History and Backgrounds

I like the idea, as you say, some of us do like to get some background on what we are building. Are you suggesting it should be written by the forum members, a bit like Wiki, or by the moderators. If the former, you of course have the issue of accuracy and possable 'debates' about what someone has writted and if it is accurate.

Hans,

I like the idea of a reference site for information on a model's subject, but I don't think the forum is the right format.  As it is, the forum can be tricky to search through looking for some specific piece of information.  Finding a thread that discusses the subject may not be enough, if it is 27 pages of back and forth comments and hellos and oh wows.  I think that is why there are so many repeat questions, it is easier for a "newbie" to ask the same question that someone else did 8 months ago than to try and find the answer buried in some old thread. 

And all the different subjects would mean a whole lot of sub-forums or sticky threads (think how many different ones you would need just to cover American Armor).

Maybe another section on the FSM website would work as a reference collection, but creating those entries would require a lot of work for the FSM editors. 

Paul

  I too have actually thought about this as well. And as you indicated I think it's a great idea. As well as being a modeler i too am an avid history buff and am fascinated in the stories behind the men and machines we build. It's certainly doable, just a matter of getting the ball rolling, which, you my friend have aptly done!

Hans if I read your message right, you are referring to the history of the kit, not the subject, correct?

Sounds like a great idea to me.

Bish-

Are you suggesting it should be written by the forum members, a bit like Wiki, or by the moderators. If the former, you of course have the issue of accuracy and possable 'debates' about what someone has writted and if it is accurate.

Well, I'd say the membership should write it... If a person wants to debate the accuracy, it'd have to be documented, for sure.. The draw-back is the ol' copy & paste from Wiki, like you mentioned.. Although it has good info, it's not the most reliable source for accurate info...

Bondo-

Hans if I read your message right, you are referring to the history of the kit, not the subject, correct?

I mean the history of the prototype is focused on what the model is about... Not say, the "History of the P-51D" necessarilaly, but the "History of P-51D 44-14906, "Moonbeam McSwine" flown by Major George Preddy"

The writer puts up a shot of his or her build, and then writes the background story of it.. The build-log can go in the respective forum, but write up something in the "Histoory Hooch" about the build's background, yeah... Adding a link to the build, or a link in the build-log to the history part...

Lukewarm to negative. The information is already out there on the web; just google any subject and the word "wiki." I'm involved in another forum that has a history section, and I found a lot of the posts had material lifted directly from Wikipedia or other sources, unattributed, which could  leave Kalmbach open to take-down notices or lawsuits. Then, if you have a science-fiction section, you're going to have Kirk/Picard debates worse than any recent manifesto threads....

Hans von Hammer

I was thumbing through some old issues of Military Modeler a little while ago, and made mention of it in the forum I was in..

MM and it's sister publication, Scale Modeler, had something going for it that FSM never did.. That was a short, four or five paragraph historical background on the particular kit being shown & built....

This got me to thinking, "Why doesn't FSM do this?".. While the obvious answer is "space limitations" for the magazine, I see no reason why this would be so in the forums... But while not everyone is all that interested in what theit model actually did, others are, and still more "might be" but don't know where to look or who to ask..

Hans,

For the record, FSM has done these kinds of things in the past, often in the form of a sidebar, and continues to do them depending on the subjects and as space allows. Some subjects don't really warrant this kind of treatment — the P-51 Mustang or the Tiger tank — but if we have the room we have run a historical photo and a short historical piece. Why don't we do it every time? Because we'd rather use the space we have to communicate modeling information and much of the historical info is widely available on the Internet and even in books.

Cheers, Aaron

Hans von Hammer

The writer puts up a shot of his or her build, and then writes the background story of it.. The build-log can go in the respective forum, but write up something in the "Histoory Hooch" about the build's background, yeah... Adding a link to the build, or a link in the build-log to the history part...

 

As the recent 'Midway Avenger' thread illustrated, I fear that a forum of this kind would inevitably degrade into a back and forth about why a particular build doesn't fully represent what the builder claims it is representing.

While I like the notion of a history forum, I suspect it would rapidly become as cantankerous as O&E ever was.

I tend to agree with bbrowniii, and the recent "Midway Avenger" thread in the Aircraft forum is a good example of what could happen if FSM made what Hans is suggesting a regular feature. Doesn't mean it is a bad idea, just that I suspect the negative waves generated by such an effort have a high potential for overwhelming the good that it might do some as far as enlightening some.

Thanks for the feedback, Aaron, but I wasn't asking FSM run it in the magazine.. Just add a sub-forum to the existing hooches... The mag's fine (get it?) the way it is....

As for, "the information is already out there", well, that's true, but it's not in here...

The information on painting, weathering, building dioramas, how to do whatever is "out there" too... Yet we compile and condense even more of it in here..  

There's also some information that is NOT "out there".. It's contained within the brain-housing groups of the general membership... For instance, while the "History of the M109A3 Howitzer" may be all over the 'net, there isn't much in the way of my M109A3, Charlie-13, "Chemical Dependency"...   I haven't been able to find much about Redleg 12's 105 or Rob's first M60A1 either...

If someone doesn't have a use for it, fine.. I have no use for the ships, helicopters, commercial avaiation, or auto hooches, and very little for the Sci-fi one either..  Don't read the IPMS section, couldn't care less about Spacecraft past the Apollo Program, either.. Yet there they are...

As for the reference to the "Midway Avenger", I don't understand what that has to do with writing up a history of a subject of a particular build.. That was a disagreement between members on what constituted a "Midway Avenger" vs a TBF that was sent to Midway, and how the atitcle should have been titled...

It wasn't hostile, nor was it in any way a vilation of the TOU to discuss it...  

But to shoot down a suggestion because someone, somewhere fears someone, somewhere else might say something, someday, that might upset someone, somehow is a bit beyond my capacity for risk assessment...

These kinds of ideas are best when people have to footnote their sources (min. 2 at the SF Chronicle), and wiki does not count as a source however valuable.

Look at the Pew Foundation website for the 10 best ways to stay out of court.

I think the biggest problem is that Google likes this site and it would not be too hard to introduce noise into the www.

Hans von Hammer

Thanks for the feedback, Aaron, but I wasn't asking FSM run it in the magazine.. Just add a sub-forum to the existing hooches... The mag's fine (get it?) the way it is....

As for, "the information is already out there", well, that's true, but it's not in here...

The information on painting, weathering, building dioramas, how to do whatever is "out there" too... Yet we compile and condense even more of it in here..  

There's also some information that is NOT "out there".. It's contained within the brain-housing groups of the general membership... For instance, while the "History of the M109A3 Howitzer" may be all over the 'net, there isn't much in the way of my M109A3, Charlie-13, "Chemical Dependency"...   I haven't been able to find much about Redleg 12's 105 or Rob's first M60A1 either...

If someone doesn't have a use for it, fine.. I have no use for the ships, helicopters, commercial avaiation, or auto hooches, and very little for the Sci-fi one either..  Don't read the IPMS section, couldn't care less about Spacecraft past the Apollo Program, either.. Yet there they are...

As for the reference to the "Midway Avenger", I don't understand what that has to do with writing up a history of a subject of a particular build.. That was a disagreement between members on what constituted a "Midway Avenger" vs a TBF that was sent to Midway, and how the atitcle should have been titled...

It wasn't hostile, nor was it in any way a vilation of the TOU to discuss it...  

But to shoot down a suggestion because someone, somewhere fears someone, somewhere else might say something, someday, that might upset someone, somehow is a bit beyond my capacity for risk assessment...

Hans,

I knew you were suggesting it for the website, but I wanted to clarify what you had said about the magazine. As far as sharing specific information about a subject, have at it. I think it's been done in the past if someone has photos or knowledge to share. Just be sure that anything that is posted does not violate someone's copyright — in other words don't post scans from books or cut and paste copyrighted text.

If the members think it's the sort of thing that needs it's own Forum section we can look into it, but it seems like the sort of thing that can go into the various modeling genre subsections.

Cheers, Aaron

I like the idea, because I am one of those that likes to know some of the history behind the subject. But I'm afraid it has the potential to turn into a real octopus using the forums format. Google is your friend for a great deal of this information!

Check an' a rog', Aaron..

hans, i get where you are coming from, and this is something i would like to see. But persoanlly i don't think its something that would take on in a big way. When i started the Mighty 8th GB i asked that as well as build a kit, that the builder also right a little history of the unit of their aircraft as well as the airfield it was based at. But not many people have done it. While some people may be interested in say the Tiger tank or the aircraft of a certain famous pilot, on a wider level with less well known subjects i just don't think there would be enough interest.

But... Even though you think there wouldn't be enough interest, is there any harm in writng such a story?  Who knws?  It might take off.. If it does, cool, if it doesn't that's ok too.. It can just fade away..

Meanwhile, did you read what I wrote about MAJ George Preddy's last P-51 in the diorama hooch??

No, i agree, theres no harm in writing it. But then it could be done during a WiP or when you show pics of a finished build. But if there was such a section on the site, i would use it.

No, i didn't see that, i will have a look for it.

It's in the Spitfire vs Wirbelwind thread..

So... in the words of an old Special Forces instructor "thank you for volunteering to start!"

I say this as someone who does not regularly visit every section, but howzabout you start doing them and seeing how they fly? If they prove popular and useful, then it might be worth Matt & Aaron's time to create the section, but if they just sit out there and don't catch on they they haven't wasted their precious time. Most forums grow out of need more than desire...

I'll do what I can..

It wiull be a while before i get round to his P-51 Hans, but i will certainly keep that account it mind. And i will do my best in joining you in giving a bit of history beyind what it is i am building. If only one other person is interested, then it is worth it.

I have taken this up as i promised, and would be glad to get some feedback. Not so much on the model, though of course that would be nice, but also on the historical write up. Its a bit of a read, i have done a history of the aircraft, unit and its base. But i would be grateful for any comments or suggestions.

You can find it here.

/forums/t/142219.aspx

Bish I am that first one.

Then its worth it.