Jump to content

Talk:Dragon's Gate

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Romilin agrees —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.65.7.10 (talk) 15:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

[edit]

Please keep a neutral point of view as per Wikipedia Policy NPOV. --Corly Corwin 15:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pluck You —This unsigned comment was added by 76.186.96.101 (talk • contribs) .
I really don't like mindless vandals like this one. From now on, I will make it my personal responsibility to fix/revert this page for as long as this quite dated game holds my interest, which will likely be forever. --Zenosaga 00:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sho, go wallow in your own self pity. No one who plays the game actually reads/cares what's on this Wiki entry anyway. There's a reason we have a whole wikia to work with. —This unsigned comment was added by 72.154.27.150 (talk • contribs) .

Actually, people do read and care what is on this article. Said article is even linked to on the offical DGate website, so you need to get your facts straight. Wikipedia exists for a reason, and that is to be an all-encompassing free encyclopedia, plus links to sources for any pertinent information that can't be included in an article for whatever reason. Vandalism, regardless, is wrong no matter who cares about it. Also, your comments give me the impression that you are one of the (non-extant) stereotypical DGate players who does the things that the vandals say you do (like being a failling high-schooler, being rude and prejudiced, and putting stress on newbies, etc); and I am pretty sure that you wouldn't want to give that impression to people and thus give yourself and other DGate players a bad name, overall reducing the number of people who want to join the DGate community (which consists of 4000+ people scattered across the world on the official forums alone). --Zenosaga 20:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The point was there are other, better sources for information and the players (who I specified) don't use this Wikipedia entry and Sho is only causing grief to people who don't know better.--72.154.27.150 02:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Well then please excuse my rude comments, as they were made on the basis of insufficient data (and were also meant to be a joke, hence the reason it is nonsensical, and also a word of warning to be careful). But the thing is, the article has links to the sources you mention, and allows other more mainstream people to find out about the game and join the community once it goes back online. Besides, I'm not the one who created the article, but I am insane enough to become obsessed with it after a couple of hours. And vandalism happens to many other articles as well, causing grief for everyone else. --Zenosaga 14:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's No Original Research Policy

[edit]
"According to Varchild: '"Dragon's Gate is like Vanilla Ice's music, it was fun and cool at the time it was released, but now it is no longer mainstream, and only for a niche few."'"

This violates Wikipedia's No Original Research Policy:

  • "This policy does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia, but it does prohibit them from drawing on their personal knowledge without citing their sources. If an editor has published the results of his or her research in a reliable publication, then s/he may cite that source while writing in the third person and complying with our NPOV policy. See also Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest."
  • "Any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged must be accompanied by a reliable source. Material that counts as "original research" within the meaning of this policy is material for which no reliable source can be found and which is therefore believed to be the original thought of the Wikipedian who added it. The only way to show your work is not original research is to produce a reliable published source who writes about the same claims or advances the same argument as you." (Emphasis mine)

Corly Corwin 00:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I simply assumed that it was vandalism, and technically, it is. The only reliable source is the official website and the officially sponsored wikis (linked on the official site). Most of the article's information is, of course, from said sources. Over and out. --Zenosaga 22:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Needed for fanbase numbers

[edit]

Requesting a citation for the fact "the game still has an extensive and loyal fanbase (approx. 4000+ players)" The only number I can find that comes close to this figure is the 4080 registered members at the Dragon's Gate EZBoard. This number should not be used for the following reasons:

1) This number includes every account that created or posted on the EZboard since its creation, making it impossible to determine that they are "loyal fans"

2) Multiple accounts are frequently created by single persons for various reasons. I personally had 5+ accounts created for various characters over the years. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.35.224.64 (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]


Seriously, this is a game, if they exaggerated the numbers slightly, who cares? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.104.72.9 (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dragon's Gate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:41, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dragon%27s_Gate&oldid=1207031426"