Talk:Quake Army Knife

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

[edit] Old history

When the old QuArK page was 'moved', the history wasn't moved to the new article-page with it. So it's still on the redirect-page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=QuArK&action=history --DanielPharos (talk) 20:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that the page was moved at all. The two versions existed and were edited in parallel. We don't do history merges in cases like this (as opposed to clear cut-and-paste moves). —Wknight94 (talk) 10:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Then I'd just like to point out for future reference, that this is the revision when the two articles were merged: 17:15, 5 March 2007 139.222.203.48 (Merged with QuArK article) --DanielPharos (talk) 10:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:VG Assessment

  • Why is it notable? You need to establish the significance of the programme, otherwise it might be deleted (WP:N).
  • None of the material in the article uses citations to reliable sources. This is required per WP:V.
  • Support list too long. Link to Id Software suffices.
  • Too much jargon. What is "GLScene", "OpenBSP",
  • Rewrite the trivia list to include it in the main body of prose.
  • "has an easy-to-use and intuitive interface", "much easier and quicker", "large variety of popular games" are classic examples of peacock terms.
  • Include one official website in the external links, any extra could be considered advertising or violate WP:EL in another way. That website probably guides the reader in the right direction anyway: currently, a "clueless" layperson reader has to choose between several vague links.

Rated stub class (no sources, large problems), no importance (no indication of notability). User:Krator (t c) 22:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know how to stike items marking them as done till now, so I don't have insightfull comments on those. Sorry about that. --DanielPharos (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, here's me again. I'm upgrading the article to Start-class because of the addition of some sources and the upgrade of the prose. Some suggestions:

  • Verifiability remains an issue. The book (I assume a coursebook?) looks very promising, maybe there are more coursebooks of its kind that discuss this subject? Out of curiosity, I did a "google scholar search", which is very promising. Check out this source, as well as the others here.
  • You need a lead section. See WP:LS. Basically, write two paragraphs summarising the article. If the article is this short, one is ok as well.
  • Can you write something on the release history and initial development of the subject? Sources for this should be easy to find in release notes and such. What were the major improvements?
  • Can you write something on the impact this thing had? The fact that it is used as a reference tool in courses on 3D modelling and game design is quite notable, and how did it influence that scene in general?

Good luck! This article is unique in its kind, not many good articles exist on such subjects. User:Krator (t c) 18:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)