Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post - In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned.

Milawe · 01-06-2009, 01:48 PM

It's actually just one reason: notability. You can easily see this in the discussion on Wikipedia.

MudMann's logic is actually a very easy one to follow. Take this entry:

Now, go to the references. Peer review, peer review, expert review (Egbert's), popularity list, another list, blog. Apply the standards set to the Thresold entry. Bye, bye entry.

How about this one?

References are from Wizards of the Coast, the company that owns the Dragonlance copyright. Articles cited are written by the authors of Dragonlance or from the official Dragonlance forum. Apply the standards being set to Threshold's entry. So long, Dragonlance! Actually, Dragonlance would get deleted far before Threshold would with those references.

Yet, Dragonlance spawned more than 50 novels by various authors. Untold numbers of people have played DnD with Dragonlance modules. Who knows how many people have read the books. Yet mainstream media hasn't really written about Dragonlance.

So, tell me exactly how you know for a fact that Threshold has had no impact on society, and then tell me how that even matters based on Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. There is no WP:NOIMPACTONSOCIETY.

Don't let your disinterest and biases against Threshold blind you on the issues here. I know you don't have a whole lot of love in your heart for Threshold, but as I said before, this has moved beyond the scope of Threshold. The entry itself now is irrelevant. No one's being allowed to improve it. The people who could improve it aren't interested in doing so. Whether it lives or dies matters not at all to the actual game, but the precedent it sets matters to our genre.

Try applying it to something more dear and near to your heart:

References: All from TSR or Wizards of the Coast, the company that owns the copyright to Dark Sun. There's actually no references there that determines notability at all, just verifiability. It has not been written about in a third-party, reliable source according to the standards set to the Threshold entry. I think you start to see how the problem perpetuates itself.

01-06-2009, 01:48 PM	#96
Milawe Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: USA Home MUD: Threshold RPG Home MUD: Stash Home MUD: Archons of Avenshar Posts: 653	Re: In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned. It's actually just one reason: notability. You can easily see this in the discussion on Wikipedia. MudMann's logic is actually a very easy one to follow. Take this entry: Now, go to the references. Peer review, peer review, expert review (Egbert's), popularity list, another list, blog. Apply the standards set to the Thresold entry. Bye, bye entry. How about this one? References are from Wizards of the Coast, the company that owns the Dragonlance copyright. Articles cited are written by the authors of Dragonlance or from the official Dragonlance forum. Apply the standards being set to Threshold's entry. So long, Dragonlance! Actually, Dragonlance would get deleted far before Threshold would with those references. Yet, Dragonlance spawned more than 50 novels by various authors. Untold numbers of people have played DnD with Dragonlance modules. Who knows how many people have read the books. Yet mainstream media hasn't really written about Dragonlance. So, tell me exactly how you know for a fact that Threshold has had no impact on society, and then tell me how that even matters based on Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. There is no WP:NOIMPACTONSOCIETY. Don't let your disinterest and biases against Threshold blind you on the issues here. I know you don't have a whole lot of love in your heart for Threshold, but as I said before, this has moved beyond the scope of Threshold. The entry itself now is irrelevant. No one's being allowed to improve it. The people who could improve it aren't interested in doing so. Whether it lives or dies matters not at all to the actual game, but the precedent it sets matters to our genre. Try applying it to something more dear and near to your heart: References: All from TSR or Wizards of the Coast, the company that owns the copyright to Dark Sun. There's actually no references there that determines notability at all, just verifiability. It has not been written about in a third-party, reliable source according to the standards set to the Threshold entry. I think you start to see how the problem perpetuates itself. Last edited by Milawe : 01-06-2009 at 01:54 PM.