ID:110100
 Feb 26 2011, 9:42 am
|
|
Now that we have some good sources, thanks to SilkWizard, someone should rewrite the BYOND Wikipedia article
| |
|
Feb 26 2011, 10:01 am
|
|
Jeff8500
 |
Because every time I edit an article or create one, it gets deleted.
|
Those articles are about NEStalgia, not BYOND. They're not going to give you any ammo against the Wikipedia deletionists, unfortunately.
| |
But they mentioned that it's made with BYOND, which should provide us with at least enough sources for a stub that says BYOND is an online game creation suite.
| |
How about we just find and murder all the members of the deletionist cult and then write the article?
| |
Yer mawm lieks mudkipz!
| |
Airjoe wrote:
Those articles are about NEStalgia, not BYOND. They're not going to give you any ammo against the Wikipedia deletionists, unfortunately. destructoid and one or two others mention BYOND itself to some extent. i'm too lazy to hunt them down and see exactly what they said, though. i just remember the guy in the youtube destructoid video saying "it's made with BYOND, which i've heard complaints about, but it worked nice for me" | |
Most of the old article has been preserved here. A lot of it has been rewritten by me personally.
I once tried to add the BYOND article back to Wikipedia but it was deleted yet again. Despite the Wikibin article being mostly copy/pasted from Wikipedia some overzealous admin decided to delete it anyway under grounds of copyright infringement. | |
A mention of BYOND in passing is not going to be enough to cover WP:N. We tried this before, particularly with Richard Bartle's quote.
| |
Airjoe wrote:
A mention of BYOND in passing is not going to be enough to cover WP:N. We tried this before, particularly with Richard Bartle's quote. But didn't they say there was no other reputable source of that quote except the BYOND website? | |
NEStalgia is only one game. Besides, the name hasn't spread -that- far yet. There are still loads of people that absolutely hate BYOND and would love to troll anything about it no matter what new games there are or how much it's changed since version 3.0.
| |
Jeff- the quote was on Richard Bartle's own blog, which we linked to. Didn't matter, and neither will a destructoid video that mentions BYOND for two seconds.
Our best bet is to start a NEStalgia article to start building interest. We can later link that to a BYOND article so that it isn't an orphaned article (which will make it easier to delete when they undoubtedly protest its existence). | |
Wikipedias notability page specifically says " Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material". So I do not think BYOND it's self would meet the guidelines for it's own page.
Also, I don't think even NEStalgia meets the requirements for it's own page. The Wikipedia notability page says that independent coverage or recognition of a subject must not be a direct result of promotional activity. It also says publication in a reliable source is not always good evidence of notability. It also says something about short-term interest, but at the moment there has not been enough time passed to determined this. | |
The Magic Man wrote:
The Wikipedia notability page says that independent coverage or recognition of a subject must not be a direct result of promotional activity. NEStalgia was discovered, not promoted. Airjoe wrote: Our best bet is to start a NEStalgia article to start building interest. Creating the NEStalgia Wikipedia page is on my to-do list for tomorrow. Hopefully that will pave the way for a BYOND page. | |
Wikipedia sure has a stick up their ass. Aren't notability and popularity fairly synonymous? Or do you have to be a Hahhhvad-educated douche to decide if something is worthy of listing? BYOND/DM may not be popular compared to some things but it has had a heck of a lot more users than half of the notable programming languages.
| |
SilkWizard wrote:
NEStalgia was discovered, not promoted. Pretty sure it was discovered because of a direct result of your promotional activity. You know, the promotional campaign you were talking about, and the one I am pretty sure you did just a few days ago. Tom wrote: Wikipedia sure has a stick up their ass. Aren't notability and popularity fairly synonymous? Or do you have to be a Hahhhvad-educated douche to decide if something is worthy of listing? BYOND/DM may not be popular compared to some things but it has had a heck of a lot more users than half of the notable programming languages. Yep. The way it all works is rather silly. An easy way to check notability is to look at the references section of each page. If you cannot find several links to go there that are not from a credible source and not the direct result of the owner/creater of whatever the wikipedia article is about, then it's probably not notable enough to have it's own page. | |
Tom wrote:
Wikipedia sure has a stick up their ass. Aren't notability and popularity fairly synonymous? Or do you have to be a Hahhhvad-educated douche to decide if something is worthy of listing? Agreed. I can't imagine what a complete loser you'd have to be to lurk Wikipedia getting your thrills from deciding what is and isn't worthy of being featured. Almost makes me want to scratch off the "Organ Donor" symbol on my driver's license, just because the remote possibility exists that if I die in a car crash my organs could end up saving the life of some douchebag Wiki editor. | |
I'm way too tired to deal with you Magic Man.
I sent out 8 short emails early Wednesday morning while I was sitting at my computer in my pajamas. From that amount of effort, I'm either the most brilliant "marketing" genius that has ever lived, or the concept of NEStalgia simply caught the interest of lots of people and spread on its own. Take your pick, I'm going to bed. Probably should have done so two hours ago. | |
Don't worry Silk. I shall take the argument from here!
Let us dance, Magic Man! | |
SilkWizard wrote:
I'm way too tired to deal with you Magic Man. A quick Google for NEStalgia shows that 9 out of 10 websites that have it posted have the exact same article. Word for word, with the same images and video. So either you wrote that article (in which case, they do not count as a reliable source), or they all copied off of each other (seems unlikely). But in either case, you sent out emails to several sources, this is self promotion. The Wikipedia notability page says that independent coverage or recognition of a subject must not be a direct result of promotional activity. Promotional activity is promotional activity, no matter how you want to dress it up. | |