Talk:Laser tag
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] gah?
well i guess that answers my, what the holy hell happened to this page question..... well its definately alot shorter and more to the point, but it seems the remaining bits were.. murdilated? and now why do you want to get rid of Commercial Laser Tag Systems —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whateverpt (talk • contribs) 23:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- I don't want to "get rid of" that article so much as merge it, we don't really need two articles. I took a lot of material back, I'd like to add as much as possible back, but want to do so in a way that doesn't leave it as a disorganized mess, less drastic cleanup measures hadn't worked in the past and I haven't had the time for a rewrite. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 01:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- i disagree that the two articles don't help.. the second fufills its function quite well.. ~whatever~
[edit] Archives
[edit] Current Cleanup Tasks
- Rewrite article (in progress - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 19:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC))
- Find a way to include a listing of notable systems.
- Properly source all information.
- Reinsert information from Talk:Laser tag/temp.
- Merge Commercial Laser Tag Systems back in.
[edit] References
Please, please, please, please don't manually number references. Its very difficult to keep up with manual numbering, and it doesn't link between the reference and the references section when you do this. WP:CITE gives details of the various citation styles and tools available. Please use them! - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 18:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rewriting
I've started to do a rewrite of the article, since it was getting out of hand. It's been cleanup tagged since May 2006, and its been getting steadily worse. Please help by going slow in adding material back, and by properly sourcing any material you add. This article has a lot of potential, and I'd love to see it become a featured article someday! - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 19:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Where did the categories go?--Choz 03:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wanted: Photographs
Photographs under an acceptable license would be a huge improvement to this article. (We can't support a fair use claim here, so it has to be a free license.)
I personally would like to see at least one photo of an arena interior, a photo of a player wearing equipment indoors, and someone playing outdoors.
The interior shots will be somewhat difficult due to lighting, so if a skilled photographer wants to help that would be great! - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 23:06, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- We've got thousands of such photographs, however not all lasertag belongs to any one system. - whatever 03:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Very much true, there are a lot of systems out there, and they are very different from each other. I'm still seriously hoping to try to get articles for as many systems as possible. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 01:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- grumble. i'll play the formatting game, you do get that people delete new subjects as soon as we get them up? ~whatever~
-
For some reason, there is a lot of fan zealotry in the current Laser Tag scene. That is annoying, but more importantly, totally irrelevant to a good encyclopedia article. So, why doesn't everyone who has a bias put their preferences for one type of equipment or another aside, and think about this: "What kind of picture(s) would you expect to see in a Real Encyclopedia? If you are a manufacturer, arena owner, or just hardcore fan of one brand, does it look like a fair representation of what the equipment commonly looks lik? If it does, post it; if not, don't or we'll just have to find something else.
There are several types of laser tag equipment that are relevant to this article. Images of historical value showing early equipment and arena, pictures of the most common commercial and home equipment, and those of contemporary equipment, in which way the (one again, most common) equipment has changed lately, aside from current fashion sense, such as homebuilt to Milestag spec.
I will watch and try to revert deletions of legitimate contributions as best as I can figure out in wikipedia's messy backside. --Choz 03:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
What I suggest is to use the pictures of the distinct systems, for nobody could say you're preffering one or another manufacturer. Megaboss 12:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
And for God's sake, please forget about military simulators (such as MILES system) - they have absolutely nothing to do with the current commercial systems. Megaboss 12:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know about anyone else here, but I prefer no system over any other, in respect to this article. In fact, I am very fond of wikipedia's neutral POV. Whatever images look most arch typical are most appropriate. If that means that Bob's Laser Stuff Inc. makes the most generic, universal and plain equipment, is that really any endorsement? This is acceptable in other wikipedia articles, as well. I would recommend that we avoid "publicity shots" or pictures and captioning that would make the brand particularly obvious to a novice approaching the article. Of course, since we have no pictures, this is all a bit theoretical.
If there are several fundementally different designs in common usage, there should perhaps be illustrations of each. And if there is more than one pic, potential perception of bias can be diffused by including equipment from different vendors.
MILES is historically significant in laser tag. It has a lot to do with current commercial systems, in a fashion. Originally it was some influence on the design of equipment, and it's implementation affected the laser tag culture (for example, its name was 'borrowed' for MILEStag). Since then, MILES2000 has borrowed a lot from the developments in the private sector, and offers very similar technical features. However, since it has a page already, it seems that mention of it should be fairly brief on the main page. --Choz 06:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Possible sources
[edit] Moderating
I don't like the way the page has been "rewritten". The "old" version was much more interesting. It's a FREE encyclopedia, and - to my mind - nobody should moderate any page the way it has been done to "Laser Tag". Not the "moderator", but the READERS may decide what information is worth publishing... (Megaboss 18:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC))
I think we are a long way from any sort of revert-war, but a lot of people expect the article to follow the flow or format of any other wikipedia article, so a bit has been temporarily lopped off, as people work to make it more of a traditional document. None of that stuff is gone, AFAIK, just bookshelved into history. Feel free, to rewrite, or snip the best of the existing work, and re-integrate it into a greater article for all of us.--Choz 03:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)