The Gun Wiki is up...

[dc.fireman]

http://www.thegunwiki.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

With the wealth of information on this forum, it would be great to have people like rcmodel, Walkalong, and Slamfire1 contribute stuff - this could end up being the largest firearms knowledge repository in the digital world...

-tc

 

[fireman 9731]

I guess its in its fledgling state?

My search for "mosin" and "mosin nagant" turned up nothing. A search for "colt" gave me a decent page on the Colt 1911.

Interesting idea... I wish I had the knowledge to contribute...

 

[loadedround]

What's wrong with THR?

 

[bear375]

What's wrong with THR?

Too much BS and many DS to wade through.
Correct me if i'm wrong but isn't THR a discussion forum.
The gun wiki is a good idea.

 

[Clark]

The main Wikipedia, that Google links to on the first page of hits, is run by liberals.

I put in hours of effort on the gun stuff on Wikipedia and then after I quoted a sentence from a book about Che on the Che Wikipedia page, all my Wikipedia work was purged, and I was branded a "vandal".

That was not as painful as putting in 10,000 posts and giving money to a gun forum, and then being banned for criticizing a point made in a gun book.

What does it all mean?
There are moderators that worship some commie, there are moderators that worship some gun writer?
No, it is just dumbing down.
If we work on gun Wiki, do we have to make it dumb?

 

[stu454]

The problem with THR and just about any other webforum is the 'keyboard' experts that in reality couldn't find their butt in the dark with two hands.

Everything they know they read about in a magazine or online.........in a forum. ;-)

 

[earlthegoat2]

If it is informational FACTS only and no opinions then it cannot go wrong. THR is a wealth of knowledge but the only reason I frequent it as much as I do is because of the opinions of others and everyones take and point of view on guns.

Gunwiki is a good idea for pure facts but I hope there is no opinons thrown in as well. It will just muck it up.

I would never work on gunwiki for my own points above and Clarks points as well. EVERYONE has an agenda whether it is good or bad. THR has an agenda and so does Gunwiki. I think I know THRs agenda so that gives me an advantage when posting. (seriously all you have to do is read the forum rules) If you disturb the agenda you will pay the consequences whether it is Wikipedia or Gunwiki or what have you.

 

[USSR]

Anybody that spends any time on this or any other similar site, quickly learns who are the posers and who are the guys with hands-on experience.

Don

 

[broham]

Very true USSR

 

[dc.fireman]

"Share what you know, learn what you don't."

Sage advice from THR staff. I thought the GunWiki might be more like that, hence my OP.

 

[Zak Smith]

Being able to vet information is a critical skill, especially now that anyone and everyone is a "publisher", that's for sure.

 

[grammaton76]

Not that I object to this guy doing his own site, but from what I can determine this "thegunwiki.org" guy is trying to rip off of the name that "thegunwiki.com" has established for itself.

Speaking as the primary author of thegunwiki.com, I'm more than a bit annoyed that he chose to confuse users by naming his site so similarly, when my site's been around since Dec 2005 (a bit over 4 years before he even started his)... if he didn't appear to be trying to dilute the name and confuse folks I wouldn't care.