Since the gun Wiki is now a lot more extensive, a few agreements of reverting some aliases have been made.

Take the m16 and m4; both because of the gun Wiki being more detailed and the fact that these are famous guns, has caused them to be separated from assault rifle.

Here comes the point: what other weapons should have their own tag? Got any suggestions? I have the feeling I'm missing a few.
Please take a few things into account:

• the gun needs to be recognizable and quite distinct from the rest
• the gun needs to be decently popular. Images with guns like this are never drawn and shouldn't get tagged in detail.
• no alternate versions (m4a2, m16a5, etc.). Just the brand is enough (except if said brand makes a large variety of weapons)
• guns like grenade launchers, laser rifles or missiles etc. generally don't need alternate version tags
• revolvers don't need alternate versions either, since they're mostly similar

This is what the Wiki contains at the moment (not completely quoted):

Handguns

• handgun
• revolver (a revolver is not a pistol)
• pistol
• desert eagle
• glock

Rifles

• rifle
• laser rifle
• plasma rifle
• sniper rifle
• assault rifle
• ak-47
• famas
• m16
• m4

Shotguns

• shotgun
• sawed-off shotgun

SMGs

• submachine gun
• mac-10
• p90
• thompson gun
• uzi

What's on my mind so far:

• beretta (pistol)
• ak_(weapon) / kalashnikov_(weapon) (so that all the variants of the kalashnikov are caught under it. Another option is to tag everything that even remotely looks like an ak-47 as ak-47, but I'm less enthusiast about that idea)
• awp (sniper rifle)
• barrett (sniper rifle)
• hunting rifle
• carbine
• m60 (machine gun. Currently in use but not yet part of what is to be tagged)
• mp5 (submachine gun)
• ppsh (assault rifle)

All just ideas, not direct suggestions, but please leave your opinion on them.

Also, if the tag group:weapons Wiki is missing anything, both guns and gun accessories, please notify me about it.

Well one immediately coming to my mind would be this one. There are currently two post tagged with aug, but I'm not sure if we just use that or the full name since it would be the correct label, but it can be aliased easily enough.

Jatix said:
Well one immediately coming to my mind would be this one. There are currently two post tagged with aug, but I'm not sure if we just use that or the full name since it would be the correct label, but it can be aliased easily enough.

It's indeed a quite distinct assault rifle, but it lacks popularity in terms of appearances in furry art. I haven't seen many of them on e621, but I do believe that it's worth keeping as a tag.

Bumping this. The ranged_weapon tag has over 7000 posts, of which most are guns, so it'd be nice to see this wiki project finished (and it's already looking pretty damn impressive).

I'm trying to think what would be the best way to justify any particular gun having it's own tag.

Should it be:

• Number of posts the gun appears in?
• The uniqueness of the gun's appearance?
• A combination of both?

Of course what we ideally want is for us to have tags for everything that needs one without flooding the site with way too many tags, which I think will be an issue here (as well as for melee_weapons. See forum #162601).

Personally, out of the list HotUnderTheCollar suggested above, I'd +1 beretta, hunting_rifle and mp5.

DragonFox69 said:
Bumping this. The ranged_weapon tag has over 7000 posts, of which most are guns, so it'd be nice to see this wiki project finished (and it's already looking pretty damn impressive).

I'm trying to think what would be the best way to justify any particular gun having it's own tag.

Should it be:

• Number of posts the gun appears in?
• The uniqueness of the gun's appearance?
• A combination of both?

Of course what we ideally want is for us to have tags for everything that needs one without flooding the site with way too many tags, which I think will be an issue here (as well as for melee_weapons. See forum #162601).

Personally, out of the list HotUnderTheCollar suggested above, I'd +1 beretta, hunting_rifle and mp5.

I honestly have no idea where to stand on that. I used to be of the belief that we should be as general as possible and avoid tagging specific guns all the time, unless they're in a class of their own. But now I'm not so sure.

I think a good policy would be to use the way we tag cars as a reference. Do we give cars unique tags (including the particularly iconic ones)? I haven't looked into it but I think "Humvee" is used as a tag...

Fenrick said:
I honestly have no idea where to stand on that. I used to be of the belief that we should be as general as possible and avoid tagging specific guns all the time, unless they're in a class of their own. But now I'm not so sure.

I think a good policy would be to use the way we tag cars as a reference. Do we give cars unique tags (including the particularly iconic ones)? I haven't looked into it but I think "Humvee" is used as a tag...

My view on tags:

• Less underscores > More underscores
• Words > Acronyms, model numbers, and portmanteaus
• Not obscure/general > obscure/overly specific (unless it involves a fetish :V)

That being said, I care less about people tagging some_gun_m25_carbide_mk3 than I used to, but I definitely won't bother with implications for those. I have little experience with guns, so I tend to rely on other users and tag counts to gauge how obscure or overly specific it is.

Either way, I'm open to suggestion. :)

parasprite said:
I care less about people tagging some_gun_m25_carbide_mk3 than I used to, but I definitely won't bother with implications for those. I have little experience with guns, so I tend to rely on other users and tag counts to gauge how obscure or overly specific it is.

Either way, I'm open to suggestion. :)

No worries, I will take care of the Wiki along any other volunteers.

I received a bit of feedback on the suggestions. I had kind of hoped for a bigger discussion, but it appears guns aren't hot topics. Nevertheless, thanks to the individuals who took initiative.
So, what about me starting to tag and make Wiki's for:

• awp
• barrett
• beretta
• carbine (this one was needed for a while)
• hunting rifle

If you search these up, you will immediately recognize a distinct pattern in these kind of guns and therefore my motivation to begin using them as tags.

Agreed with these so far? The rest will probably be discussed in the future.

Personally, I feel we would be better served by having firearms-related tags simplified:

handgun

• pistol
• revolver

rifle

• sniper_rifle (perhaps)

sub_machinegun

machinegun

shotgun

This would alleviate absurd arguments over a gun being, say, an M16-A1 or an M16-A2:

- this is CLEARLY an M16-A1, as denoted by the hexagonal shape of the select-fire-toggle-switch retaining pin

- moron, you are obviously are overlooking the shape of the A2 carry-handle-with-integrated-optic

(please excuse the hyperbole for artistic license).

Yes, I know that HotUnderTheCollar is suggesting doing away with such trivialities regarding specifics, yet I have a point to make here (somewhere).

Fact of the matter is, with the detail level of the vast majority of artwork posted here, it is near impossible to accurately identify firearms exactly.

If I am not mistaken, there was a consensus around 2 years ago to do away with specific firearm nomenclature to avoid silly flame and tag wars.

This is coming from an open and unabashed gun lover / sport shooter.

I suggest all firearms be aliased to the above classifications as warranted, with implications to gun and ranged_weapon only.

I support SC's suggestions (I think sniper rifle seems a bit unnecessary, though, as any rifle can be used as such if need be, and there's nothing prohibiting using a rifle intended for sniping as a regular hunting firearm).

Getting specific about the type of firearm in art seems to me to be an exercise in frustration given how most artists don't care to go into detail with the firearms they draw, as it's not the focus of the art.

imagoober said:
I support SC's suggestions (I think sniper rifle seems a bit unnecessary, though, as any rifle can be used as such if need be, and there's nothing prohibiting using a rifle intended for sniping as a regular hunting firearm).

I think that's usually pretty clear. They have a scope and a long barrel, that's all there really is to it. Tagging this with just "rifle" seems overly vague to me...

Comment by Sharp Coyote

Sharp_Coyote said:
Personally, I feel we would be better served by having firearms-related tags simplified:

handgun

• pistol
• revolver

rifle

• sniper_rifle (perhaps)

sub_machinegun

machinegun

shotgun

This would alleviate absurd arguments over a gun being, say, an M16-A1 or an M16-A2:

- this is CLEARLY an M16-A1, as denoted by the hexagonal shape of the select-fire-toggle-switch retaining pin

- moron, you are obviously are overlooking the shape of the A2 carry-handle-with-integrated-optic

(please excuse the hyperbole for artistic license).

Yes, I know that HotUnderTheCollar is suggesting doing away with such trivialities regarding specifics, yet I have a point to make here (somewhere).

Fact of the matter is, with the detail level of the vast majority of artwork posted here, it is near impossible to accurately identify firearms exactly.

If I am not mistaken, there was a consensus around 2 years ago to do away with specific firearm nomenclature to avoid silly flame and tag wars.

This is coming from an open and unabashed gun lover / sport shooter.

I suggest all firearms be aliased to the above classifications as warranted, with implications to gun and ranged_weapon only.

Comment by imagoober

imagoober said:
I support SC's suggestions (I think sniper rifle seems a bit unnecessary, though, as any rifle can be used as such if need be, and there's nothing prohibiting using a rifle intended for sniping as a regular hunting firearm).

Getting specific about the type of firearm in art seems to me to be an exercise in frustration given how most artists don't care to go into detail with the firearms they draw, as it's not the focus of the art.

I partially agree with you on this.

The first thing you should keep in mind that the tag group:weapons Wiki has been created by me about 1,5 months ago. The weapon tag currently has 22089 posts, of which the ranged weapon tag has 7189 posts. If you compare this to other tag group Wiki's, you will see that it is a quite low amount. Both for that reason, and the reason that the Wiki has been given life, I think that it's an idea to increase its detail. It doesn't hurt to have them.

Most guns in art are being drawn as either popular guns, or generic guns that fall outside any of the branches of those guns (requiring only the umbrella-tags like rifle, submachine gun, handgun, etc.), so that's easily taken care of (read: requires no changes).

However, having mentioned the word "popular," there are a few guns distinct enough from the majority to deserve an extra tag (perfect example: the desert eagle). Now I am aware that there are many guns that are a lot different from the rest, but simply lack popularity, as described in the first post in this forum. Guns like the desert eagle, m16, m4 and ak-47 have a long tradition and are widely known, especially thanks to video games.

Personally, I am against the use of numbers as well. Numbers as in model numbers. An exception would be popular guns like the m16 or ak-47, but I don't believe weapon tags should have two different versions with numbers (e.g. m16a2 and m16a4).

Also, consider all these proposed tags as extras. They are designed to further detail what's going on in a post and don't have a high priority. If tags like desert eagle were omitted from posts, you still have handgun and pistol left, taken the post contains proper tagging. This is partially why I encourage these tags. See it like blue background being an extra detail to simple background: not having it on a post isn't a disaster as simple background almost makes a full circle, but it's still nice to have both.

Might you not agree with anything mentioned above, know that I like to personally take care of the Wiki's for weapons, and, if you look at my profile, my tagging projects all involve weapons as well. There's much room for change, too.

Comment by Fenrick

Fenrick said:
I think that's usually pretty clear. They have a scope and a long barrel, that's all there really is to it. Tagging this with just "rifle" seems overly vague to me...

Indeed, and you also inadvertently gave an opportunity to discuss the necessity of the tag anti-materiel rifle. While it is indeed a distinct type of gun, a sniper rifle could easily be confused with an anti-materiel rifle and vice versa. Plus, it seems overly specific if you ask me. If it was a widely known type of machine gun sure, but another type/version of an already specific gun branch...

And while we're on it: handcannon? I'd say handgun is enough.