Talk:Armsel Striker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] List of Varients

At five different varients by two different manufacturers I think it's time for a varient section. So far we have the Armsel Strtiker, the Armsel Protecta, the Armsel Protecta Bulldog, the Cobray/SWD Streetsweaper, and the Cobray/ SWD Ladies home companion.Paulwharton 17:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official Title

As DAO-12 is the name of the weapon in a Video game. Shouldn't the page use the real world name for this weapon? Every reliable source I can find states the weapon's name as Either the Armel Striker/Protecta/ Protecta Bulldog or as the Cobray "Streetsweaper". -- Paulwharton 21:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to create a subpage.--Holocron 16:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to see if I can clear this mess up. Arctic-Editor 10:53, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

something sounds wrong about the LA Riots example of a situation in which this weapon would be useful, could it maybe be changed to "any event of civil unrest in which the bearer's life, limb, or property were at stake"? -anonymous

Yes, 65.32.197.91, it could. Go ahead and change it.--Holocron 12:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I can find no source for the name "DAO-12" besides Battlefield 2. Does anyone have any further information? Zod 16:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

every source of information I can find on this firearm refers to it as the Armsel Striker or Protecta.I think that we should re-name the article to reflect this. Paulwharton 10:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pancor Jackhammer

This gun bears a striking resemblance to the Pancor Jackhammer. Does anyone know what the relation between these two is?

-- MiG 01:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

They are completly unrelated designs.

-- Paulwharton 12:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] list of firearms in films

I've moved the fiction list to list of firearms in films. See What wikipedia is not.CynicalMe 18:05, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] .410-bore model?

I recently saw a .410 model made by Cobray. Anyone know what this is and if it should be added to the article?

I've handled one, Cobray Took the trigger group of a Street Sweeper and attached a .410/.45 long colt drum and barrel to it. It is officially called the SWD Ladies Home Companion.

-- Paulwharton 03:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. Maybe this should be added to the article. 71.93.238.214 17:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Popular Examples

Though specific examples elude me at the moment the DAO-12 very much resembles the 'Streetsweeper" type of shotgun popularized in video games and moves. Though I can't give specific names at the moment, my first thought about shotguns if not of the saw-offed variety then of the streetsweeper. I am not a hunter nor have I been in the military so my knowledge of shotguns is limited to the sort of exposure I mentioned before. Merely upon seeing the picture I thought of the nickname streetsweeper which is indicative of popular culture.

What I propose is that a list be formed here on the discussion page and that once 4-5 examples of its usage in fictional settings or non-military examples is reached that a section dedicated to its reputation outside of military use. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Helioglyph (talk • contribs) 13:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

"Striker" is another name for said weapon. Featured in Resident Evil 4. Shorttail 17:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Yup, obviously its reference in culture should be mentioned in the article. Because this kind of coverage of it is exactly what gives it the degree of notability which it has. And after all that is one of the key areas that enables it to have a wikipedia article in the first place! So to reduce and cut out such coverage seems to be highly conter productive. There use to be a good section in the article about it in popular culture, but another editor has been persistent in its removal due to their belief any such mention of this kind of notability of the weapon should be kept out of the article! Mathmo Talk 00:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Designers thought it looked cool"

LWF removed the popular culture references with the above message, believing that this means it doesn't have anything to do with notability. Yet it does, they have "noted" this gun as such in their games. Would they have done this for a totally obscure weapon nobody has heard of, or famous weapons that people can identify with? Naturally, such references as this shows the notability of the weapon. Mathmo Talk 02:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The entry was trivial, that's why I reverted it. There is a clear policy, and these games don't meet it. There is an easy way of determining notability, is the game (or pop culture item) commonly associated with the gun? An example could be the Walther PPK, which is almost synonymous with James Bond in the public's mind, so much so that gun shops will frequently advertise it as "James Bond's gun". Somehow I don't see these pop culture references as being of the same notability; the game designers could have gone with the Saiga-12 or the SPAS-15, and no difference would have been made to those guns in real-life. See WP:MILHIST#POP and WP:GUNS#Pop culture for two policies on this kind of thing.--LWF 03:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The links you have supplied show a confusion between what is policy and what is just writings by a project. This section does illustrate notability, how would the average person (who is not already interested in guns) know about this gun? 99.99% of the time through popular media examples such as Max Payne, Far Cry, etc... Without the existence of these references in popular media you are wiping out the knowledge of existence of this gun (in a sense, its notability) from millions of people's minds. Mathmo Talk 03:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Does the average person really care that it was used in a video game? In my experience, the people that care are those who already know. Also, as to your comment about the projects, both of those policies were arrived at by consensus by both projects, and since Wikipedia is editted by consensus...--LWF 03:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The purpose of wikipedia is not to educate those who already know! Mathmo Talk 03:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps this discussion should be taken over to WT:GUNS to reach a consensus.--LWF 03:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

On reading the previous policy links and what they say about popular culture I have to say deleate the trivia section.it adds nothing of substance to the article and the weapon is known outside of videogames and films. The weapon in question is notable due to its design let alone it's media image. Paulwharton 23:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course it is known outside of its coverage in the popular media, just like it also obviously gains part of its total notability due to its many repeated mentions in popular culture. Mathmo Talk 07:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Matho, I sugest you seriously read the Trivia section policy again. so far all you have posted is unrelated information. adding a line like: the Armsel Striker's distinctive looks makes it popular in visual media apearing in numerous films and video games.(a few examples given). would be apropriate but a trivia section would not be so. do you understand what I am trying to say?Paulwharton 17:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Just out of curiousity, do you have any evidence for your claims that the games made the Striker more famous?--LWF 20:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

In doing some looking to try and see if any of the trivia information was valid. All I can say is that due to BF2 there are alot of uninformed people using the name DAO-12 for the design. other than that there is really no notable popular culture referances.Paulwharton 23:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rhodesia

Isn't the phrase "After Rhodesia fell..." a tad POV. Couldn't a more politically neutral phrasing be developed?Rykalski (talk) 23:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)