AGS Award importance.

Iliya · Mon 20/10/2008 19:14:37

I just want to share what happened around 1 year ago. Someone wrote an article about Cosmos Quest in Wikipedia. In that article there was a link to the website of Cosmos Quest and a screenshot from the game. That article was included in many other wikipedia articles. My stats showed many visitors from that page and I was very happy about it. Then a wikipedia editor deleted that page

. For a every article deletion in wikipedia there is an explanation from the wikipedia editor. The explanation for the deletion of the article of my game was something like "The game is not notable. This game hasn't been awarded by the AGS". I don't want to argue if my game is notable or not. I just want to stress on how AGS Awards are important!!!

My advice: Every game that has an AGS award should have an article in wikipedia. Then include that article in all other related articles in wikipedia - adventure games, AGS article and etc. This will increase your website stats. I guaratee.

DanielH · Mon 20/10/2008 19:35:49

I don't think each AGS game should have a wikipedia article, perhaps one large article for lots of games.

On the other hand, that reason sounds like BS. It sounds like a stupid reason to remove an article, seeing as the idea of wikipedia is to create access to all knowledge. We should delete Psycho's wiki page because "The film is not notable. This film hasn't been awarded an Oscar"

LimpingFish · Mon 20/10/2008 19:51:44

Well, being mentioned on recognized gaming websites (a number of AGS games have been mentioned on 1up.com, for example) or published appearances in magazines and such, which you can link to on a wiki page, help sell the notability of a game.

SSH noticed a similar proposed wiki-deletion of a number of AGS games in a past thread.

Makeout Patrol · Mon 20/10/2008 20:02:13

I don't think this has as much to do with the AGS awards as it does with moronic editors on Wikipedia. I mean, I'd be glad if there was a "The Vacuum" page on Wikipedia, and I might be a little bit offended if it was deleted, but I wouldn't be surprised. I agree that needing to win an AGS award is what is required to make a game "notable" is stupid (is a game that won the p3n15 award in years past eligible for inclusion on Wikipedia?), but frankly with Wikipedia you just have to accept that it's powered by the sweat of single-minded, asocial, ill-tempered nerds.

EDIT: Oh, I see what you're saying. Yeah, I guess that makes sense, but I don't really want to be the one to write them...

Iliya · Mon 20/10/2008 20:07:11

Quote from: DanielH on Mon 20/10/2008 19:35:49
I don't think each AGS game should have a wikipedia article, perhaps one large article for lots of games.

I also don't think that each AGS game should have a wikipedia article. But every game that have won an AGS award should have a wikipedia page!!!

Iliya · Mon 20/10/2008 20:11:52

Quote from: Makeout Patrol on Mon 20/10/2008 20:02:13
EDIT: Oh, I see what you're saying. Yeah, I guess that makes sense, but I don't really want to be the one to write them...

I will make everything that will make AGS and AGS games more popular!

SSH · Mon 20/10/2008 21:00:08

Everybody keeps bringing up stuff I already said in my blog

...

However, winning an AGS Award isn't enough for Wikipedia as evidenced in the discussion here and here.

DanielH · Mon 20/10/2008 21:54:51

Bah. You know what I say? Ignore Wikipedia. Let them have their anal-retentive borderline troll nerds, spend a few minutes working on, and entering games into Our Wiki. We don't need them anyway.

(at least your game is guaranteed not to be deleted on our wiki

)

Iliya · Mon 20/10/2008 22:17:35

Quote from: DanielH on Mon 20/10/2008 21:54:51
Bah. You know what I say? Ignore Wikipedia...

I disagree. I will not quit searching the places to popularize my game, just because of the wikipedia editors.

PS: I'm receiving more visitors from wikipedia than from AGS website (which is not good).

Snarky · Mon 20/10/2008 22:25:31

I guess I take more or less the opposite view, in that I think very few AGS games are so notable that they should have a Wikipedia page. As an analogy, Wikipedia has articles on important paintings (say, Mona Lisa or Guernica), but that doesn't mean that every time I whip up a picture in Photoshop and upload it to the internet it should have a dedicated page in Wikipedia. Not even if it happened to win the Background Blitz or some other such contest.

There shouldn't be a Wikipedia article unless there's something to actually say about it. Is there any question that someone might have, which the article might answer? And can the information be verified against reliable sources? Most subjects that aren't notable fail one or both of these criteria.

Sure, you can try to use Wikipedia as a way to promote your games, but that's not the purpose of the Online Encyclopedia, and you shouldn't complain when the editors stop you.

Articles for AGS Award winners? Maybe the Best Game winners, probably not most of the others, unless they have some other claim to fame.

Iliya · Mon 20/10/2008 22:29:16

Snarky, my post is not complain! The post is about AGS Award importance.

Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens · Mon 20/10/2008 22:48:43

I also don't think wikipedia should be muddied up with entries for individual AGS games. I do think wikipedia could have an AGS entry with noteworthy/award winning ags games listed along with a link to their AGS wikipedia entry, though.

Snarky · Mon 20/10/2008 23:01:26

Yeah, I agree with that, ProgZ.

OK, Kinanev, that's fair enough. I think the reason given by the Wikipedia editor probably doesn't hold water, since as SSH points out, AGS Awards on their own probably don't establish notability, and there's nothing to stop a game that didn't win any awards from being notable on other grounds. S/He probably just meant to say that the AGS Awards can be used as a rough indication of whether the game is seen as significant even just within the AGS community.

I do think that the AGS Awards have importance outside of just here in the AGS Forums, because of things like this. The awards get reported on most adventure sites that cover indie games (and indie game sites that cover adventure games), and awards can be used to promote a title and drive traffic and downloads. So we should take that into account when we discuss the AGS Awards. I don't think we should conclude that we ought to add as many AGS articles as we can to Wikipedia, though.

Iliya · Mon 20/10/2008 23:13:21

"Notable" for one person means nothing to another. Who decides what is notable, and what is not.

What you will say if someone says that games in database here are not notable?
You will say "We don't care". We like them.

Makeout Patrol · Mon 20/10/2008 23:42:48

Quote from: Kinanev on Mon 20/10/2008 23:13:21
"Notable" for one person means nothing to another. Who decides what is notable, and what is not.

What you will say if someone says that games in database here are not notable?
You will say "We don't care". We like them.

Yeah, but Wikipedia belongs to the nerds, and the nerds get to set their own ridiculous standards that are dictated by their personal prejudices rather than consensus if they want to.

I agree with you - I make my games because I want people to play them, and as a result I want them to be as visible as possible, and as a result of THAT I would like it to be on Wikipedia. If the Wikipedia hive mind starts to conspire against me, though, I'm going to let the nerds settle it on their own, because it just isn't worth the drama and stress.

blueskirt · Mon 20/10/2008 23:51:34

I remember being involved in an argument a year or so ago regarding a crazy Wikipedia moderator who was on some crusade to remove all AGS games from Wikipedia, that being said, it was on the account that they weren't notable enough and didn't had any references, not because they didn't win AGS awards, and while I disagreed that all games should be removed, of the twenty or so games present on Wikipedia at the time, 12 or 13 were indeed insignificant games using Wikipedia to pimp themselves.

I do think AGS awards are important, for the reasons voiced by Sparky, but I don't think that all AGS awards winners should be on Wikipedia, or that an AGS award should be a requirement to be on Wikipedia.

Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens · Tue 21/10/2008 00:53:14

Well, a practical solution would be to allow anyone to add a link to their ags wiki game entry (if they have one). This would mean they would have to exert effort to make their AGS Wiki entry, of course, which will limit the amount of entries by virtue of the effort itself. A separate list could be displayed for award winners, possibly, since they do attract attention to the forums because many people rely on ratings and awards to decide if a game is worth playing.

Bai Karl · Tue 21/10/2008 08:51:02

Of course. Any game here don't deserve an article in Wikipedia. AGS forum is a closed community. That makes games here not notable.

Jared · Tue 21/10/2008 09:18:40

...I'm sorry, I thought a closed community was somewhere like Outpost Gallifrey, where you can't even view the forums before you register. AGS forums are fully accessible, along with their games, which are linked quite a lot online. I'll admit that awareness doesn't seem as high as I'd have thought it should be, but unless you work by radically different definitions I don't know how you can call the community closed.

Off-topic: aren't you full yet?

Also, on the subject of 'not notable' how about this, this, and this?

Bai Karl · Tue 21/10/2008 09:26:18

"Closed community" because AGS people here tolerate same games and same authors. And of course 320x200 (240) resolution mostly. New ideas are not welcome.