User talk:Piquan/Lintilla (talker)

I could expand on this quite a lot, and go on and make a page for Sleepy's multiple worlds, Fantasia's multiple worlds, the lighthouse (chat site) and Crystal Palace (chat site), but the thing is that what with the Planes of existence (chat site), the most notable adult talker ever made, being nominated for deletion 2 seconds after creation (and it was a damn long article too!) I don't see the point in writing a lot more. Until that one's AFD is removed, and it is kept, I don't see the point in writing all of the other ones.

If people are doing these AFD's out of ignorance, then I think that that's a pretty poor showing. If it is out of ignorance, then I hope that this one clears that up. However, if it is actual policy on the basis of what constitutes notoriety, then I should just stop here.

I mean, what are the qualifications?

POE was the 3rd of 4 multiple worlds talkers. (Lintilla was the first).
POE had 50 spin offs (lintilla had about 10).
POE was about the 50th adult talker ever made (Lintilla was the 2nd).
POE was the 4th popular NUTS talker (lintilla was the 2nd).
POE reached a peak of 10,000 users per day. Lintilla had a peak of 5,000.
POE overall was the 2nd most popular adult talker of all time. Lintilla was the most popular.
POE during its initial reign (1996-1999) was the most popular adult talker. Lintilla from 1994-1995 and then from 1999-present was/is the most popular adult talker.
POE was linked with the United Nations. Lintilla wasn't linked with anything.
POE's human rights areas made a significant difference to the world. Lintilla did nothing.
POE's zoophilia protection helped to protect over 100 zoophiles from prosecution by the FBI and German police. Lintilla did nothing.

It really does depend.

Like if the qualification is a million users, then stuff it, neither of them qualify. If its to be the first in something, then lintilla qualifies, but POE doesn't. If its to overall be the most popular in something, then again only lintilla.

It just depends on what the requirements are.

I will wait to see if this one remains. If this one isn't nominated for deletion, then I would suggest that Planes of existence should stay, as a necessity, as they are linked so directly. If this is, then that's it. 203.122.225.241 20:36, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stub

This page was deliberately written in stub form because of the Vfd that was placed on planes of existence (chat site) just seconds after the page was created. The primary aim of this page, at this stage, is to verify the validity and importance of planes of existence so that it can pass the Vfd. Once that has occurred, this page will be expanded beyond stub form in to something more comprehensive. I see no reason why it should be more than a stub when people are going to incorrectly and immaturely plaster Vfds all over the place and then lie and misuse official Wikipedia policy to try to steamroll a Vfd. I recognise that there are a lot of articles on Wikipedia, and some users believe that it is their god-forsaken duty to get rid of a lot of them, but I really think that it was poor form to place a Vfd on this one at all.

If this fails the Vfd, I will protest vehemently that it should be restored. It passes all requirements for inclusion in to Wikipedia with regards to its worthiness as an encyclopaedia article. The first of something and the most popular of something assert automatic notoriety, according to WP:WEB, the exception being when the area is sufficiently small. Talkers were not a small subculture. They existed as a linking point between IRC/newsgroups to instant messengers. In 1993 and 1994 they were the most popular form of communication on the internet. Granted that this one came in towards the end of that craze, and granted it was not overall the most popular. But it had a valid reason to exist as part of the culture.

Perhaps this needs a bit of an explanation here.

Okay, in 1994, there existed IRC, which was difficult to use (mIRC did not come about until much later) and was very raw with how it worked. You could alternatively go on to web-based chats (geocities had their own chat servers), but then you did not have a permanent account, and all you were was a name that could talk to people. ICQ and instant messenger programs did not exist, nor did online journals. You could go on to a newsgroup if you wanted to, and if you liked to be flamed or to be involved in flame wars, then you might do that. Or you could play a mud, which was a game.

It was possible to talk on muds, and to use them as talkers (historically, talkers derive from muds). But the commands were difficult to use and it was awkward and there was a certain amount of compulsory game play that you had to do. Because of this, they created Mushes and Moos, although in 1994 these did not really exist (Mushes and Moos are half-game half-talker).

Talkers were, put simply, the simplest way to communicate that was available to people. If you wanted to go to meet someone, then talkers were the best way to do this. From 1984 right through to probably 1998 this was the case (whilst ICQ was released in 1996, it didn't really take over from talkers until about 1998). Actually, I would suggest that it wasn't until we had the other instant messengers, yahoo and aim and msn messenger and the like that people really gave up on talkers.

As at 1996, there existed over 20,000 talkers in existence. With the introduction of talker.com, these grew exponentially, as talker.com themselves hosted 500, and then other hosting places came up as well. By 1998, everyone had their own pet talker, and most of them were empty. I am unsure of the number that we eventually ended up with, but I would guess it was around the 50,000 number.

Now, of these, especially when there were far too many of them, there was a quest for people to find ones that were more popular.

Lintilla was in the top 100 most popular talkers throughout its entire history. I don't think it ever entered the top 10, but it was in the top 100. However, it was the most popular adult-orientated ones. And every adult-orientated one that came after it referenced it in some way.

I know that this is a specific demographic, and it is relatively small, but it is important just the same. I know that talkers themselves probably represented less than 10% of the users of the internet, at their peak. But they were a superior way to communicate.

Removing this is like deleting history. You personally might not care about internet history, or about talker history itself, but if you do, then you have to include it. There were hundreds and hundreds of people who wrote articles talking about the history of talkers, and all of them included lintilla. You couldn't write one without including them.

And if you were writing a history of internet chat and didn't include talkers at all, then you would be missing something. They had an important place.

If you delete this, and then someone has a school project that says that they are asked to look up about the history of chat programs, and this doesn't exist, then what are they going to do? They'll put a little blip in there saying "and there were talkers that were created in 1984 and were most popular from 1992-1994 and represented about 10% of al internet users". But if they want to go in to more detail, to talk about the talkers, or even to have a project to just talk about the history of talkers, and they can't include this, then I dare say they would fail. Not including this one would be silly.

Now, I didn't include Surfers, Resort and Crossroads, because I don't know a lot about them. But they are also important to the history - as all ages talkers.

Because of the influence of lintilla, most talkers from 1996 onwards were adult only. Prior to that, the vast majority were G rated.

Just the idea that this should be deleted is ridiculous. Zordrac 20:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion debate

This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. Owen× ☎ 00:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of survived. No consensus. 5 keep, 6 delete, 1 unsure. Oh well. Apparently there was a lot of talk that it should be merged.

IMO that's reasonable, but IMO the merge should be to move other articles that are based on it (fantasia's multiple worlds and sleepy's multiple worlds) in to this one, not to move this in to something else, since this was the original one. Or else to have Multiple Worlds (but then again, "Multiple Worlds" is also a term that is used to describe having more than 1 talker connected on the same system).

Anyway, I guess its good enough. At least it wasn't deleted outright. That was stressful. Zordrac 01:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lintilla described in review of what cyber sex is

I added this link [1] to the article.

A quote, "One popular form of MUD is called a Talker -- a slicker, easier version of an IRC, but with all the flexibility of a MUD. Adult Talkers, like Lintilla's Multiple Worlds, are a common staging site for netsex." Funny that he'd happen to pick that talker, and no others, in describing net sex (cyber sex).

I didn't notice things like that when the Vfd was going on, because that's a source of it being mentioned in the media. Of course, that's 1998. Only mentioned that one, no others. Zordrac 22:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Move from Lintilla (chat site) to Lintilla (talker)

I have renamed this, in a similar way to moving Planes of Existence (talker) and have also renamed the links to this. Lots of work, but it just makes a lot of sense to call it talker. Zordrac 21:42, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

As there is an AFD on PoE and CP right now, it is not currently possible to merge these in to talker. I have already merged fantasia's and sleepy's in to this, and facilitated a merge of CP and PoE in to this, and once the AFDs are over, will put a redirect to here and wipe the 2 articles. I think that we need to do the merge in stages to make sure that it's okay. I still haven't finished writing all of the articles anyway.

As I said though, I think that CP, Crossroads, Ncohafmuta and Lighthouse should be deleted, the rest merged. I am not counting notability purely on user numbers, rather because of historical relevance. However, I think it is reasonable to put the top 3 most popular talkers in based purely on numbers. But I will wait until the AFD is over. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 11:02, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Orientated?!!

How about just "oriented"...?!!! Is this some regional dialect thing? British? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.69.114 (talk) 00:13, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Down?

For at least the last week, it appears that Lintilla is offline. If anyone has any information, it may belong in the article, or at least here in discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.117.103.34 (talk) 06:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]