Talk:Superpower Classic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Weasel Words

Superpower: Classic is a forum-based nationsim. It is currently one of the largest nationsims in existence.

Is it? How do I know this?

modificated

You mean modified. I will edit this; modificated is most definitely not a word.

In 2001, what is today recognised as one of the largest nationsims was started by a breakaway player from Qpawn 2000. Using the rules and layout of Diplomacy and Conquest (with permission from the previous operators of that sim), he created a new game called Superpower: Classicc . At first, the sim was small and concentrated to a playerbase recruited from an online gaming clan which the admin was a member of. Soon, thanks to heavy modifications of the forum by an administrator, Superpower: Classic grew explosively to become one of the largest sims out there. Superpower: Classic has evolved to adapt a new set of rules different from those first rules from Diplomacy and Conquest. It is the only geopolitical sim that uses real-life individual military units which add a depth to the game (especially in the area of military construction/purchasing).

1. Same as the first; how do we know this? It may or may not be true, but as the saying goes, "if a tree falls in the forest".

2. Superpower: Classic may be the only game that uses real military units. But it's highly unlikely that you can verify this, as anyone can start a game and use real-life units, rendering this statement invalid. You may, of course, make note of the fact, but you may not claim more than you know.

As for the cleanup and advert tags, the language in this article appears to be heavily biased to promote Superpower: Classic. I know because I've written articles like this before (not on WikiPedia, but on various other Wiki's, before I moved on). The language needs to be cleaned up a bit, and the article should read less like an advertisement and a diary and more like a critical look at what makes this game unique. 71.235.66.254 05:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

I've asked for references for this article three times now. The only citation presented has been the URL of the game itself. That is not a source. Articles require sources. Furthermore, our WP:WEB criteria require sources that are independent from the subject. Articles that don't satisfy these criteria do not belong in Wikipedia. Please cite sources. Uncle G 13:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The site contains links to other nationsims, which are independent of SPC, which in return are sources to confirm the existance of SPC. Itake 13:33, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

In other words, you're saying that when I am required to post a source, I could just post a link to [google, as google contains links to other nationsims which are independent of SPC and in turn sources to confirm SPC's existence and relevance. Or, no, wait, you should provide the actual sources. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 09:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Err, a source for what? For the existence of the sim? Is that in dispute? Sprotch 12:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

No, sources for:

• it is one of the largest nationsims in existance
• and regarded as a pioneer within the nationsim community
• was started in 2001 by a breakaway player from Qpawn 2000
• the game in turn became the basis for other nationsim off-shots

They now have cite-tags, when your message was written they were removed by the game's founder, Itake. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 12:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, all such assertions need to be backed by a source. This is made very clear at Wikipedia:Verifiability. Sprotch 13:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The source provided for the first statement (it is one of the largest nationsims in existance) is clearly not a source worthy of inclusion. Why?

1), I am not even able to view it. For some reason it states "Sorry, you are not permitted to use this board. You may be sharing an ISP with someone who has been banned from this site, or you may have been banned yourself.".

2), it is a self-reference. Our WP:WEB criteria require sources that are independent from the subject.

3), it is (presumably) not a source comparing different nationsims and showing that SPC is one of the largest, or a source claiming SPC to be one of the largest nationsims.

4), it is (presumably) nothing but a list of the members of SPC.

Point 4 is obviously the most crucial one here. Itake claims that that page in itself contains references, but then these should be provided - especially as I am unable to even access the page in question. I am however not going to revert those changes again, just adding a disputed tag. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 01:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Searching very hard, I cannot find a single reference to a wikipedia policy that states article sources have to be viewable by User:Jobjörn. The links in questions are definently independent of SPC, its a source showing that SPC is one of the largest nationsims. Itake 01:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, either my IP is banned, or my ISP is banned. I can't see any reason as to why my IP would be banned, and as thus my ISP would presumably be. My ISP, Telia, is one of the largest ISPs in Sweden, so banning it makes it unreadable by quite a lot of people. But OK, I retract that point - what about 2, 3 and 4?

You have repeatedly claimed that the page you sourced (that I can't view) contains links to sources showing SPC as the largest nationsim: why can't you just post the URL of that instead? Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 01:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I can see it, it appears to be the member list of the Superpower Classic forum. I cannot see the statement to the effect that it is one of the largest nationsims in existance or who the publisher is. Sprotch 17:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, Sprotch is correct, the source does show there are a lot of people playing superpower, but without checking how many people are playing other nationsims the statement cannot be verified. It is not a source then. Besides, Itake is clearly doing merchadise here. This article should be either entirely modified or deleted. --El Chemaniaco 15:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)