View Single Post
Old 08-24-2010, 02:01 PM   #265
Milawe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: USA
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Home MUD: Stash
Home MUD: Archons of Avenshar
Posts: 653
Milawe has a spectacular aura aboutMilawe has a spectacular aura about
Re: In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned.

The problem with this is that things that are well-cited can still be pushed off of Wikipedia by a war of attrition. It only takes one editor who wants to another notch in his belt to begin edit-warring and whittling away at every source. You can actually do it on almost anything that isn't a current popular fad. For example, if you go to the Dragonlance page, you can knock out about 70% of the sources because they're published by TSR or WotC. (Conflict of interest and self-publishing are what was claimed when long-standing MUD sites were cited.) Most of the rest of the sources are either fan pages or articles written by the authors of the series. If the movie had not been released and the article finally improved in citation, Dragonlance could have easily been attacked in the same manner as individual MUDs are.

If you look up , the article is barely scted. I happened on the page while looking to improve the Savage Coast campaign setting entry, and unfortunately, I discovered, instead, that I'd lost my entire Red Steel campaign books somewhere. I've been searching for a replacement, but it's been out of print for years and also incorporated into the Savage Coast. The campaign setting existed, was popular for about a year and a half, and now it's lost in the TSR/WoTC rumble in addition to the sheer amount of time that has passed.

Ultimately, it's the whining that keeps mud entries where they are, especially for bigger MUDs or the ones that hold historical significance. From what I've seen, it's the whining that gets things done on Wikipedia and a handful of editors that got their position from building up Wikipedia rather than knocking it down.
Milawe is offline   Reply With Quote