Jump to content

Talk:Munzee

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

Deleted Munzee Image

[edit]

Dear SudoGhost,

I regognized you have deleted the Munzee image for the second time. So I think we should start a discussion here, why you are doing this.

IMHO, it is very important for the article to show how a self created Munzee looks like and what the code is saying in general. And 2nd, the article needs a lead image!

Since the Wikipedia rules forbid to copy an existing image from somewhere from the web, I had to create my own one. Unfortunately, this included my personal referral code. Since I don't care about a personal reference, I changed the code to a neutral one, which is http://www.munzee.com/m/munzee/39/. I hope it is ok now.

Regards Hanky27 (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uninvolved opinion: I don't see any problem with using a representative Munzee as an illustration, and in fact I think it adds to the article to have it there. --MelanieN (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The prolem isn't with the illustration, it's with using a specific user's referral link as an illustration; lede images shouldn't violate WP:ELNO. The example the website gives links to the website's about page, I don't see any reason why this article shouldn't do so as well. If that type of image is going to be added, I think using an example that Munzee intended would be preferable over a single user's code, considering that you "level up and gain rank based on your score. Points are obtained by capturing other people's munzees or when your deployed munzees are captured by someone else." Given the number of people that use Wikipedia, for a single user to be able to create an unfair advantage for themselves by inserting their own code into the article is way too promotional and inappropriate. - SudoGhost 04:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.munzee.com/m/munzee/39/ is NOT a single personal user's code!!! The "user" munzee is the platform itself. They are not part of the goup of regular users.
Hanky27 (talk) 13:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The link makes no such distinction, and if the website itself feels the need to avoid linking to any specific user, but to the site's "about" page, I don't see why it's so critical that the image must point to a specific referral link. Not only that but referral links, even if they are part of the game, do not belong on Wikipedia per WP:ELNO; that the link is in the form of a QR code does not matter. - SudoGhost 14:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since I don't care about a specific referral link, I changed the QR Code of the URL again to something completely neutral. This now is the link to this Wikipedia article. I hope this is neutral enough! Is this now acceptable? If yes, please put this image back into the article. Thanks Hanky27 (talk) 12:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SudoGhost is correct and I agree with the reasons for removal. Although a single image is the least of the problems faced by the article. At the moment I'm wavering between having a good prune of the article, which is overly promotional/spammy, and simply taking it to AfD. --Biker Biker (talk) 14:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about the article, how to improve it, and how to get it approved at Articles for Creation already has taken place. Please see my talk page Hanky27 (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still think it is a good idea to have an illustration of a Munzee. Does the one now proposed meet people's objections? --MelanieN (talk) 15:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Munzee Website Inactive?

[edit]

When I attempt to go to Munzee website: http://www.munzee.com there is no place to log in and I only see the following:

Munzee is running in an optimized mode to ensure a quality gaming experience on your smart phone.

Interested in playing? Go to the App Store or Google Play to get the Munzee app for your iPhone or Android device.

Does anyone know why the login is missing from the website? Ceo255 (talk) 04:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]