Talk:List of Battlefield 1942 mods

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 Dec 2006. The result of the discussion was No consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 May 2006. The result of the discussion was No consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 June 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

I assume this is about a game? Could we make that clear? RickK | Talk 02:00, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

This page needs work on formatting and wikification. Some problems:

1. It's Battlefield 1942, not Battlefield:1942.
2. There's issues with the table; listing the version numbers in the same column as the mod name is confusing.
3. Titles of unreleased, inactive mods shouldn't be wikified. What are we going to say about them?

I'm going to start cleaning it up now. --Mrwojo 15:47, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield:1942 are used interchangeably([[1]]) a lot of places, though i agree it better to leave it out is probably better.

Version Numbers can go in new columns, certainly. I had moved some to that format but a lot are left. Intially i thouht it was ok as the list was much shorter when I did it intially- and a release version of a mods is nearly as important as its name also factored in.

I re-tablized the 'inactive/moved' list, as eventually I hoped there would be another column for whether it ever had a website, or released screenshots. I was going to remove the ones that had neither, once that information was assembled. The usefullness of the short list and the mini list are debatable but I never decided on them. I also removed wikilinks for those minimods and inactive mods, as I agree there not usefull.

I was thinking of adding some backround color to distingush between moved, ended, or just dead mods like in the bigger table. Also more of the active but unreleased mods in the upper table will have to be moved down, as they move or decide on no BF42 release and keeping the format the same can allow saving work put into formatting that entry.

Finally, the disambig for mods is still up in the air. I was thinking just "(mod)" may be the best as a lot of mods change game engine so cant be pinned down, though this may be to general. The few of the bigger mods I did I didn't choose a disambig for as they tend to have unique enough names, though there are a number of un-done ones that do have this problem. Look forward to have any more idea you have- good luck! Greyengine5 18:12, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. All that sounds good to me. I personally think "(computer game)" would work fine, even for mods. The main problem I had with the colon is that there was no space following it ("Battlefield:1942" just didn't look right, "Battlefield: 1942" is better). Also, you only need to put one set of square brackets around a URL. If I can think of anything else that's important, I'll bring it up here. In the mean time though, I'll just make formatting tweaks. --Mrwojo 03:04, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Encyclopedic enough?

This list of Battlefield: 1942 mods seems to be striving for comprehensiveness, but I feel fails to understand the purpose of an encyclopedia. I do not believe listing mods that never amounted to anything is worth putting in an encyclopedia.

As an example: Many people have tried to climb everest. Should they all be listed? Or should those people of significance be listed?

I'm currently thinking about reorganizing how we list game mods. I will discuss that over at the Mod discussion. But the point I am making here is that this list of Battlefield mods needs to be pruned. Paitum 15:01, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I recommend leaving it alone, as its the only nearly comprehensive (for a time) list of mods for BF in existence. Determing which mods are truly not significant can be hard to do as mods can unexpectedly come out of dormancy, may have suggested a interesting idea only recognized in retrospect, etc..

Many in the second list released nothing more then a few screenshots, but within are old names, ideas, -and each making news items in its day and becoming part of the history of bf. I am against pruning this history away- which is much less arcane and insignficant then many other things listed on the 'pedia.

I do agree that the organization of mods and games in general needs a lot of work, but I would rather see work go into adding content in the many areas lacking it. Greyengine5 14:35, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Correction

Just to correct the author: under the dead mods you have Battlefield Firefighter. I am the Developer Leader and I can assure you the mod did not die. We decided to port to BF2 and abandon BF1942 and BFV. BF2 has features we need to do things we could never do with 1942 or Vietnam.

[edit] Move to Wikibooks?

I believe that this article would be unencyclopedic here, but would be better in a "book-type" format at Wikibooks, like other crufty lists.--Zxcvbnm 16:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)