Re: In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned.
This may just be an indication of a serious flaw in Wikipedia's design and what will lead to its eventual decline. Citations seem to only be accepted if they are on the internet rather than in printed papers, and some hobbies just aren't big enough not to fall under the axe of some of the Wikipedia people with an agenda.
My biggest concern about this issue is simply that apparently mud sites have no legitimacy, and random people get to determine if something is "popular" enough. I simply have no idea how that is going to play out due to the fact that popularity of all sorts of hobbies waxes and wanes, and who is going to keep the mudding hobby alive enough for Wikipedia?
|