User talk:Tamarin88

From Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Welcome to IMFDB

Before you do any editing please take the time to read the Rules, Standards and Principles. This is a very important document that explains how this website is setup as well as telling you what is and isn't allowed. If it is determined by an admin that you have not read these rules, your account will be suspended. Continued non-compliance may result in a permanent ban. After that you should also read the IMFDB Screencapping Guide and the IMFDB Style Guide to familiarize yourself with the image and formatting requirements for pages you create.

There are a number of pages that desperately need your help. You can find these Incomplete pages here.

If you have any questions, feel free to post them here but make sure to sign your post by typing --~~~~.

Finally, IMFDB has a forum set up here that is only available to registered members. There is lots of good stuff to see there. If you would like to join the forum, please post HERE and an account will be created for you.

Now, HAPPY EDITING! bunni (talk) 15:27, 3 January 2019 (EST)

Civilization V

Are you still working on the Civilization V page? --Funkychinaman (talk) 07:40, 11 January 2019 (EST)

Yes, there's a few weapons I can ID that have to be added and I'll put the ones I can't on the talk page. --Tamarin88 (talk) 08:40, 11 January 2019 (EST)

Regarding some recent edits...

First off, I just want to say thank you for joining this site, and for all the work you're doing to improve it. That being said, I'm a bit confused by some of your recent edits. Many of them seem focused around paring down certain pages' text, which is understandable, but many of them also remove certain bits of interesting info in the process. Take, for instance, the incongruous file names for weapons in the CS:GO page, or the bit about the manufacturers of the Hi-Power on the Fallout: New Vegas page, or a number of other things. Sure, they might not be necessary per se, but there's no real harm in keeping them there (barring a notable exception, for which I am largely to blame, we're not exactly struggling to keep pages small enough); besides, if nothing else, they're at least interesting little tidbits of information. And while I can understand that you might want to make certain pages a bit more buttoned-down and serious-sounding, this can often make pages seem dry and bland - a certain user on this wiki has described some pages as "reading like a filing cabinet" or "sounding like an EULA". One of the main things that this wiki prides itself on is being able to provide useful, legitimate information, while still maintaining a certain level of lightheartedness that makes it more enjoyable to read. So, in the near future, I'll likely be rolling back some of your edits; I hope that this makes it clear as to why. Best of wishes, Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 18:46, 16 January 2019 (EST) P.S.: Also, regarding the Battlefield 1 info with the locked-back pistol slides, the main reason that I put the "justifying" bit in there is because you really can't notice the slides locking back on their own automatically unless you're really watching closely (or watching in slow motion), so anyone who's played the game and hasn't paid very close attention would take a look at your statement and think, "What? That's not true, I was playing the game just the other day, and I saw the gun lock open right when I fired out the last round, not when I started reloading." My explanation wasn't so much to "justify" as it was to "clarify"; without it, the statement might seem a bit confusing, or just plain wrong to someone who's not actively checking for stuff like this.

I removed the New Vegas Hi-Power info because it's speculation. It doesn't enhance the reader's knowledge of the gun's depiction in the game to speculate on how a ficitious gun company is making Hi-Powers. As for the CS:GO info, I deleted it because I was under the impression that datamined info wasn't something we did, and in any case the only really worthwhile piece of information there is there is the SIG556 having its correct name in the files. If you have any other concerns about my edits, please state them specifically so I can give my reasoning. As for humour, while I don't have any specific objection to it on the wiki, someone should tell the rulewriters if this wiki is meant to be somewhat lighthearted... --Tamarin88 (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2019 (EST)
With all due respect, Tamarin88, I have to point out that you don't really have the authority to go ahead and make such many decisions on your own, especially when you've only joined this site recently. Datamining inconsistencies that are worth pointing out are indeed allowed here, and humor is very common as well (we have admins that do it even more than regular users). As such, I must ask you to not make sudden changes for major stuff that was established here long ago (including your recent edit of the StG 45(M) on the WWII page, which you mainly did because you personally didn't like the joke), unless it's totally justified. Plus, Pyr0's point above regarding the slides locking back on their own is valid, and in regards to this you shouldn't go and cause edit warring (especially against many long-time experienced users regarding the same edit), and instead discuss it on the article's talk page. If you have issues about something major, please discuss them either on a specific topic's talk page, or on the Main Page's discussion. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:51, 17 January 2019 (EST)
I removed the joke because it was a confusing joke that could mislead readers as to why it is dirty. I could readd the Far Cry 2 part if it's that important to you. The rules also specifically state that humour is not allowed, so if the mods are engaging in it they should probably change the rules. If you have complaints about any other edits, please tell me. --Tamarin88 (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2019 (EST)
For the record the rule is to 'keep media pages as encyclopedic as possible', not 'absolutely no humor allowed on media pages whatsoever'. Yes humor and fun are meant to be kept more in discussion pages but media pages themselves aren't totally exempt from a bit of in-good-taste fun here and there as I understand it. Otherwise U94N said it, when in doubt, always use the talk page, it's what they're there for. Also, make sure to make any reply to discussions made on your page on the talk page of the one who made the discussion, as every user gets notified of any edit on their talk page and thus they know you've replied. StanTheMan (talk) 17:06, 17 January 2019 (EST)
The rule is, explicitly, "Humor and teasing to be kept in the Discussion pages, please". If this actually means "some humour is okay" it should be changed. Also, are you serious? Reply to users making posts on your talk page on their talk page? That is bizarre, totally contrary to any logical principles of how a talk page should work, totally contrary to how talk pages work on any other wiki, and makes discussions unreadable. If people can't bother checking the talk page of someone they're having a discussion with (or notice the notification on the recent changes list) that's their prerogative, but I'm not going to indulge them. --Tamarin88 (talk) 19:38, 17 January 2019 (EST)
It also says 'you don't have to check in your sense of humor at the door'. Ultimately it's not a complete and utter absolute - at least as I and others have understood it. I'm sorry if it isn't worded explicitly enough to suit you, but the site shouldn't and indeed doesn't prescribe every little thing down to the inth degree. That said as pointed out there's dozens of pages that have scant little blurbs and quips that while not absolutely necessary certainly don't hurt anything and do help with the 'dryness' of the wiki as U94N explained. That such bits may or may not suit you and only you is why you should check before making such changes. As for the talk page thing, again replying on the other gives them an automatic notification so they know someone said something on there, which they do not get if you edit your page unless they mark it as such. I suppose it isn't absolutely necessary given some of your points but it - like discussing certain edits - I believe is meant to be a courtesy. Something that seemingly never even crossed your mind. Having said that I have to say here and now that I find that that - and much of your other remarks and actions of late - to be indicative a whole attitude of what I can only describe as contempt for how we do many things on this site. An attitude that, while how we conduct ourselves may be odd or irregular, is still one I for one feel is both troubling and unwarranted. If I'm misunderstood then I apologize but it is the vibe you're displaying here as I see it and, well, like anyone else I can only call things as I see them. Again sorry if I've got it wrong there. StanTheMan (talk) 21:57, 17 January 2019 (EST)
If I challenge things like the talk page thing, it's because I feel they negatively affect the wiki. I'm not sure if it's contempt, but tradition can be a dangerous thing if left unchallenged. --Tamarin88 (talk) 06:14, 18 January 2019 (EST)
Hi, I'm an admin. Some humour is allowed, there's a particular amount of leeway granted on videogame pages. And the reason we prefer the alternating talk pages thing is because it gives a notification, rather than forcing people to check the recent changes. This is how wikis used to do it back in The Old Days (it was how you did it on Wikipedia before they put in that notification thingy). Please don't be obnoxious. Evil Tim (talk) 06:44, 18 January 2019 (EST)
I can understand why alternating talk pages are kept, but I think this is probably a case where IMFDB should update itself to match standard practice on other wikis. As for humour and the rules, while I do agree that some humour has a place on the wiki, if the admins want to avoid confusion the rules should be clarified - "you don't have to check in your sense of humor at the door" is not clear enough. --Tamarin88 (talk) 11:11, 18 January 2019 (EST)
Well, we have to work with what we have. And I just clarified them, so no problem there. Evil Tim (talk) 03:33, 19 January 2019 (EST)
The point of clarifying the rules would be that admins don't have to clarify them to everyone who misinterperts them. --Tamarin88 (talk) 04:55, 19 January 2019 (EST)
It's fine, don't worry about it. Evil Tim (talk) 07:27, 19 January 2019 (EST)

Same issue as before

Hello. I understand that you're trying to help building pages on this website, which you're more than welcome to do. However, there's a major issue with you that you need to fix, which is your constant preoccupation (if not obsession) with making unnecessary removals. You've been already notified about this before, and yet you're still doing it. For starters, the Enfield No. 2 issue on the WWII page already had me concerned, and while I finally opted not to keep it due to the reasons I stated on the discussion page, you still behaved rather poorly and were incredibly insistent on it by causing edit warring. What you should have done instead is discussed it on the talk page (which I ended up doing, but it was on you to do it in the first place, since you're the one who insisted on changing a long-time established edit, regardless of whether the user who wrote it regretted it or not). And now with the VMG 1927 you went ahead and removed attachment images, even though I did say that they were fine (and the extended mag view is even more important, yet you removed it as well - I'm not sure why you did it, considering that you're the one who uploaded it). For the record, we do show images of weapon with and without attachments on IMFDB pages (including CoD), even if it's not the case on literally every page. It might probably sound a bit asshol-ish from me to tell you "if I say it should be kept, then you shouldn't remove it", but I will be straightforward and tell you that you have to take into consideration the fact that me and the other users who talked to you above are long-term editors with many years of experience, and we know what we're doing. Now this doesn't mean we're always right, everyone makes mistakes after all, but we still have the necessary knowledge about how this site operates, and what type of content should be added/kept or removed. As such, I'm seriously asking you to be careful, and please don't edit in an unpleasant way as described above. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2019 (EDT)

COD:WW2 Variant Images

First of all, a big thank you for adding those variants to the page; really didn't think we were going to be able to get those. That being said, for future reference (it's not a big enough deal to replace the old ones, but it'd be good for any others that you might add in the future), would you mind turning the model to the left? It'd let people get a clearer view of the weapon. Just a suggestion, do with it as you please. Sincerely, Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 22:48, 22 April 2019 (EDT) P.S.: Keep up the good work!

I have a few that haven't been uploaded yet, but if I take more in the future I will move them a bit to the left, though not too much. --Tamarin88 (talk) 04:18, 23 April 2019 (EDT)
Thanks! Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 08:14, 23 April 2019 (EDT)



Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Categories
Special
Social Media
Toolbox