Stop the evil!

SSH · Mon 11/12/2006 11:30:48

Vote to keep important stuff on wikipedia! Some guy has been going around marking lots of amateur adventures for deletion. Support AGS games by adding references and otherwise improving the quality of the articles.

Stuff he has marked as non-notable include:

The Shivah
Apprentice
Ben Jordan

O_o

Please, however, don't make personal attacks on anyone.

Vince Twelve · Mon 11/12/2006 11:45:22

Can I make personal attacks here?

Because here is the guy's website, and here is the guy doing some of the worst open-mic stand up comedy ever.

Edit: the guy also wrote a scathing review of Barbie Super Model for the SNES.

I seriously can't understand why this guy advertises some of these things on his webpage. It's just too easy. You at least have to search a little (a little) to find the dumb things I've done in the past.

[Mod edit: Links removed to anonymize the person in question]

Helm · Mon 11/12/2006 11:55:17

QuoteI am an administrator (meaning I can block users and delete pages)

I love how telling this is.

ManicMatt · Mon 11/12/2006 11:59:28

Does he have any wiki articles? Fight fire with fire!!! So what if he's admin or something there!

His stand up is more like sit down and shut the f*ck up, please!

He seems really full of himself.

His argument "700 hits is very few" Oh yeah, sure mr 400-odd views for his lame stand up act! Also people, don't watch his stand up act actually, we dont want to give him hits now do we? (Wished I knew it would be counting so i didn't)

EDIT: Excerpt from his barbie review: "if you gave the cartridge away for free nobody would want it. Actually, someone might, but only for use as a doorstop, or perhaps a paperweight."

Ooooooh that's so original! A paperweight! Oh how DID you come up with that one? (Note sarcasm)

Vince Twelve · Mon 11/12/2006 12:19:30

Ok, yeah, sorry I started that. We should actually be taking the fight to Wikipedia. Fighting FOR the articles SSH mentioned, not AGAINST the guy. Even if he makes it really easy.... :

scotch · Mon 11/12/2006 12:32:10

He's just an admin that saw a page about some freeware games without any sources and marked it for deletion... he's not the antichrist! SSH's modifications will probably save it, the articles probably meet the notability requirements now.

m0ds · Mon 11/12/2006 13:01:26

Daft [Redacted]!

If things go into turmoil my fingers are ready to abuse him!

ManicMatt · Mon 11/12/2006 13:19:46

Quote from: Vince Twelve on Mon 11/12/2006 12:19:30
Ok, yeah, sorry I started that.

Nope, i was ready to rip him before I read your comment!

DGMacphee · Mon 11/12/2006 13:45:41

what a nerd

LimpingFish · Mon 11/12/2006 20:30:01

Lost in the Nightmare...

It is proposed that this article be deleted, because of the following concern:

No reliable source for notability. Fails WP:SOFTWARE.

For explanantion see here.

People really have nothing better to do?

EDIT: Cirque de Zale hasn't been targeted yet, I can't find any others. All of Yahtzee's games, and the entry for Ben Croshaw himself, have deletion warnings. RON also has one. This is not on

Kweepa · Mon 11/12/2006 20:54:51

Perhaps these games aren't notable, as defined by wikipedia.
It doesn't stop me enjoying them.

scotch · Mon 11/12/2006 20:58:28

Yeah, I'd let a few wikipedians work it out if these are worth keeping. If we're the ones keeping them there then it's not a lot better than a vanity page, we know a lot of the authors personally... but it's good that SSH has added more information to the pages, that will help them decide.

ManicMatt · Mon 11/12/2006 21:06:16

Actually I am annoyed that he would prefer to see, say, FIFA 2007 have it's own wiki page than Grundislav's homegrown efforts.

scotch · Mon 11/12/2006 21:31:57

Wikipedia isn't a repository of obscure underground knowledge, and inclusion isn't a judgment on the quality of things. Just because your mum's apple pie is better than Delia Smith's doesn't mean she should take precedence over Delia on wikipedia, because she's not as culturally significant. The wiki admins have to deal with a lot of pages made by people that think that is how it should be though... pages about their new webcomics, sites, bands or even about themselves. I think BJ is worth inclusion in a large encyclopedia, but only just.

Radiant · Mon 11/12/2006 21:34:54

I am an administrator too (meaning I can block users too and delete pages too)!

No, that doesn't mean I have veto power or anything, but I'll keep an eye out for these. The rewrite by SSH should do the trick; the thing that matters is if the game has an outside review (e.g. on JustAdventure or such). Without outside review, any n00b can pimp their game and that's simply not what an encyclopedia is for; outside review proves you're famous enough. Don't bother voting if you're not already a member, because it doesn't count. But if some nasty admin kicks you out, drop me a line and I can probably help.

I see that some of the game screenshots have already been removed because they were copyrighted. Wikipedia has to be very careful with copyright since they don't want to get sued; this is mostly the fault of America's triggerhappy system of law. If you want a screenshot of your game on Wikipedia, the best you can do is upload it there yourself, and clearly state "I made this game, and I put this screenshot in public domain" or something like that. Then it won't be deleted.

LimpingFish · Mon 11/12/2006 22:23:49

Technically, NO (or at least very few) non-commercial games would meet the criteria mentioned here.

It's not worth getting into a knot about, though.

SSH · Mon 11/12/2006 22:46:59

I think many games would meet the criterion "The game has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the creator of the game: This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations except for the following: Media reprints or rewrites of press releases, advertising for the game, published walkthroughs/guides for the game, brief magazine mentions, brief television mentions, brief mentions for change in release date mentions, etc."

So, reviews, in other words....

LimpingFish · Mon 11/12/2006 23:20:44

Well, I guess if look you at it that way. Non-Trivial is an interesting term, though. How is that defined?

EagerMind · Tue 12/12/2006 04:31:55

Actually, I think I'd agree that most of these games aren't really notable. Ben Jordan is notable to us, but you don't really see many non-affiliated publications talking about it. Same with RoN and a lot of the other AGS games up there. Doesn't mean they're not good, enjoyable games.

The Shivah could probably pass, since Dave Gilbert made a presentation at that independent gaming convention, his game has been mentioned at Manifesto Games and in PC Gamer, and especially if he's able to be commercially successful with his games.

I'd agree with Maniac that FIFA 2007 probably doesn't deserve an entry. The FIFA series maybe, but I don't think each title needs its own entry. Who's gonna be the first to go slap a "this should be deleted" banner on it?

This guy being a jerk is a different matter. Of course, whenever I try to be funny, the first thing I always turn to is Nazi Germany. Those silly Nazis always get big laughs for me.

Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens · Tue 12/12/2006 04:47:02

Hmm, I'd have to agree that I don't think amateur and non-commercial games deserve wikipedia entries unless they have drawn public eye for doing something innovative or otherwise important. We have our own wiki for such things, anyway!

Stop the evil!

m0ds