As I wish to avoid a dear user letter...I am doing a bunch of work on Rogue (Computer Game), and working on improving both its notability, and its general articleness. I wanted to ask you why you took away the italics on roguelike. I put it in italics because its a jargon word. Also I wonder why you removed the dialbo II refrence. Rogue, and its system of magic is one that started with old make believe games in Oxford, became Tolkiens Fairy world, inspired Gary Gigax to create D&D, inspired Michael Toy, in Rogue, and followed the books, gaming system, and wildly popular UNIX game, followed by Diablo, and Diablo II, and continuing on with World Of Warcraft. There is a common thread, of fantasy, that puts each of them on the map as important milestones in popular culture. Rogue, Diablo II, and World of Warcraft being three of the most popular computer games of all time. What would be the best way, in your opinion of establishing this connection across the articles? I see you have an interest in the article, and perhaps you can add a few suggestions as to how it may be improved. Thanks 71.193.2.115 (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I have a lot of concerns to address here. Let me start with the first:
I removed the itals on roguelike because it doesn't need to be italicized. At best, it should be in quotes to signify that it's a jargon word. But, in fact, I don't consider it a "jargon" word. It's a name for a class of computer games. What's jargon-like about that? Is the term "first-person shooter" jargon? (No, I'm not trying to say that roguelikes are first-person shooters—it was just an example).
I removed the Diablo II reference because Diablo, the first game in the series, is more like Rogue than Diablo II is. It had a randomized dungeon that was the focus of the game, like Rogue, while Diablo II was more expansive. While it had randomized dungeons as well, it was further removed from being a roguelike than the first game was. The only acceptable way to include it, if you really feel it needs to be, would be to say the Diablo series.
As for Rogue being the forefather of WoW, I don't buy it. It owes its lineage more to the popular role-playing games such as Dungeons & Dragons than it does to Rogue. While they both have elements of fantasy, just because Rogue came out before WoW (or even Warcraft, for that matter), it doesn't mean that one follows the other. Rogue didn't invent the fantasy-genre of games and doesn't need to be mentioned as the fore-father of WoW. Saying such is jumping to a conclusion and constitutes original research. Now, if you can find a verifiable reference that says the Rogue served as inspiration for WoW, that's another matter. But for now, without a reference, there is little to demonstrate much of a genealogy between the two.
You don't need to educate me on the importance of Rogue—I'm a fan from way back. But, to be honest, while Diablo, Diablo II and WoW are all very popular games, Rogue was never a big hit, despite the numerous ports it's had. It was only ever really popular among the hacker and geek subculture. While many non-gamers (and non-geeks) will recognize WoW and maybe even Diablo, almost none recognize Rogue in name or visible representation. So Rogue isn't really a part of popular culture as you state, but just geek culture.
In any event, I stand by my edits. If you have questions or concerns about them in the future, put them on the Rogue talk page so all Rogue editors can see (and respond) to them.
And lastly, please set up a user account. Getting an account is free and gives you more privacy than a straight IP address. Plus, it's easier for other editors to follow your edits (and give you credit for them) than by a a string of numbers. Thanks! — Frecklefσσt | Talk12:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And you certainly hit the nail on the head regarding Dungeons and Dragons. Pretty much all roads lead there. Even Rogue, which according to one of the authors was directly influenced by Adventure, which itself was directly influenced by Dungeons and Dragons. And the fact that Blizzard dedicated one of its recent patches for WoW to Gygax speaks volumes on his legacy and direct influence on the industry. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rogue, went from running on BSD, to being ported to almost every major UNIX distrubution, and including most minor ones. It was avaible from almost every shareware vendor I could find. I left out Dungeon Siege. Chris Taylor told me at E3, that his biggest influnces for Dungeon Siege were Diablo and Rogue! Of course I cannot use that, but it does point to the influence of early games on games designers.
I had a user account. The main page got vandalized weekly, for more than a year. I deleted it, when a few articles I helped improved were deleted for *notablility*, which despite the retroic, is just basically a popularity contest. American Idol is a much more important article than say...Ida Red. Editors and pesky admins can use my IP to trace my edits. 71.193.2.115 (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but I still stand by my edits. Verifiable references are the only thing we can use, which I gather you understand. So, we can only use in the article what we can prove. — Frecklefσσt | Talk12:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Collaboration of the Month nominations are currently open for WikiProject Homeschooling's Collaboration of the month. So far there have been two nominations. You can nominate and vote at May's Collaboration page (link).
Project member count reaches 37 members! Invite others using our invitation templates.
Jc37, I was about to create the Category:Wikipedian game programmers, but then saw it was deleted twice before by you. I see it went through a debate before it was deleted, but I can't find the transcript for it. Any chance you could point me to it so I can see what was discussed? Thanks! — Frecklefσσt | Talk13:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, Frecklefoot. I've been reading your wiki pages and discussion and wondered if you might be interested in serving as a technical editor for an upcoming book on the greatest games ever made (to be published by Focal Press). I'm the author of Dungeons & Desktops and my co-author Bill Loguidice has published a multitude of articles on Armchair Arcade and Gamasutra. The pay would be $500. Please let me know if you are interested; prefer email at mattbarton.exe at gmail.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattbarton.exe (talk • contribs) 18:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO Past Simple is suitable (like the present version). Why Past Perfect ?? It couldn't be used here (at least in British En. , don't know maybe in US En. there are different grammar rules, so tell me ;] ). Thanks, Sir Lothar (talk) 21:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an English expert, but it was awkward. The change in question:
a number of programmers decided they have had enough and left.
versus:
a number of programmers decided that they'd had enough and left.
The first sounds like the present. The second is clearly in the past. It happened in the past. I don't know why you prefer the former, but it sounds poor to me. If you feel I am greatly in error, bring it up on the Activision talk page. — Frecklefσσt | Talk21:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're the boss, you're the native speaker so I won't argue. But why not just Past Simple like: a number of programmers decided they had enough and left. ? Sir Lothar (talk) 23:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! I was just "passing through" this page, and came across this interesting thread. Though, am myself not native English speaker, and definitely not an English expert, I'd like to suggest the following "a number of programmers had decided that they (had) had enough, and left". Regards. —KetanPanchaltaLK09:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's probably the best wording, though it still has the double "has", but there may be no way around it. I'll change it if it hasn't been greatly improved already. — Frecklefσσt | Talk12:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mambo a Go Go
Bridge words/letters are suppose to be in lowercase regardless of how the title is marketed or formatted by the creator. Can you point to the style guideline or policy or common sense point that says this game gets to have an upper case A? --AeronPrometheus (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really familiar with this game. I just moved it based on how it was capitalized in the game article itself. If it is capitalized Mambo a Go Go by the developer/publisher, then that's the way the page should be capped. But if that's the way it's capped, the article text should match it. Right now, the article has it as Mambo A Go Go. — Frecklefσσt | Talk19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:X7ModuleCover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Blast from the past!
Well following is the comment that you'd posted waaaaay baaack on the talk page of an article called Triceps reflex:
"This article is nonsense to the layman. All Wikipedia articles should try to educate readers enough so they understand the contents of the article, at least to some extent. That means explaining jargon and writing in a straight-forward manner. Right now, it looks like it is aimed at an expert.
Also, the intro sentence is all wrong. It says what it does, not what it is. All articles should first state what the subject of the article is. The opening sentence:
The tricep reflex tests the patency of the sensory and motor pathways within the C7 & C8 spinal nerves.
Should actually read something like this (just an example):
Please rewrite the article so it conforms to the above suggestions. — Frecklefoot | Talk 22:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)"
Keeping in view your comments, I've made a few changes to the article, please do see if you find the article more understandable now. Actually, a lot more work would have to go into not just the said article, but also into articles that link to it. It's very challenging to remain concise, precise and intelligible at the same time when dealing with such topics where too many terms, and more importantly, concepts are involved that are important to understand the article, but don't happen to be their core subjects.
Likewise, if you encounter any other Medicine/Health-related articles that are very difficult to understand, do let me know, I might like to improve them.
Well, it looks better than it did, but it didn't hit the nail in the head. I re-arranged much of what you wrote for greater clarity and to conform to Wikipedia standards. In short:
You wikilinked the terms in the title of the article (i.e. Triceps reflex), a big no-no. Words in terms being defined should never be wikilinked. If you want to wikilink them, it can done later in the article, as it is done in the article.
You said the reflex is tested in the opening sentence. You didn't say what it is. The opening sentence of any article should first always explain what the subject is. This is covered in the Manual of Style.
Hi! All the changes you've made to the article are absolutely agreeable. While adding to the article, my major aim was to provide the additional information to make the article understandable. May be had I returned to it, I might have made further changes. But, of course, which is not to mean that your changes were not impressive. In fact, I was very impressed with them. The only disagreement would be that I'd have liked the various maintenance tags to remain as actually the tendon reflexes are very important topics in medicine (and I was really appalled to see the standard of this as well as other tendon reflex articles). Thanks and regards. —KetanPanchaltaLK16:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can put the tags back in, but you really should explain on the Talk page what needs to done to improve the article. The tag without any explanations is nearly useless. Cheers! — Frecklefσσt | Talk17:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Video games work differently that many software would be already in work by the time it is officially announced to public. (You see the trailers, do you?) As the article says, a preliminary rating õf a game is rated at the development stage and, is posted online. Hence the news leak. A final copy of the software have to be submitted for final review. SYSS Mouse (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the reference and it appears you're correct. However, having been in the video game industry for over 15 years, I've never heard of it happening. — Frecklefσσt | Talk11:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lindsay Lohan and Samantha Ronson
There are ongoing RfCs on both talk pages about the issue you inserted. Please discuss there and try to work toward consensus rather than adding contentious material before consensus is reached. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 12:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article is neutral - apologies for the detail which may have made it seem otherwise, but I am currently writing a book on the early members of the game industry and hence the depth of knowledge. The contents of the page are based on my reseach over the past 2 years. Do you wish me to stop editing the article? Or should I continue to add references where you have indicated they are needed? Cheridavis (talk) 14:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and keep editing it, adding refs. The version I converted to NPOV seemed overly gushing. So I assumed Langdell had originated the article himself. Just keep in mind, however, to present material in a neutral point of view. And when mentioning a person, apart from the initial introduction, refer to them by their last name. Take care! — Frecklefσσt | Talk20:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Invitation
You have been invited to join the Wimpy Kid WikiProject,
a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series. If you would like to participate,
you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks or add some of your own.
Thanks for uploading Image:BadDudesTitle.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I know you're just a bot, but apparently the members of the Video Games WikiProject think screenshots are a bad idea for the video game infobox. Since that's the only place where this would be relevant, I guess I'll just leave it alone and let it get deleted. — Frecklefσσt | Talk13:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problem
Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
I'm not good at providing rationale for such things. It's just a screenshot of gameplay and one of the attract mode title screen. Go ahead and delete them, I guess. — Frecklefσσt | Talk19:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have put some work into the Gary Gygax article, which I have nominated for a GA review. If there is anything you can do to help it get passed, please join in! Also, feel free to comment on the D&D WikiProject talk page regarding our efforts to get articles in the 0.7 release. BOZ (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problem with Image:RS1ModuleCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:RS1ModuleCover.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Found evidence that MicroProse Sytems owns no game titles
MicroProse has acquired not a single game title, they own simply the brand name [Talk:MicroProse#Is_Microprose_Systems_out_of_business.3F]. Worse since September their website is offline. The company is private, young and small, there will be no public announcement declaring that it shut down.
Sorry, but your source does not back up your claim and you're obviously not familiar with the US trademark and patent system. The patent and TM filing system is for registering tm's to brand names and properties - it does not track anything that is not filed for. It does not state ownership of said properties, because that's not what it exists for - it exists to track names, etc. that an owner wishes to protect. That would be in a securities statement (sec) etc. is for (listing business transactions and transfers of properties), if one exists or other legal documents. Likewise, it clearly states "ASSIGNS THE ENTIRE INTEREST". Likewise, the F-15 strike eagle source simply lists the last time a TM was filed, which was 1998. Hasbro sold their entire software division to Infogrames in 2001 (save the properties they publicly stated were kept), this included all the Microprose, Atari, etc. etc. brand and their assets. Its up to the new owner to file for tm's each time a property expires. You'll find that with other properties (such as Atari's Centipede for instance) filings have been kept up. And the I Dr.'s states Patrick is sharing ("ASSIGNMENT OF AN UNDIVIDED PART OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST") a percentage ownership of the brand with them. They did not "aquire it from him". Now I suggest you try once again and maintain a level head and call for an RFC before trying to make these changes and wild accusations. You have found zero proof that anyone lied, and your attitude and obvious slant towards your edits are going to start bordering on disruptive editing - which I know you don't want. You've accused a company and individual of lying without actual evidence of such and which violates several Wiki policies, and you've now accused me of lying the last x months and being incapable of researching said topic - which I take as highly offensive. And I'll add one more thing regarding why I'm further offended at your claims - *I* was contracted to do an update to F-15 for them for XBLA and a flash mini-game. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:11, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And once again, the Microprose article should not return to its previous state. The way its currently structured encapsulates the original brand and companies from any future ones - which is something *you* wanted. As is stated, this isn't the last use of the brand, and the fact that someone is no longer licensing the name and titles from Patrick does not change the fact that they were and that the brand was exercised publicly over the past year. Regardless of any personal "thing" you have against anyone. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don Bluth
Frecklefoot,
Just got back on the site, sorry for not responding to this last year. The information we posted last year was from personal experience. When we reviewed the page last year, Gary asked me to update the info that was incorrect. Any links we deleted may not have been relevant info. Can this still be reverted?
Sincerely,
Kip Goldman
Associate Producer
Don Bluth Films, Inc.
PS, Don is semi-retired, however, we are currently seeking financing for a 2D Dragon's Lair movie.
Thanks for responding. Please see your talk page where this discussion was originated. I also moved your comments above to there for clarity. — Frecklefσσt | Talk01:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Frecklefoot,
Thanks. I'll see what I can verify. That looks close to what we posted last year.
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Endless Stair, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
