ToME off of Wikipedia

[Jaorin]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... eo_game%29

I seem to remember it being removed before this. Why?

[Frumple]

Basic answer seems to be no references, or something. It's a problem that a lot of smaller/obscure games have, honestly, and some folks lurking around wikipedia seem to have it out for said niche dwellers. Technically not without reason, but it's always struck me as a bit of a jerk move. Defendable jerk move, but still...

Not that I've any idea how to go about getting the deletion revoked, or something along those lines. I'm crap with wiki software in general, and good luck finding whatever counts as significant coverage for those folks anyway. If you're interested in seeing it return, or putting up another page, you're probably going to have to dig up third party/vaguely credible coverage for ToME. Something along those lines, anyway.

[Jaorin]

Roguebasin lists it as a major stable roguelike http://roguebasin.roguelikedevelopment. ... title=ToME and http://roguebasin.roguelikedevelopment. ... roguelikes

A review of the game on another website http://www.reloaded.org/download/Tales-Middle-Earth/87/

I don't know anything about wikis though.

[Frumple]

The thing is, it'd have to be something from somewhere both vaguely reputable (Say an actual, in publication, gaming magazine) and not directly affiliated with the subject in question.

An abandonware site (By its technically illegal nature not particularly reputable) and roguebasin, which is maintained by the community wouldn't really count. To be honest, I think the only one cited on the actual angband page is the gamesetwatch article (which is probably why it's flagged as needing citations.), which is itself dubious, since the @play column's specifically for roguelike games. EDIT: Oh, wait. Okay, reloaded seems clean, but just being affiliated with the name 'abandonia' is going to taint it, heh. Mind, I don't think there's anything morally wrong with the general abandonware movement, but moral doesn't necessarily equal legal, et al.

It's not really wikis in general so much as Wikipedia itself, which has pretty specific guidelines for articles. Said guidelines make things relating to the roguelike world hard to justify for non-deletion, though. Basically, there's effectively no money in roguelikes and very little academic or popular notice (currently; with procedural generation starting to vaguely poke its head from under the ground, it's picking up a little.), so it's incredibly difficult to find sources that aren't, to whit, a "primary [source] or [source] affiliated with the subject." Them's the breaks, basically.

[farvardin]

It doesn't surprise me much. Many wikipedia admins are bitter ***** who censor and delete pages they don't know a thing about. ToME is certainly famous both in the open source and rogue scene. And with more than 4000 registered users on the forum, and probably much more registered to play in game, ToME is not a small project, and certainly notable. There are also many online reviews about ToME 2 and 4, and the ToME 2 package is in all linux distributions.

Wikipedia admins probably feel more concerned by the obvious notability of the - stars breast size or the pokemons characters.

Maybe it would be possible for ToME to reintegrate wikipedia. But why beg for something that should not have happened?

I'm happy I didn't give anything to the wikipedia fundraising, and I'll certainly better use this money to support ToME instead!

Anyway, I think it would be useful to have a wikipedia-like page to present ToME: there is the wiki, there is the FAQ, but it can be quite complicated to get a first introduction to ToME with only this, for example we can't find a detailled history of ToME 1 to 4 (the French wikipedia tells me it started in 1998, but that's all), all the contributors (are there others coders / game designers beside Darkgod, are all pictures by Shockbolt? We can find some answers in the CREDITS file in the game archive, but it could be precised on a presentation page. And are the media GPLv3 too? The http://te4.org/license page tells about the game and game engine, but we're not sure about the medias)

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

necroposting much?

[darkgod]

Necroing a good thread anyway.

We need a ToME page on wikipedia and I probably shouldnt be the one to do it

[ZiMMy]

Oh, the Russian version is present: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.o.M.E.

[Grey]

If it goes back up it should be an entry for Tales of Maj'Eyal, not T.o.M.E.

[darkgod]

Yeah

[lukep]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_ ... Maj%27Eyal

Needs more content! I think the RPS article and roguelike of the year are enough to meet "notability", but the article is still a stub, so add stuff, people!

[Crim, The Red Thunder]

Is it appropriate to include 'history' - back to the path it followed through classic tome and Pernagband before that? (Not details of those variants, but how they became what is now MajEyal?) I'm not even familiar with some of the early history details for pernangband, Would love to be able to read more about this progression of events.

[Dwindlehop]

The history is pretty relevant since a lot of people familiar with ToME 2 think the acronym ToME is ripped off from the earlier game.

[Sradac]

why yall only hyping up the oldRPG tileset

[Canderel]

Cause assembling and maintaining such an addon including gear etc, is an impressive feat on its own.