So, the SRB2 Wikipedia article

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is it marked for deletion, anyway? Because it's a fangame? There are quite a few articles on fangames that are apparently fine.
 
I posted, saying that it's too popular to be neglected. I have a different screen name on Wikipedia (I.M.Fearless, big points to anyone who can tell me where it came from) so they probably won't recognize me from here. However, it's a recent name, and I've hardly clocked 10 posts yet. Most of those are even in discussion (on Sonic 2006, at that). Plus, these people keep complaining that it's "fanpeople" who post the keeps.
 
I actually think people should stop posting at this point. I don't think anyone will honestly call meatpupping since everybody offered valid points, but the Keeps outnumber everything else by far, and at this point, more votes might do more hurt than good.
 
Nah, Arrow. It's pretty clear at this point that there is no way that it's going to be deleted. I mean, there are only two delete votes against a sea of keep, and while a lot of them are meatpuppets, quite a few of the keeps aren't meatpuppets. Assuming you have a Wikipedia account and have been using it for a while, there is absolutely no reason not to post a "Keep", assuming you have a reason for it.
 
Now then, it's pretty much clear that the article isn't going to be deleted. However, I'd also like to point out that the article does suck pretty hard, and no one really addressed that earlier in the topic. I just did a basic purge of the article and tried to get rid of some of the really useless crap, but there is a ton of stuff that's important and interesting that isn't mentioned in the article at all.

I highly encourage you people to go over there and edit the article to improve it. Read Wikipedia's explanations about how it works and have at it. A reminder to those who never use Wikipedia: It is an encyclopedia. It's not supposed to show off your mod or be clever or cute. First and foremost, it's supposed to be informative and helpful, giving detailed information on the subject.
 
And remember, when doing editing, specify a Summary. The Summary is entered into the edit box below the main editing box. In this box, you type out what you have changed, to make it easier for others to see what you edited.

Also, if your edit is a minor edit, check the box that says "This is a minor edit". An edit is a minor edit when it's just about a few fixes in spelling or grammar. Otherwise it's a normal edit.
 
I'm normally the guy who does tidying up of articles, and fixing of spelling mistakes. Just did an edit, by removing the second Multiplayer section (why do you need two?).
 
Well, what I did was take Mystic's Multiplayer paragraph (which is a good length) and replaced your with it, in the section where it should go. We really don't need two multiplayer section, like I said.
 
Mystic said:
Besides, these are real people. Several of which with Wikipedia articles that contribute. Personally, I think the consistancy of it is more important than the source, because if a bunch of people who just got there and a bunch of people who have already been there for some time all offer the same opinion, that's just as fine as just a bunch of people already there offering the opinion. No one except the person who offered it up for deletion wants it deleted, so this shouldn't shock anyone.
Click to expand...

Amen. Now I'm off to do something to help with the article.
 
Well, at least this guy didn't edit out the feature list from the features section for no reason and mention it like it was a good idea, edit out the external links section and not mention it, replace the links with a "Forks" section and mention it as though it were somehow needed, which is links with most things that are useful removed and didn't give a direct link to a site with nothing wrong, posted the address in a (), then claimed that it was on the blacklist, which if it was, disappeared off it quickly, and also link to the discussion page where there might have been a discussion, but it was probably resolved. It was overall unnesscecary, pointless, and completely stupid, yet the guy treated it like it was a-ok for some reason. Just be glad something like that didn't happen. A similar thing happened to the Bungie Studios page, except it was blanked except for random chunks of the company info box, so I decided to copy and paste an earlier revision to restore it. Except I forgot a good bottom part of the page, so I had to do it again. then it was corrected. Most of the time was spent with me feeling annoyed at the guy who acted like an idiot and decided to blank it except for chunks of the company info box and thought it would be funny. Never contacted him ever. Nor do I know his username.

Again, atleast the idiot didn't do the above. Then again, he couldn't have been able to, judging by his stupidity.
 
The guy who put the AFD and Cleanup on the page isn't a n00b, just some senseless guy who apparently has a grudge against the article. It did need a bit of cleanup, but it seemed like he was trying to get rid of the page.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)

Back
Top