Talk:Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (`~~~~`). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

CVG Portal

This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

CVG To-do:

[edit] Question

Under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galciv2#Player_criticism it says

Other updates are set to follow after the release of a demo version.

I was just wondering where this information came from, and when they mentioned a demo version? --Mercury1 17:31, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

If you want an official source, you should try this forum post, which has a reply by Brad Wardell (User:Draginol, aka Frogboy) who states that it should be available by the end of March. GreenReaper 18:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

This is very interesting! http://digg.com/gaming/Company_WANTS_its_game_pirated_ TonyJazzman 05:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

There's a Stardock response to the Starforce incident. Besides, the digg people are undigging this article as a fake. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 05:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

1563 users digged the story as Truthful. EuERERS 22:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Read the nice warning box there: Warning: The Content in this Article is Under Review Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Digg is concerned with what people are interested in reading, not in what is accurate. In their own words: "To help promote stories to the homepage, simply visit the digg area and digg stories you think are cool." It may be really cool to hear a story about a company that wants its own game to be pirated, but that doesn't mean the story is true. GreenReaper 16:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

GreenReaper is a StarDock employee, thus he should not edit this article.

I believe this applies: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself

Sn0rlax 23:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

No. GreenReaper is not Stardock. Therefore he is not writing a biography. Nothing prohibits users from editing articles on their places of employment. Also note that he did not revert to a version that he wrote. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Just like Marty Meehan's employees have been banned from editing wikipedia, so should GreenReaper. Sn0rlax 01:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

And why exactly is that? As long as GreenReaper is writing objectively and from NPOV, there is nothing barring him/her from editing any Wikipedia page. Also, could you explain why you insist on reverting to a grammatically incorrect version with numerous spelling errors? -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 02:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. The congressional staffers were blocked because they were found to be vandalising articles, not because they were editing articles. jaco plane 02:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

In addition, you can use your User:Robust Physique account to respond here. It is not blocked. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 02:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

The congressional staffers did not vandalize articles, they inserted POV, there is a huge difference. Sn0rlax 17:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The question of my contribution to Stardock articles has been discussed elsewhere. While I was not intimately involved in its development (I'm on the credits, but that's mostly for the metaverse map), I do know quite a bit about the game, and I considered myself in an ideal position to improve this article. Without my input, it would probably still look a lot like this, which I think is somewhat lacking in comparison to the current version.

Moreover, you have offered no compelling reason for your own edits — or indeed any reason that relates to the content of the article. Why are you reverting to a version that is quantifiably worse? The digg story inaccurately represents Stardock's position (including a quote that they made up), by the author's own admission. They're someone I happen to know personally and they misunderstood something that was written by Brad. The phrase "download source" is also misleading - it seems to me to imply that Starforce was linking directly to a CD image or something, which is not the case. The reasoning behind the original employee's decision to link is also important, and it helps them come off just looking misguided rather than intentionally malicious (which I believe to be an accurate representation of the situation - I like to think that they didn't do it with the deliberate intention of "getting back" at us, it was just an angry developer who was tired of seeing negative reports of copy-protection). GreenReaper 16:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Two races will be exterminated during the campaign, mainly Alterans. They will, however still be available in 'sandbox' mode, but will not appear in the future releases of the game"

This line is a bit inaccurate. They still haven't confirmed exactly which two races will be killed off, and also it's "Altarians", not "Alterans". Thanks.