Talk:LUGNET

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	The LUGNET article is part of WikiProject Lego, an attempt to expand, update, and improve all articles relating to Lego on Wikipedia. You may edit this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives for the project.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as mid-Importance on the importance scale.

I took out the bit about Lugnet editting user posts for vulgarity, etc. This is untrue. - Lenny Hoffman

They do have a system called "murfling" that provides a warning about posts which contain offensive language. It doesn't censor, it just warns. I think it's kind of neat. Would that be worth mentioning in the article?Elliot Pratt 03:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admins

As Lenny resigned from his position, I took him off the list, and then a while later changed the text so that it read "Five admins" instead of six. - Kevin Blocksidge

Edited names of admins once again, to match info here: http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=12976 - Kevin Blocksidge

[edit] Link issues

This sentence reads sort of funny: "The website also features a database of LEGO sets and provides links to other major LEGO sites such as LDraw.org (http://www.ldraw.org), distributor of popular LegoCAD programs; Brickshelf (http://www.brickshelf.com), free image hosting site for LEGO fans; Peeron (http://www.peeron.com), a LEGO parts inventory site; MOCpages (http://www.mocpages.com), providing web site hosting for LEGO fanatics; and a variety of themed forum sites."

Not sure how to fix it, but it sort of leaves the impression on first reading that all those other things are part of LUGNET. Maybe if the list of links were bulletized? I do have to ask, is linking to other sites important enough to warrant a paragraph larger than many of the rest? I don't know the right answer. ++Lar 05:15, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Revert war?

Examine the history and you will see that there appears to be a bit of a slow running (not 3RR violating, mind you, but there nonetheless) revert war going on about Lego vs. LEGO as the proper capitalization. The current Manual of Style clearly says that here at Wikipedia, Lego is the proper usage, despite company preference. (note that BrickWiki usage guidelines are different but that's there not here). May I suggest that some sort of warning or comment (if there's a template already, great!) be placed at the top of the article to cut back on the wasted effort of the reverts? Changing capitalization policy cannot be done here, better to argue it on the MoS talk page... ++Lar 23:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)