352:, widely played by thousands of users at universities all over the world, widely distributed in Unix libraries to this day, widely referenced both in print and on the 'net. Notability can be trivially established in Google Books, for instance. Alastairward's apparent lack of even the tiniest amount of effort in checking his AfDs gives me cause for concern. Just as silence cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, bad referencing cannot be used as a statement on notability. Please stop wasting all of our time with these frivolous AfDs.
393:
On the wiki, "notability" is generally synonymous with "does really exist". We didn't create the guidelines to eliminate every article that isn't properly referenced, we made it to help remove articles on self-published BS topics. It is similar in concept to SPS or other tools - these aren't systems
876:- I think the article should be fixed with proper references added as necessary. If anyone finds this link useful, they're a bunch of old bookmarks I had on the subject when I ran a netrek server and was working on client enhancements. Includes a link to a project at MIT involving Netrek as well:
786:
of mentions in secondary sources is what defines NOT. GNG states that if you meet V more than once, then there is a presumption of NOT. You appear to be stating your agreement that these sources do indeed meet V more than once, so that would imply meeting NOT. Perhaps I misunderstand your concern?
672:
You are conflicting the form of the results with the results themselves. This game is mentioned in hundreds of different real-world sources. All of them meet NOT, V and RS. I have said my bit, repeatedly, and I am leaving it to the seven-day limit to close this.
389:
But there is the burden on you to not waste people's time - I'm here to add content, not argue about it. This AfD, and the series of related ones you filed, are a waste of time. In the interest of avoiding this in the future, let me explain why that is the
402:. If someone writes an article about his neighbor's kid's garage band, that's when you might want to pull NOT out of your holster. That would be an example of "clearly bogus", an article that does not add to the sum of human knowledge.
610:
It's all of those things apparently! It's the primary source, of course it will tout it's own notability. We need an independent, verifiable source. Why not provide some?
136:
536:
netrek.org clearly matches both of those criterion. But why are you talking about NOR now? Are you really sure you understand the wikilawyering you're quoting at me?
247:
417:
of the notability guidelines, not just the letter, before spamming the AfD with every article that isn't reffed. Use your common sense, that's why we have it.
394:
that lead to an AfD for everything that doesn't match one of the thousands of rules on the wiki (or there would be nothing left), they are systems that you
413:
passes the google test, notability is established. That's pretty much end-of-story for this case. But I encourage you to be sure you truly understand the
208:
Given GameSpot and Wired articles below, merge-to X or retention seems appropriate. Either way, needs to stubbified to get rid of gameguide dreckcruft. --
782:
states "The threshold for inclusion in
Knowledge (XXG) is verifiability", and "Substantial coverage... constitutes... evidence of notability". It is
76:
301:
Netrek was the probably the third
Internet game, the first Internet team game, and is the oldest Internet game still actively played (as of 2008).
625:
740:
704:
663:
579:
527:
437:
303:
925:
883:
17:
145:
It might benefit from trimming the long explanation of the mechanics of the game and merging into a general list of Star Trek games.
189:-- or if such a list wouldn't be an appropriate target for this article to be stubbified and merged into -- I'd be happy with its
288:
186:
165:
970:
731:
an admin. "haha, your argument is obviously untrue" isn't a very mature way to respond to things, last time I checked.
562:, and I'm failing to see where a single one is. Without sources, articles get deleted; this is why we have policies on
36:
498:, which states "To demonstrate that you are not presenting original research, you must cite reliable sources that are
428:"waste people's time"? There's no obligation to edit, you know. If you don't want to participate in an AfD, don't.
103:
98:
943:
915:
852:
792:
718:
678:
633:
593:
541:
422:
357:
231:
107:
969:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
910:
And restored. I was in the midst of major edits. May I assume from the thread you are the former 66.11.179.30?
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
736:
700:
659:
575:
523:
433:
307:
90:
276:
929:
887:
615:
451:
378:
336:
151:
901:
269:
821:. The point of my previous post is that none of the Google Books sources I looked at go into the topic
611:
447:
374:
332:
226:
Netrek and Star Trek are very different games. Putting them in the same article would confuse matters.
147:
939:
911:
848:
788:
714:
674:
629:
589:
537:
418:
353:
227:
897:
405:
The "does really exist" can be demonstrated in any number of ways, and that's why the google test
761:
the existence of the game, none that I saw present (or could be used to substantiate) a claim of
732:
696:
655:
571:
519:
429:
284:
947:
933:
919:
905:
891:
856:
834:
796:
774:
744:
722:
708:
682:
667:
637:
619:
597:
583:
545:
531:
511:
483:
455:
441:
382:
361:
340:
311:
259:
235:
217:
202:
177:
155:
60:
691:; merely saying "I think all these books can be used as reliable sources" does nothing to show
506:
the information as it is presented." Articles have to show siginificant real-world context via
255:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
817:
called for in the preceding section makes clear the cited reliable sources discuss the topic
806:
779:
446:
What is this "google test"? Are we meant to award notability on the basis of number of hits?
762:
495:
467:
830:
770:
479:
213:
198:
173:
643:
559:
555:
551:
507:
878:
373:, the burden is on those who edited wikipedia to add material to this article, not me.
51:
840:
758:
688:
651:
647:
515:
471:
280:
844:
801:
Perhaps the disconnect is in my notion of verifiability -- for me, it simply means,
251:
124:
896:
I did some cleaning up on the article, removed all the gameplay-related trash. --
94:
642:
No; merely being a book or a search result does not make something useful as a
826:
766:
475:
209:
194:
169:
713:
LOL. I'll let my co-admins pass judgement on the veracity of that statement.
924:
I have no
Knowledge (XXG) account and have not modified the article yet.
143:
The article does not seem to establish any notability for the subject.
554:, which means it doesn't establish notability; this is entirely what
299:
reading the article shows that it has provided claims of notability.
86:
66:
168:. Makes a dubious claim of notability that might be subsantiable. --
963:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
514:
of any kind are neither "directly related" to the subject nor
464:"notability" is generally synonymous with "does really exist"
757:
I've looked at some of the Google Books results. While they
588:
So first it was NOT, then it was NOR, and now it's IR.
558:
is about. The fundamental issue is, this article needs
131:
120:
116:
112:
825:; they merely verify that, "Yes, this game exists". --
879:
http://mmondor.pulsar-zone.net/netrek_bookmarks.html
494:
define the exclusion of unreferenced content, hence
938:Well I think I'm done with it for now, so go nuts.
490:Furthermore, the policies and guidelines very much
409:be used to establish notability. Since this topic
398:use as a tool when trying to delete articles that
727:Comments like that make me question why the hell
185:If there isn't the manpower/interest to create a
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
973:). No further edits should be made to this page.
550:netrek.org is the official site and therefore a
248:list of video game related deletion discussions
646:. We cannot cite a Google results page due to
803:there's evidence this isn't a hoax; it exists
650:, and therefore we cannot use them to verify
8:
246:: This debate has been included in the
847:seem to cover that definition as well.
74:
502:to the topic of the article, and that
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
73:
839:You're right. I should have added
187:List of text-based Star Trek games
166:List of text-based Star Trek games
24:
327:, which is entirely different to
323:, I said notability had not been
1:
466:is a specious conflation of
77:Articles for deletion/Netrek
990:
805:. The second sentence of
966:Please do not modify it.
948:11:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
934:23:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
920:23:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
906:23:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
892:21:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
857:01:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
835:23:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
797:20:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
775:18:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
745:14:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
723:13:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
709:18:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
683:16:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
668:14:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
638:13:52, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
620:13:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
598:13:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
584:01:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
546:01:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
532:00:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
484:18:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
456:22:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
442:21:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
383:19:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
362:19:27, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
341:11:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
312:06:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
260:19:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
236:01:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
218:01:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
203:18:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
178:18:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
156:18:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
61:06:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
687:None of them have been
72:AfDs for this article:
270:Star Trek (text game)
815:significant coverage
462:MM, the notion that
695:they are reliable.
508:independent sources
841:this Wired article
813:coverage, and the
44:The result was
845:this Gamespot one
400:are clearly bogus
293:
279:comment added by
262:
59:
981:
968:
881:
560:reliable sources
504:directly support
500:directly related
292:
273:
242:
134:
128:
110:
58:
56:
49:
34:
989:
988:
984:
983:
982:
980:
979:
978:
977:
971:deletion review
964:
940:Maury Markowitz
912:Maury Markowitz
877:
849:Maury Markowitz
789:Maury Markowitz
715:Maury Markowitz
675:Maury Markowitz
644:reliable source
630:Maury Markowitz
626:several hundred
590:Maury Markowitz
538:Maury Markowitz
419:Maury Markowitz
354:Maury Markowitz
331:it. Any cites?
274:
228:Maury Markowitz
164:and migrate to
130:
101:
85:
82:
70:
52:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
987:
985:
976:
975:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
950:
870:
869:
868:
867:
866:
865:
864:
863:
862:
861:
860:
859:
784:very existence
755:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
608:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
601:
600:
552:primary source
512:search results
488:
487:
486:
460:
459:
458:
403:
391:
386:
385:
365:
364:
346:
345:
344:
343:
315:
314:
294:
263:
240:
239:
238:
224:
223:
222:
221:
220:
141:
140:
81:
80:
79:
71:
69:
64:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
986:
974:
972:
967:
961:
960:
949:
945:
941:
937:
936:
935:
931:
927:
923:
922:
921:
917:
913:
909:
908:
907:
903:
899:
895:
894:
893:
889:
885:
880:
875:
872:
871:
858:
854:
850:
846:
842:
838:
837:
836:
832:
828:
824:
820:
816:
812:
808:
804:
800:
799:
798:
794:
790:
785:
781:
778:
777:
776:
772:
768:
764:
760:
756:
746:
742:
741:contributions
738:
734:
733:Haipa Doragon
730:
726:
725:
724:
720:
716:
712:
711:
710:
706:
705:contributions
702:
698:
697:Haipa Doragon
694:
690:
686:
685:
684:
680:
676:
671:
670:
669:
665:
664:contributions
661:
657:
656:Haipa Doragon
653:
649:
648:verifiability
645:
641:
640:
639:
635:
631:
627:
623:
622:
621:
617:
613:
609:
599:
595:
591:
587:
586:
585:
581:
580:contributions
577:
573:
572:Haipa Doragon
569:
565:
561:
557:
553:
549:
548:
547:
543:
539:
535:
534:
533:
529:
528:contributions
525:
521:
520:Haipa Doragon
517:
513:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
489:
485:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
444:
443:
439:
438:contributions
435:
431:
430:Haipa Doragon
427:
426:
424:
420:
416:
412:
408:
404:
401:
397:
392:
388:
387:
384:
380:
376:
372:
369:
368:
367:
366:
363:
359:
355:
351:
348:
347:
342:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
319:
318:
317:
316:
313:
309:
305:
304:76.66.202.139
302:
298:
295:
290:
286:
282:
278:
271:
267:
264:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
229:
225:
219:
215:
211:
207:
206:
205:
204:
200:
196:
192:
188:
183:
182:
181:
180:
179:
175:
171:
167:
163:
160:
159:
158:
157:
153:
149:
146:
138:
133:
126:
122:
118:
114:
109:
105:
100:
96:
92:
88:
84:
83:
78:
75:
68:
65:
63:
62:
57:
55:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
965:
962:
926:66.11.179.30
884:66.11.179.30
873:
822:
818:
814:
810:
802:
783:
728:
692:
612:Alastairward
567:
563:
503:
499:
491:
463:
448:Alastairward
414:
410:
406:
399:
395:
375:Alastairward
370:
349:
333:Alastairward
328:
324:
320:
300:
296:
275:— Preceding
265:
243:
190:
184:
161:
148:Alastairward
144:
142:
53:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
811:substantial
350:Strong keep
325:established
809:calls for
763:notability
654:, either.
652:notability
516:verifiable
54:Sandstein
823:in detail
819:in detail
568:exclusion
564:inclusion
281:Kkmurray
898:Collinp6
689:verified
329:claiming
289:contribs
277:unsigned
191:deletion
162:Stubbify
137:View log
807:WP:NRVE
780:WP:NRVE
510:; mere
411:clearly
371:Comment
321:Comment
297:Comment
252:MrKIA11
104:protect
99:history
759:verify
729:you're
566:, not
496:WP:NOR
468:WP:GNG
415:spirit
132:delete
108:delete
87:Netrek
67:Netrek
827:EEMIV
767:EEMIV
624:Will
556:WP:IS
476:EEMIV
470:with
390:case.
268:into
266:Merge
210:EEMIV
195:EEMIV
170:EEMIV
135:) – (
125:views
117:watch
113:links
16:<
944:talk
930:talk
916:talk
902:talk
888:talk
874:Keep
853:talk
843:and
831:talk
793:talk
771:talk
765:. --
737:talk
719:talk
701:talk
679:talk
660:talk
634:talk
628:do?
616:talk
594:talk
576:talk
542:talk
524:talk
480:talk
474:. --
472:WP:V
452:talk
434:talk
423:talk
379:talk
358:talk
337:talk
308:talk
285:talk
256:talk
244:Note
232:talk
214:talk
199:talk
193:. --
174:talk
152:talk
121:logs
95:talk
91:edit
882:.
693:how
407:can
396:can
946:)
932:)
918:)
904:)
890:)
855:)
833:)
795:)
773:)
743:)
739:•
721:)
707:)
703:•
681:)
666:)
662:•
636:)
618:)
596:)
582:)
578:•
570:.
544:)
530:)
526:•
518:.
492:do
482:)
454:)
440:)
436:•
425:)
381:)
360:)
339:)
310:)
291:)
287:•
272:.
258:)
250:.
234:)
216:)
201:)
176:)
154:)
123:|
119:|
115:|
111:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
48:.
942:(
928:(
914:(
900:(
886:(
851:(
829:(
791:(
769:(
735:(
717:(
699:(
677:(
658:(
632:(
614:(
592:(
574:(
540:(
522:(
478:(
450:(
432:(
421:(
377:(
356:(
335:(
306:(
283:(
254:(
230:(
212:(
197:(
172:(
150:(
139:)
129:(
127:)
89:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.