Needs Help: Cool Guns

The definition and our current use of Cool Guns and its subpages are really questionable, on multiple fronts.

1: Gun entries on Cool Guns are really just Useful Notes. Really useful ones, but sill Useful Notes. Talking about quirks and interesting tidbits about guns are cool and all, and could really inform new-and-coming writers about what cool gun should their character use, but they're not really what the trope is about. They should be merged with the gun entries on Rare Guns and spun off into their own section for UsefulNotes.Cool Guns or something.

2: The current definition of Cool Guns needs rework. The current definition, as defined by the introduction, focuses exclusively on non-fictional guns. Compared to other Cool X pages, it is the only one that says "non-fiction only", and is not helpful to trope works.

I propose that the trope should be reworked into listing specific examples of notable cool guns in works, fictional guns or not.

See also my Rare Guns TRP proposal, which needs to be reworked simultaneously with Cool Guns.

edited 25th Nov '17 2:28:26 AM by Wuz

I could support moving this to Useful Notes/ but just so you know we do have UsefulNotes.Firearms, which seems like maybe a fitting place to move this information?

I agree that the requirement for non-fictional guns seems odd. It seems to support the idea that this is really a bunch of Useful Notes, honestly. If we do keep something for Cool Guns, I think it ought to include fictional guns, but maybe keep it to kinetic weaponry since we already have Frickin' Laser Beams and Ray Gun etc.

I am not convinced that "cool real life stuff" is Useful Notes material. To me this seems like a Real Life section that should be split off to its own pages so that storytelling uses aren't completely overwhelmed.

The main page really should be about fictional guns and how they're portrayed to be cool.

On the whole, I find that each weapon having a trivia section followed by examples works surprisingly well. It makes it easier to connect the characteristics and history of the weapons with the usage in works. It's sort of like Useful Notes items used as tropes, but for the purpose it still works.

UsefulNotes.Firearms is only about firearms in general, not any specific makes. UsefulNotes.Modern Battlefield Weapons, on the other hand, does list specific makes, but not as extensively as Cool Guns, and is still more focused on weapon types. Can naturally be rearranged.

My problem with the "Cool X" trope is that they're effectively "list of X" which.... Seems pointless to me.

Some folks have visited the gun threads and brought up issues on the various gun tropes. Taking a look at Cool Guns alone I can see some of the issues.

First I agree that the definition needs reworking and needs to include fictional fire arms given a lot of fictional fire arms are deliberately designed around some idea of aesthetics and function to "look cool". There is already a soft work around in the page under "Semi Fictional" which includes outright fictional examples. I think it is safe to say we can cut through that bit of unnecessary red tape. This isn't a useful notes page, though it sure looks like someone wrote it like one.

My general proposal is this. Even at a casual glance many of the individual firearm folder blurb write ups are written like they are useful notes entries. However I have noticed a rather distinct pattern in all the fire arms examples listed on the page. Namely they all make some sort of consistent appearance as Real World weapons used in fiction.

I would suggest creating an actual useful notes page for Real World Guns Used In Fiction, or a similar title, and transplant the longer individual fire arms descriptions used there. Why? Because that is pretty much exactly what those individual fire arms folders write ups really are. They are written just like a useful notes entry and there is no really convincing reason to not treat them so.

For the Cool Guns page. The page could be split between Real World Guns and Fictional Fire arms. We more or less keep the general organization of the sections we have now and that becomes the Real World Examples but rework the write ups. Though I would honestly just cut the folder structures or coral the sub-varieties of firearms under the same general folder entry. Like all the pistol weapons under hand guns because that is what they all are. Same for rifles.

Something like this.

Handguns Entry

• Beretta 92: <No more than two or three sentences giving a short description. Something more along the lines of the Captive Bolt Gun Write Up under Other.>
  • Insert one of several John Woo's assorted film examples here.
  • Other work examples.

• Other Handgun example: etc.
  • Etc.
  • Etc. Etc.

Really that is all that is needed. The rest is frankly unnecessary excess or detail more suited to a Useful Notes page. In the majority of pages a lot of this stuff would be considered cruft and the bulk of it would have been cut.

The fictional guns is a lot easier. I would organize it like the "Semi-Fictional" fire arms section is. Namely how we normally create trope pages. Sorted by Genre with works sorted by alphabetical order.

edited 5th Dec '17 7:36:14 PM by TuefelHundenIV

I think the important bit is keeping the information of the guns along with the examples of those guns. That's content relevant to writing. It's probably better on a UN page (or pages, as it really is), though.

No we really don't need to keep the excessively large blurbs. The history of the fire arm and other trivia are not relevant to the tropes or even the individual examples.

Captive Bolt Entry has this.

This is almost perfect. It conveys relevant information without any real cruft or excessive material.

This is the crossbow entry. It is the polar opposite.

This is excessive no matter how you slice it and contains a lot of information that is not relevant to the trope or its individual examples. You quite simply do not need that much info to make the various listings or the examples work. You can easily boil down relevant information on crossbows to a few sentences. Most of the examples are around two paragraphs or more. There are literally multiple short essay examples in each section.

"Relevant" does not mean "concise".

Yeah it kind of does. I could ask you how the short essay on the histories and the excessive amounts of trivia on the weapons is actually relevant to a page that is supposed to be about Cool Guns but I won't. I don't have to because they are not relevant by any reasonable measure. You do not need to list the history of the weapon, its list of known flaws, the various cultural variations, and other extraneous details.

It is clear, CONCISE, and witty. We regularly par down entries that get this out of control all the time. There is zero reason to keep this page as it is. You can save the info if you want but we do not need to save the assorted essays masquerading as part of a folder entry.

Again those overtly run away entries are what belong on a useful notes page not a trope or works page. I find your contrary opinion to be lacking quite a bit of substance.

edited 7th Dec '17 12:37:17 PM by TuefelHundenIV

No, it doesn't kind of mean that by any reasonable argument. You're not the be-all-end-all definition of what's relevant. If it's an iconic part of any culture, profession, or time period, that's relevant. If it was used in a historical event, that's relevant. You don't need to list every use, but notable uses are relevant.

And if that's your definition, why do you say a description is "almost perfect" when it includes those very details you claimed weren't relevant? I could ask you to at least follow your own definitions, but I won't. I don't have to because it should be obvious.

Besides, since you completely failed to notice that, I explicitly said, "It's probably better on a UN page". What do you think I meant with that?

Duck: I hate to break it to you but it doesn't take a lot of effort to see how the vast majority of a literal essay length block of information is not relevant to a page on cool guns even with the current issues it doesn't take a lot to see the problem. The history of known malfunctions has nothing to do with cool guns. The developers and manufacturers history? Same thing. The developmental period? Again same damn thing. These are not pieces of information relevant to this trope page. We don't need to keep them on the trope page. You have to make some serious stretches in logic to insist they are relevant. I am still waiting for you to show how they are relevant.

Notice I said the captive bolt gun example is almost perfect. Why? Because it gives us the minimal amount of excess information while describing what the object is. It is the definition of concise. What it isn't is someone's personally written multiparagrph essay. There is a pretty obvious difference there.

I pointed out quite overtly we don't need to keep any of the long blurbs and they should be moved. Not a maybe, no waffling. To boot I suggested that in there place we put a much more cut down versions of around two to three maybe four sentences that conveys the minimally relevant information. You chose to argue for excessively larger entries anyways. That is on you.

There is such a thing as too much info on a page and this trope is rife with that very issue in the individual write ups. The larger write ups should not be the dominate features of each section yet that is exactly what they are. Your argument regarding relevancy would have more legs if the lengthier write ups were actually full of relevant information that actually relate to this trope even as it is currently written, but the fact is there is that isn't the case. In fact for most of them you could chop off large portions of the write ups and keep the 3-4 intro sentences and those alone provide sufficient context and information. They may need some trimming but overall the majority of the entries go beyond that.

I hate to break it to you, but none of that answers anything I said or asked. Please go back and read what I wrote.

I did and I pointed out for you yet again we can easily cut down the excessively lengthy blurbs to a few sentences.

This look familiar? If you were following your own advice it would.

The vast majority of these don't fit what you just described or serve any purpose on the trope page. In fact the bulk of what you described can again be fitted into about two to four sentences. You don't need to write an essay. Again let me know how the bulk of these excessive write ups are actually relevant to the trope and it's entries. Tell me how does the fact that the slide of the Beretta M92 early models went flying off under heavy use is relevant? The manufacturing and procurement history of the M1 Garand? The history of all the variants of the C 96?

I pretty directly answered the second one and again I pointed out it is short and to the point. It isn't full of excessive information. It isn't two to four paragraphs long trying to say what could be said in a few sentences. It describes pretty concisely what the captive bolt gun is. Could it be improved? Yeah. but last I checked that wasn't your question.

Your last statement is not conveying anything other than fence sitting.

Pretty obvious that I already answered your questions.

I second a consolidated real life weapons Useful Notes. The above linked UN pages definitely need some cleanup (see the M16 entry on Modern Battlefield Weapons) and overall could use some TLC.

I also agree that the Cool Guns page should focus on fictional weapons. For the inclusion of a real world weapon on the Cool Guns page, I think we should go by the description from the main trope page itself. Here's the relevant quote: " ...these are the weapons that are often given that special close-up, spot on the cover, or speech extolling their virtues." Simply appearing in a work shouldn't qualify something for a spot on that page.

There should be something like there is for various Fanservice tropes, which is some kind of indicator that the creator is trying to play that trope up. Gun Porn being the obvious trope to go with it, but there can naturally be other indicators as well.

Yeah, I think it's a matter of degree. Just looking into the very first entry for examples, for the Beretta 92 section one of the examples is this: "Neo, in The Matrix (his first pair of Throw-Away Guns in the lobby shootout)." That's the entire bullet point. To me that doesn't really qualify them as cool guns in that instance, as opposed to something like a John Woo movie or Black Lagoon.

Archon: Sounds good to me. The first part of the description in the intro blurb almost looks like it was tacked on after the original page was created.

What about the Cool Action bit of the blurb? In most works of fiction your not going to get a lot of info on the actions and only various fire arms buffs are going to know there is a unique or interesting action. Especially guns that have cosmetic masking or are converted props. This is even more notable with some of the sci-fi flicks.

edited 9th Dec '17 7:00:03 AM by TuefelHundenIV

Tuefel: Yeah, I noticed that. I think some limited re-writing of the main page might be in order. Locking down the definition of what constitutes notable coolness is the issue, it seems.

I think the main thing should be a focus on the gun. The pulse rifle from Alien comes to mind, not a real gun but it has a relatively iconic appearance and got a few glamour shots in the films.

I think that is a good idea. I think the original entry sans the odd restrictions does a good job of giving us a starting point. Some sort of focus on the weapon in the work is needed. Especially when we have examples like you described for Beretta's Matrix entry.

I think the central description in the main page now is okay. Here's a quick stab at a main page rewrite, just shuffling things around, editing, and cutting out some extra. It's a copy/paste so it also doesn't have the links. It probably needs some more work.

"Some firearms just look so cool people have to put them in things to show how awesome they are. These are the weapons that are often given that special close-up, spot on the cover, or speech extolling their virtues. In some cases, they’re so cool creators use them much more than they appear in real life or in anachronistic places. Frequently, the real gun isn't even quite as cool to actually use as fictional depictions would have you believe, but it’s used in fiction anyways. Cool Guns may be used as a BFG or Hand Cannon, regardless of their real life performance. Some guns have a unique feature or signature action that can be done with them. If they do, this is a Cool Action, and will be listed with the weapon.

This trope also includes the guns so widely used that you just can't get away without having them, especially when they get special attention from the cameraman.

For guns that are unique and rarely found in real life, see Rare Guns.

See also Gun Porn, Good Guns, Bad Guns, Gun Accessories, and the Sword Counterpart, Cool Sword. For guns that are not so cool, see Reliably Unreliable Guns."

edited 9th Dec '17 3:15:38 PM by archonspeaks

Honestly that looks pretty good already and even if we chose to leave it at that would likely be rather functional. At the moment I can't think of anything to add or modify.

Someone else may have some suggestions though.

If it works for everyone I'll put it in, it's basically just a minor rewrite of what it is currently.

The bulk of the work is going to be cleaning up the individual pages, I think if everyone takes a category we could split up the work.

I think we can wait a little while to see if anyone else has an idea to throw at the wall.

For the sake of adding to the discussion, I want to mention that the Semi-Fictional Cool Guns was formerly just straight-up "Fictional Cool Guns" (I was also the one who created it), but was later purged because of the current "IRL only" trope definition.

Here's the folder before it was purged:

edited 16th Dec '17 7:28:36 PM by Wuz