A similar system governing the number of edits or picture contributions could help to cut the unwanted "noise" by unscrupulous users, such as limiting the amount of edits to pages they can make, followed by (temporary) revocation of such privileges if they prove undeserving.
Wow, you do love to make life complicated, don't you? Bro, we're not GameFAQs; we're a Wiki (and they're not, last I checked).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
In any case, I'd like a verdict soon on this.
It's simple: The PDW category is going. End of discussion.
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.