Talk: Weapons

Back to Category

Categorization & other musings

While looking at this list and attempting to clean up some of the clutter, there have been problems. Specifically with weapons that cross categories, or are so broadly defined that they don't specifically fit (see: Blaster, Blaster cannon, Disruptor, etc). What category should these be put in? "Personal range weapons?" A new "Weapon Technology" (a bit redundant) category? Or should they simply stay in the base "Weapon" category?

Another interesting problem is where to put the Flash grenade? surely it deserves a better spot than the "Personal range weapon" category, and it doesn't exactly fit in the "Demolition weapons" category either. Maybe there should be a new "Grenade weapons" category (or "Thrown weapons")? -- Falmarin 21:18, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Not everything needs to be in a specialized category, as long as they are sorted as weapons in the first place. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:38, 29 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Double-bladed lightsaber

Categorization (again)

This category needs to be reorganized, like Falmarin said above. His comment was months ago, when we had much fewer articles; but now that we have grown significantly, we need to reexamine this issue. As stated before, the current format is somewhat poorly laid out, with numerous cross-category weapons. What I have been thinking about is the following:

Weapons

  • Personal weapons
    • Melee weapons
    • Personal ranged weapons
    • Thrown weapons (grenades and the like)
  • Demolition weapons
  • Missile launchers (note: "missile" defined as "an object forcibly propelled at a target"—this includes grenade launchers, etc)
  • Naval weapons
  • Superweapons
  • Emplacement weapons
  • Artillery
  • Weapon technologies (perhaps under the Technology category?)
    • Blasters
    • Disruptors

If we are going to make changes, it will be a large task, so I want to get this right the first time. What do you think: any categories I missed? Do I have too many? How do you like the layout? RMF 19:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

  • It could be a little better organized. -- SFH 00:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
  • There's a lot of overlap between demolition weapons and thrown weapons. Thermal detonators and proton grenades, for example. Also, I'm not sure if missile weapons is a worthwhile category; technically, wouldn't it include bowcasters and slugthrowers? Also, Naval weapons could be vehicle weapons instead, to include walkers. This beats what we have now, but it could be better.-LtNOWIS 03:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
    • We would just have to give certain weapons categorical preference based on use. For example, slugthrowers and bowcasters, while technically projectile weapons, are primarily personal range weapons; and should be categorized as such. Regarding thrown/demolition, I suggest that we could either make thrown a sub-cat of demo or, like the previous example, set certain standards: i.e. grenades go in thrown weapons despite the fact that they are technically demolition (for the most part, there are exceptions). We could change to Vehicle weapons, that's fine. Thoughts? RMF 04:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
  • A few thoughts: 1) We may want a Category:Weapon types (Grenade, Blaster, Ion weaponry - these also go in their respective cats below), 2) Wikipedia's cat framework for weapons seems fine for us, excluding a few cats for which we'd have no need. --SparqMan 04:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

um i have a suggegetston *suggestion* for the weppons *weapons*

more facton *faction* ceterd *centered* weppon *weapon* catorges *categories*

like this (these are the facotns *factions* 100% pplz *people* know about so they should be the four major catoges *categories*)

repulic *republic* wepons *weapons* (with great sith war, clone wars, and other wars that im not aware off in subcatroges *subcategories*)

imperial wepons *weapons*

cis wepons *weapons*

alacnece *alliance* wepons *weapons* (alince *alliance* to restore *the* repulic *republic* new repulic *republic* and others)


(these are the samller or less knowan facotns *factions*)

mandorleian *mandalorian* yozzong vong *yuuzhan vong* (i dont want to insatlut *insult* with the contarcton *contraction*) (i really cant think of other samll *small* factons *factions*)

(comapny *company* spcific *specific* werpons *weapons*)

blas tech golan arms (all the others)

(and fiinaly *finally* weepons *weapons* used by no spicfic *specific* facton *faction*)

dose *does* this sound like a better idea (it makes srching *searching* for wepons *weapons* much easyer *easier*)

  • Sorry about the mess, I did my best to try to clean it up for you* - Ryluk

Categorization strikes back

The categorization is very confusing. I believe this partially arises from the habit of giving weapons only one category, and the categories being poorly defined. For example, the DL-44 heavy blaster pistol is in the "blaster pistols" category. It could also be a "heavy blaster pistol", a "blaster", a "pistol", or a "weapon". Personally, I think it should be all five. Right now, it's painfully hard to find a specific weapon by category because most exist only in one. Also, there are a number of subcategory-like articles that are simply listed as members of a category, such as Hold-out blaster. I think weapon types should be limited to categories/subcategories, and models should be members. I would go ahead and start making the changes myself (Star Wars weaponry is my specialty), but it would be an extensive overhaul, so before I mess up Wookieepedia too much, could someone important please give me approval via my user page or direct me to someone I could ask? Thanks. – Brynn Alastayr 06:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I will try posting to the consensus track forum and see where that gets me... – Brynn Alastayr 06:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, theres way too many catagories and subcatagories. It would be ten times simpler to navigate by putting, for example, disruptor, concussion (instead of pneumatic), maser, and laser weapons (naval weapon implacment included) into a catagory named "energy weapons" Then missiles, grenades, slugthrowers, flechette launchers, bowcasters, and all that in Projectiles. Superweapons have their own catagory. Electrical, Ion, and incendiary weapons in a miscillaneous section.

Also, why is there two biological weapon catagories? Chemical and biological? Brotherhood of moose 03:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Melee waepons

I would like to know what happened to the Melee category Personal weapons? In my opinnion all weapons are personal weapons as long as you can control them. I REQUEST IT BE DELETED.(MVP) —Unsigned comment by 216.168.82.112 (talk • contribs)

  • So are you saying a turbolaser is a personal weapon? Just because you can control it doesn't make it a personal wep. By personal weps it is meant sidearms and melee weapons. Ryluk Shouja 10:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


I assume when you say sidearm, you mean blaster pistols? Brotherhood of moose 04:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, all I wanted to do was to make a point that blaster pistols (sidearms)have category and Melee weapons does not.(MVP)216.168.82.47 22:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I don't really know what you guys are talking about hear, but I just wanted to ask why there isn't a category section for melee weapons...? Cyfiero 08:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Oh nevermind, I found it under Personal Weapons... Cyfiero 08:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)