Talk:Trek73

Notability

Via a tortuous route, this article has been restored despite an AfD that ended with a consensus on merging. I have checked Google, Google Books and even Google News, to no avail. I honestly cannot see any support for notability for this article subject. Would anyone care to provide some before another AfD? Alastairward (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Mentioned in widely read book Hackers, page 187. Notable, removing notice. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I think I'll restore that tag, it's mentioned once apparently as a "new game", nothing else. Alastairward (talk) 15:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

And I believe that WP:BURDEN (for those removing the tag) and WP:Notability applies here. I was only seeking the "Significant coverage" and detail required to prove notability. Especially considering that although the last AfD may not have ended in deletion, but a merging to another article. Alastairward (talk) 22:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably renomination for AfD

As per above, I couldn't find any notability supplied for this article. There is a trivial mention in the book noted above, previous AfD consensus was that this article couldn't stand by itself and should be merged to another.

If anyone would like to provide any notability, please do, I'm in no hurry to renominate. Alastairward (talk) 11:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Deleted references

This article was nominated for deletion twice by Alastairward on notability grounds with a result of keep.[1]. The same editor using the name WikiuserNI recently deleted two references that were used to establish notability during the deletion discussion.

Regarding this edit [2], in the reference Beck, Kent (1999). Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison Wesley. p. 43. ISBN 201616416. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: length (help), in this book, Beck writes on page 43 that he "wanted to tackle a more challenging problem [in computer programming] ... I decided I would write a Star Trek game, kind of like the one I had played at the Lawrence Hall of Science in Berkeley, but cooler." Beck certainly means TREK73 when he says "Star Trek game" at LHS. The reference supports the deleted statement from the article "Other programmers were similarly intrigued by the game." Beck was clearly intrigued by TREK73 because he chose that game as benchmark for his personal programming challenge. TREK73 was cool, but he felt that he could create something that was cooler.

Regarding this edit [3], in this reference, Soussan, David. "Cool Stuff". Retrieved 2009-09-23., Soussan says that " I've ported the [TREK73] game to the PC". The article states "David Soussan, took that code and ported it to the PC ... A version was later created ...", followed by the reference in question. It is clear that the end of the sentence reference is meant to show that a new version had been created, not that this version utilized long integers.

These deletions were not justified and do not conform to the spirit of WP:NPOV, particularly WP:WFTE. --Kkmurray (talk) 18:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Beck I think it likely he was referring to TREK73, but the quote doesn't seem to be definitive. Regarding Soussan, the website has a link to a .DOC which explains the genesis of the PC version, and that integer bug still exists in that version.

This topic is extremely notable in that this game affected countless programmers, myself included. You would never know it by the sad shape of the article, and the ease with which certain users are able to challenge its existence. Merge with Star Trek games: preposterous! The question is are we willing to do the research to cite reliable sources to prevent users with agendas from whittling the article back down to a stub? LionelT (talk) 23:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

This topic is extremely notable in that this game affected countless programmers, myself included. You would never know it by the sad shape of the article, and the ease with which certain users are able to challenge its existence. Just one or two points to make on that, first of all, I'm guessing "certain users" refers to me. There's nothing wrong with saying that. My edit history and talk page came with me when I changed user name, so I'm not hiding anything! Secondly, don't you think that if the subject material was notable, that there would be third party, reliable sources to back that up? Two AfDs have gone by with nothing to support this article except a lot of editors declaring it notable. Nothing wrong with declaration of an interest in the subject, but when it comes to the article that's a bit different. WikiuserNI (talk) 00:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

These deletions were not justified and do not conform to the spirit of WP:NPOV, particularly WP:WFTE, WP:NOV tells us that "encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources". There is a lot of importance being placed on this game without any sort of reliable sources to show notability to back it up.

I grew up in the 80s and can remember all sorts of little Basic games that I diligently typed up on Dad's Speccy 48k+, but I doubt very much they were all deserving of an article of their own. WikiuserNI (talk) 00:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Simulation?

"Simulation" was deleted from the body of the article and categories. I don't necessarily object to referring to it as a game in the body, however it may be useful to categorize it as a simulation. The Star Trek text and script games, while also primitive, are in simulation categories. I've put the sim category back for consistency and to make it easy to find the game. Also, it appears that for the categories game and simulation may be interchangeable. LionelT (talk) 22:33, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

License

I have reviewed the source code. The program was published in 1973 and bears no copyright notice. Per WP:Public domain#When does copyright expire? it is in the public domain. This is the same process for determining whether a picture, drawing or book is in public domain and doesn't require a source.
Is the game also Freeware? Unlikely. Freeware usually is released as such and bears a mark indicating so. Additionally, the term "freeware" postdates TREK73 by 12 years [4].
So, the game is de facto in the public domain and should be indicated as such. It could additionally be freeware but that is undetermined. If there are no further objections, I'll remove the tag. LionelT (talk) 00:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

De facto? Ah, de facto. In absence of a 3rd party cite, it will have to remain tagged. An alternative would be to leave that section empty for the moment, as per other similar games. WikiuserNI (talk) 01:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)