Talk:MTV Drumscape

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I thought Drumscape is not made by MTV but by some other company... 64.180.0.130 06:25, 13 May 2005

It's labeled "MTV Drumscape", but is likely made under license through another company.Alcy 16:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Drumscape and other music games were produced by Devecka Enterprises. MTV's name was licensed to help promote Drumscape. Guitarz31 00:53, 28 June 2007

---

How is this machine competitive against or similar to DrumMania, as stated in the article? MTV Drumscape is pretty much useless to someone who doesn't know how to play the drums to begin with, and isn't even rightfully a game.Alcy 16:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

MTV Drumscape was created before DrumMania, it allows all players to "jam" or free play to songs. You can find your own beats. Unlike DrumMania, it did not require the player to play only what the software dictates. Since playing drums does not produce "bad notes", even first time players can sound good. Drumscape was a top earning game in the US and European Markets. Guitarz31 00:53, 28 June 2007

[edit] NPOV

The entire article is written in such a way as to glorify Drumscape. The last comment only furthers that assertion. I wouldn't be surprised if John Devecka (or one of his cronies) wrote this article themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.48.40.133 (talk) 09:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

That has been fixed. (see history) RJFJR 19:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. This issue has not yet been fixed. Although I have attempted to improve things (see below), still POV issues persist. This issue could be helped dramatically with proper citation for some of the claims. I have included some {{Fact}} tags for the claims most in need of citation, but the whole article is in need of more citation. -Thibbs (talk) 15:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Patent

Do we know the patent number? When does it expire? RJFJR 19:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Found the patent numbers. RJFJR 20:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Major rework

This article was in a shables prior to my edit just now. It still is in a deplorable state. I would like to explain what I have done here beside the standard reference fixes and basic grammar corrections so that there can be proper review of my major edit.

• To begin with, in creating subcategories I was forced to rearrange quite a bit of material. Some of it was redundant (did we really need two patents sections?) and some of it violated POV concerns (see the next bullet) but through the moving I have attempted to retain as much information as possible. If I have changed the meaning of anything important, please don't hesitate to BOLDly edit.
• Despite RJFJR's earlier assertion that the WP:NPOV issue had been fixed, the article was still clearly glorifying the game. Most of the POV edits to this article appear to have been done by former User:Guitarz31 and IP-editor, 68.196.86.39, who I notice had also added John Devecka to List of drummers. I would not at all be surprised if the three (Guitarz31, 68.196.86.39, and John Devecka) were in fact one and the same. I have done my best to remove all non-essential POV comments but several dramatic claims remain.
• I have added {{Fact}} tags to such suggestions as the claim that John Devecka has patents covering all music games, and the mystifying claim that "Drumscape uses a standard VCR not utilized in the final product" among others.
• I removed a youtube clip of Chris Alder playing the game since wikipolicy discourages use of youtube.

Finally, I have returned a number of improperly deleted comments on this talk page and I have made a bit of restructuring for clarity's sake. I will probably make a few more edits here if I have time since the quality of this article is still poor. Thibbs (talk) 06:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I just reviewed all of 68.196.86.39's edits and reinserted some of the information that had been deleted by this user. The reinserted material is not of the best quality either, and it must be sourced, but it is fairly clear that due to the source of the deletion combined with the lack of talk-page explanation for it, this deletion was nothing more than part of a pov campaign.

68.196.86.39: let me remind you that "Neutral point of view is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia" (see WP:NPOV). Your use of Devecka's company website as a source is highly suspect given the nature of your edits and it runs the risk of violating WP:OR, WP:V/WP:RS or WP:SPAM. Please refrain from edits designed to promote this product in the future, and above all do not remove material you find personally offensive without first discussing it in talk. Thank you. -Thibbs (talk) 07:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)