User talk:McGeddon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for moving the Boggle link to an internal link ... for some reason I couldn't find it when I looked Bcc cindy

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello McGeddon, welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello bot. Will you stop reposting this to my talk page if I put some content here instead of deleting it? --McGeddon 08:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for disambiguating Caylus!

Someone should have done it a while ago, but I'm so glad you made Caylus (disambiguation). Definitely appreciated! --Che Fox 05:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stanley Random Chess

Hi, and thanks for taking the time to post on SR Chess, and especially for taking the trouble to check my sources. It seems many people are rejecting the game out of hand without trying to verify whether or not it is a hoax. Even though we might not agree on the question of notability, I appreciate your comments, and your willingness to take the time to consider the evidence. I have tried to clean up the Stanley Random Chess page somewhat and improve the content to make it more encyclopaedic and factually accurate, although I'd be the first to admit that it needs more improvement.

On a different note, I had to chuckle when I came to your page and discovered you were a boardgamegeek.com member. I didn't realize there was a BGG page here at Wikipedia! I am an active member there (under a different name), and am looking forward to having a group of people over to my house this evening for some Settlers of Catan, San Juan, and similar games!

Happy gaming! Gregorytopov 21:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A further reply

Hello again, I got to enjoy some Liar's Dice, Settlers of Catan, and Elfenland last night - a great evening for a boardgamegeek!

Which do you enjoy most: Mao, Nomic, or Mornington Crescent? I've only had experience with Mornington Crescent, but from what I've read about Mao I think I'd love it too!

Incidently, I agree that putting Stanley Random Chess on exactly the same level as Mao and Mornington Crescent is unfair. Comparisons with some aspects of these games is legitimate, but SR Chess simply hasn't been around long enough to be on the same level, and hasn't had enough exposure to have the same kind of player base, although I think that chess fans of Mornington Crescent in particular will find Stanley Random Chess very appealing, and it is attracting more and more players all the time. But you were quite right to react negatively to the assertion that the game in terms of merit and active players is comparable with MC or Mao, although perhaps it has the potential to become as notable, which only time will tell. There are legitimate and many points of comparison with both games, but the same level of notability is not one of them, for one thing SR Chess doesn't have a radio programme associated with it!

SR Chess is essentially a Mornington Crescent version of chess, except it functions in a unique and workable game. Like Mornington Crescent, it parodies serious chess commentary, but it does so within an actual chess game (with unusual moves due to some element of randomness, but otherwise governed by the usual rules of chess) that actually works and is light-hearted and fun. Some play it for the game itself, others more for the Mao style fun with newcomers and the Mornington Crescent style commentary. For example, here's some analysis another user posted on a move in one of my current games: 3...c6. The simple Chess player would think this a strong move for the wrong reasons. It looks like Black is threatening an "en prisant" Bishop by 4. ... c6xb5. But 3. ... c7-c6! is a subtle and brilliant move because it corrals the knight on b8 leading to the Three Dog Knights game. In the mainline of the TDK, White gains a target at b7, but Black get ample compensation in immobility. It sounds awfully profound, and rather perplexing to the knowledgable chess player, but it is sheer nonsense. As a fan of Mornington Crescent, if you have even just a small interest in chess, I think you'll find it immensely appealing. Some players opt for commentary which leans more to the fantastic, with rather absurd anecdotes; others lean more to commentary like the above quote which mimics real chess anlaysis but is completely made up. And for both players, the game itself is fun (as I've said previously, it's basically like real chess, with a computer playing about half the moves at random).

It's too bad the site requires registration (or signing as a guest) for people to browse it - you are quite correct that this doesn't help my case. It's not my website, by the way, I'm just a member there. And although you are correct that many of the current games are a result of a tournament with 10 players, these are certainly not the only players of Stanley Random Chess - there are numerous others (including myself) who play but aren't even part of this tournament.

Anyway, thanks again for writing, I just wanted to send a note back in view of the fact that you enjoy Mornington Crescent and Mao, and you might just enjoy exploring SR Chess some more yourself - skilled Mornington Crescent players like yourself might welcome a new challenge! I'd like to learn more about Mao myself, but since neither I nor my friends have played it, do you have any suggestions about how to get into playing the game? Or should we just dive in and start playing? None of us are thoroughly familiar with all the conventions (eg Point of Order), and even all the base rules (which I understand are essentially like Crazy Eights), but do you think it's possible to start trying the game with a group of entirely new players, or would you need at least one person who's played the game before? I realize the game is especially fun if you have at least one person who isn't "in" on the joke, but I figure we could learn it as a new group, and try to establish the conventions, and then invite others to join us, and let the fun begin. I'd welcome any advice you have, given that I don't know anybody who actually has played the game before, which ideally would be the best way to learn it.

One final practical question, while confessing my newness to wikipedia: how do I stop my name from appearing at the end when I sign off. I use four tildes, followed by my user ID, but it repeats my name at the end of my signature for some reason - any ideas what I might be doing wrong?

Best wishes, Gregorytopov 22:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)Gregorytopov

[edit] Meeples vs followers

You have re-introduced some errors to the Carcassonne article by replacing the term "meeple" with the term "follower".

The rules have evolved considerably from the base game and in response to many questions about the relationship between the base game's "followers" and those that appear in expansions, numerous official clarifications[1] by Hans im Glück have made quite clear that the people-shaped figures from the original game, generally referred to as "meeples", are distinct from followers in general. In particular:

  • only they count towards majorities in features,
  • only they have their placement blocked by other followers (in fact, possibly just other meeples, though this is an open question).

The adoption of the term meeple as a semi-official designation for non-pig, non-builder (and potentially non-future-expansion-future) greatly simplifies many rules which would otherwise have to say "followers (except the builder and the pig)", or worse.

Please restore the term "meeple" where you replaced it (in your 01:09, 21 June 2006 edit) with "follower", or let me know what you think and I will do it. AmbientArchitecture 20:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I got your note, but disagree. I think you are too focused on purging what you view as a colloquialism at the expense of accuracy. You also argue that dropping "meeples" preserves "the game's official wording", but the game has evolved considerably since the base set was published, and the use of the term follower, without qualification, has become a source of considerable confusion. Perhaps the thing to do to make clear, at the point in the article where the expansions are introduced, that what has been said up to that point regarding followers, applies only to the basic game, and to be more precise about the use of the term from that point on. I've made a few changes that I think accomplish this. AmbientArchitecture 03:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Try thinking of it this way: if the game rules refer to the peice as a "follower", then somebody who hadn't played any of the expansions would be confused by the wored "meeple" appearing in its place. Also, if they are indeed different only in the rules and are physically the same piece, wouldn't it be easier to avoid this whole conflict and add a footnote stating that "The followers are often referred to as "meeples" because of minor rule differences between expansions."? Ahudson 18:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I think the article works now, at least for readers who've never heard of the game (all disputed instances of "meeple" have been removed"), but I still disagree. I think you are both arguing from a very abstract point of view. The fact is that almost anyone who has heard of Carcassonne has heard the term "meeple". Because the term "follower" in the basic rules often only applies to the followers that come with that game (i.e. "meeples"), the term has been widely helpful in clarifying how those rules should be interpreted when playing with expansions. AmbientArchitecture 19:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
umm.... half of the point of a wikipedia article is to help people that have never heard of the subject (or have heard of it just in passing and don't know much about it) Ahudson 19:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
You argue that a Wikipedia article should be accessible to a reader with no knowledge of a subject, but I think it is also important that an article not become immediately useless or irrelevant as soon as someone has acquired some experience with it. What that means in practice varies from topic to topic, but for games, it seems to me, the audience should include not only those who've never heard of a game, but also those who are beginning players.
How many novices have you taught Carcassonne to? The question of "what is a meeple" is one of their first; quickly followed, as they play with others, by confusions that are resolved most easily by saying "oh, that only applies to meeples? AmbientArchitecture 13:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
An abstract point of view is pretty much the point of an encyclopaedia. --McGeddon 06:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I see nothing in the article you cite that equates "abstract" with "inaccurate" or "incomplete", though I agree (if that was your purpose in citing the article) that this is a general problem with Wikipedia: there are lot of low-level contributors making a lot of edits without much experience or knowledge in the subject they write about, believing themselves to be implementing sacred Wikipedia policy. Anyway, that's an issue beyond the scope of this little present dispute, and I'm resigned to leaving the Carcassonne entry as is. AmbientArchitecture 13:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
My point was that an encyclopaedia is supposed to adopt an abstract tone of voice. The only point of view I'm arguing is that unquoted colloquialisms have no place in the body of an encyclopaedia entry. --McGeddon 15:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spam

Hi, I noticed you removed the links I just added for Podcasting, Table Tennis and Culture Jamming. We've been working hard to create useful resources in these areas and didn't think it was spam or repetitive with what Wikipedia already has. Please take a closer look and see if you agree. Respectfully --Raymond King 08:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. AboutUs is brand new and yes, it is seeded with information which was gathered automatically. The table tennis area, however, as an example is a page that I spent many hours on categorizing sites into subcategories such as "table tennis clubs", etc. And the other two categories are also ones which have been worked on to various degrees. The overall goal is to create resources that do not overlap with Google or Wikipedia, but are instead a careful human review and summarization of sites on the web in a given area. That said, I also understand the point about self-promotion and will endeavor not to do that. --Raymond King 09:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Gaming Collaboration of the week
 You showed support for Gaming Collaboration of the week.
This week X-Men vs. Street Fighter was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

[edit] City Life (PC Game)

As the maker of the City Life article i'm here to ask you about your recent edit. Is Tropico supposed to be a "modern city building" game? I know the Tropico article says you command the small island from 1950 onwards, but I still don't consider City Life and Tropico to be in the same "genre" of gaming. Actually, the only other game in the genre I assumed City Life was in was SimCity. Anyway, please reply when you can. --Jelligraze 05:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

That's fine. I didn't really care either way. However, i'd like to clear up one thing. You stated "disingenuous and unhelpful to narrow the definition of a game simply to be able to define one of its unoriginal aspects as "unique"." I don't remember if I put in the sentence you edited or if it was someone else, but I don't think it was added with the hope of manipulating the reader nor was I suggesting changing the category to boast a particular feature of City Life. The fact is many City Life fans, myself included, don't play Tropico so you can see why the error might have happened. And, simply for the record, "modern" city building is a genre usually used by fans who are heavily into city-building games and can often be found in forums such as Deepsilver (official forum, which I mod) & Simtropolis (SC fansite) to describe city building games that are clearly different from historic games which, usually, add a political and often militaristic element to gameplay. Anyway, sorry for any inconveniences.--Jelligraze 06:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikington Crescent

Thanks for telling me about the article. I was unaware that Wikipedia games had be listed as Wikipedia pages, not as article pages. The article has now been moved to Wikipedia:Wikington Crescent, and the deletion template has been removed. Again, thanks. ISD 14:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zombie Image

i don't care if it's not the photo I took, but we need a better image to describe 'Zombie."

[edit] Re: Repeated links to Alien Experience

Hello,

I received your message regarding the removal of repeated links to Alien Experience, a major fan site I co-administrate along with an extensive staff. While I can see how the links may have appeared to be promotional rather than for reference, I can assure you that the site is renowned in the online community for its wide range of content accumulated over the past six years, near daily news updates (especially with another sequel due) and the most active discussion forums in the fanbase. In short, it is the longest running, most encompassing and comprehensive site dedicated to this franchise, which I believe qualifies it as an external link according to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Our intent is primarily to guide fans and visitors with an interest in this franchise -- whether they be films, novels, comics, games or memorabilia -- to a wealth of information and content beyond that offered by Wikipedia. I noticed there are links provided to much smaller and inactive fan sites already (such as alienvspredator2.com, AbsoluteAvP, AVP Outbreak) , as well as sites managed by our own staff and soon to be hosted by our own server (such as the Alien Universe Timeline and Alien Encyclopedia). By comparison, and in the interest of organization, I believe our site fully merits a position as an external reference. We are often credited for news by other fan sites and lately, even major movie sites. Wikipedia entries for other franchises, such as Star Wars, Batman, etc., feature links to their respective fan sites as well.

Due to the expansive nature of the franchise, I thought the placement of links on all related pages would be appropriate, but admit that it is unnecessary and too unspecific. Instead, I ask that you allow me to place a link on only the major entries (such as for individual films, the crossover page, comics page and games page) directed to that particular section of our site for easier reference. If not, at the very least, I don't think a link on the entry for the first film is too much to ask. We are already featured under external links for the film Alien Vs. Predator: Survival of the Fittest as a primary news source.

Your reconsideration in this matter is very much appreciated. If you do not see my appeal in compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines, I am more than willing to make a compromise. Our website has been an invaluable resource for fans and we only want to expand Wikipedia's status as a the web's largest and most easily accessible repository of information.

Thank you for your time,

O'Malley
Co-Administrator, Alien Experience

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Shartakscreenshot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Shartakscreenshot.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 23:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Shaun Micallef.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Shaun Micallef.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 15:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/c/g/User_talk%7EMcGeddon_3383.html"