User talk:Marasmusine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

User talk:Marasmusine/Archive 1

Contents

[edit]  !

The Photographer's Barnstar
Marasmusine, I award you the Photographer's Barnstar in apprechiation of your excellant spider images. Kamope · talk · contributions 23:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Why thankyou! I have some nice photos of snails and bugs too, but nothing that isn't already represented on Wikipedia. Marasmusine 19:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I figured out you might have some more pictures since on your userpage it says that those are your images used in articles. May you please provide some links to the pictures so I can see them? Kamope · talk · contributions 23:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a few more onto my user page. I might upload a picture of my pet husky-cross dog too, if I can get away with it. Marasmusine 10:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I've put one of the snail pictures on Helix aspersa. Kamope · talk · contributions 13:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you'll find i have added a considerable amount of detail to the page Broken metal. I also asked for your advice on my talk page Kangphil This is what was on my talk page regarding the page Broken Metal: "Page Creator: I am still trying to gather information to put on this page, do you have any suggestions of how i could improve it? If i stated more facts about the functions of the pages would this help make it appropriate for wikipedia? Broken Metal is similar to the game Stars http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars%21 in that they are both turn based, have similar themes (space) a makor difference benig how they are played, Broken Metal is an online game, and Stars can be played by email. Kangphil 10:24, 9 March 2007 (GMT)"

Hi Kangphil. The article can be improved by showing that Broken Metal is a notable game, as encyclopedia entries are of notable things. The guideline for software (and therefore browser games) is here: WP:SOFTWARE. Here is the important bit: Software is notable if it has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the software's author(s).
So if the game has had any magazines reviews, for example, that needs to be put in. More detail probably isn't a great idea. Marasmusine 15:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by published works? The site is on other game sites, where the game if ranked in accordance popularity? Free Games and MPOGD are examples of this.Kangphil 15:09, 9 March 2007 (GMT)

From WP:SOFTWARE:
  1. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, user guides, television documentaries, and full-length magazine reviews except for the following:
  • Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the author or manufacturer talks about the software, and advertising for the software. Newspaper stories that do not credit a reporter or a news service and simply present company news in an uncritical or positive way may be treated as press releases unless there is evidence to the contrary.
  • Trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report version releases without comment, price listings in product catalogues, or listings on software download sites.
So a mention on a game ranking site isn't an indicator of notability. Like I mentioned above, a review in a magazine (or a notable internet site) should be fine. Marasmusine 15:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I cannot find a website, i dont know about articles published in the U.S. .Kangphil 15:33, 9 March 2007 (GMT)

I've had a quick look myself but couldn't find any notable websites that mention it. It could simply be the case that this game isn't notable enough yet. Sorry if I sounded a bit curt in my comments above and I hope this won't put you off editing other articles. Marasmusine 16:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Its ok, i won't be wasting anymore of my time on this anyway, especially if it will only get deleted.Kangphil 16:32, 9 March 2007 (GMT)

[edit] Deletion Of Google My Way

Googel my way is a very good personalised version of google. Many people use it everyday. As it is a veriation of Google, should it be put under Google? Djmckee1 15:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djmckee1 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Hi Djmckee1! If Google My Way has it's own claim of notability it could possibly keep it's own article. Have a read through WP:WEB, and if you think you can cite some references which show it's notability, you could try the article again. In either case I wouldn't mention it on the main Google; but it could go in the Category:Google category. Marasmusine 16:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Deletion of DROD Monsters

Please help me understand how it falls under WP:NOT when it's actually just an extension of the original article. It might seem that what you really meant is that it shouldn't have been categorized under Video Games, which causes it to appear on various lists. The design decision for separating the list from the main article stems from following the pattern of Doom article. Consult List_of_enemies_in_Doom. I'm not a policy man, so please explain it to me in small words. Maurog 04:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Maurog, thanks for replying. I feel the two articles are borderline 'game guide', are unreferenced, and have no notability on their own. List_of_enemies_in_Doom isn't a brilliant article but such a page can be justified because the enemies themselves are referenced in popular culture (due to the high notability of the game.)
If you still disagree, feel free to remove the prod tag. I'll see how the pages develop then in a few weeks possibly take them to articles for discussion if I feel the same way. Thanks, Marasmusine 07:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that they have no notability on their own, because they are inseparable part of the original article. You cannot apply 'game guide' policy - if you check the articles in question, you will see that they "present facts, not teach a subject matter" and don't "include instructions or advice, suggestions, or contain 'how-to's". As for references, please add the appropriate tags where references are needed and they will be provided. I will remove the prod tags for now, but add a copy of this dialogue to discussion pages of both articles. Maurog 07:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem, took them down and added to talk pages (because I misread your last sentence and thought you asked me to do it :>) Marasmusine 07:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
You ninja! I got an edit conflict... Maurog 07:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry! I'll also add some cvgproj tags and list them on the project page. Marasmusine 07:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No worries

The page was a mess. Although I'm an admin, I voted myself so I can't close the debate, but I thought I'd make it a bit easier for whoever does so. Orderinchaos78 11:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FWIW

Hello ... FWIW, the "original editor" of Superdeterminism is User:Superdeterminism who is the person behind the man described in the article Archimedes Plutonium. This article has been up for AfD for several days with quite a discussion. Regards, Keesiewonder talk 11:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that; might be best to scrap the article and start it again once things have settled down. Marasmusine 12:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Drumgod Clan page

Hello, I'm afraid I dont quite understand how this is a violation, this is about a well established group of gamers who have had a substantial impact on the Call of Duty gaming community, it doesnt promote any one person, as far as Notability, this group helps promote fair and responsible gaming for all ages. So, if you could tell me what I would need to do to put this within your guidelines, I would appreciate it! Thank You! Dgcvengeance

Hi, I can't remember now exactly what was on that article, but gaming clans normally aren't notable. WP:NOTE is the Wikipedia guideline on notability, the main bit being this: "A notable topic has been the subject of at least one substantial or multiple non-trivial published works that are reliable and independent of the subject."
So if there are any magazine articles or suchlike which are about the clan, that should be enough to make a good article.
The other important aspect is verifiablity, which is policy rather than guideline. The information is here: WP:V. Basically articles here should only report what has already been reported by sources independent of the gaming clan itself (which is the 'primary source').
I hope that provides enough information for you organize a good article, thanks. Marasmusine 14:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/r/User_talk%7EMarasmusine_5379.html"