Save the Cantr article on Wikipedia

[nitefyre]

It appears that the Cantr page has been deleted from Wikipedia. We have lost a key advertising tool in this. I'm disappointed that more could not have been done--although I think it was deleted merely because it didn't qualify by their surprisingly stringent measure (even though their moderators could have been slightly more lenient and polite...).

I've taken the announcement status off this topic.

[Zanthos]

So wait, does that mean that the find out in game rule will be changed again?

[Sarah]

The article about Cantr on wikipedia.org was deleted. That doesn't have anything to do with our wiki.

[Sho]

This deletion was completely justifiable, and it's not getting any argument from me. Typical deletion process all the way through. I don't think there's anything we could have done that would have resulted in a different outcome.

As Sarah said, Wikipedia is not the same thing as the Cantr wiki. This will have no direct effect on Cantr play and management.

[Zanthos]

Aahh, thanks for clarifying. It would have been interesting to have all my caracters suddenly forget how to make everything they were planning on getting.

[dinallt]

I looked at the a list of role playing games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_role-playing_games_by_name#C

It appears that quite a few (highlighted in red) have been deleted. I guess they have been having a general purge of rpgs

[SekoETC]

How can it be deleted when there was just one vote pro deletion and several for keeping? It was a clumsy article though. If we're going to try again, better work on a neutral approach from the start, and write a polished article before posting it.

[N-Aldwitch]

What exactly was it missing?

Like, honestly, who cares if it's there or not? Does it really effect them if there's, omg, an article about a free game that makes no money?? Really? I mean wtfiuwtwtaed? (an acronym you need not know, amfshl?)

[Chris Johnson]

How can it be deleted when there was just one vote pro deletion and several for keeping? It was a clumsy article though. If we're going to try again, better work on a neutral approach from the start, and write a polished article before posting it.

The deletion process is not a vote - its a propsal for deletion and a related discussion - The Admin who made the final delete says

The result was delete. Deletion discussions are a sampling method to help determine what the community at large feels about an issue, and to examine the relationship to relevent policies and guidelines. There are no arguments presented that would justify over-riding established and broadly accepted inclusionary standards, and while there was little participation by established community members, it was sufficient to determine that consensus to delete exists

Issues of neutrality and poor editing could have been addressed but these were not the reason for deletion - The main issue is notability and external references to the game - ( the WP:WEB criteria was the main thing against the entry) . Basically Cantr has not been covered in any detail by reliable third party souces (Major media, 3rd party academic studies etc) . They do have stringent requirements and basically we didn't meet them (and to be honest we currently can't meet them) .

I'd say it is a job for Marketing and GAB/GAC to raise the profile of the game in the wider community , with a view to getting the required coverage.

[formerly known as hf]

At least most of the other games got deleted.

We should check out the ones that weren't put up for deletion, or managed to oppose the proposed deleteion, and see what they did - and if possible - apply that and renew the Cantr page

[PRUT]

This deletion was completely justifiable, and it's not getting any argument from me. Typical deletion process all the way through. I don't think there's anything we could have done that would have resulted in a different outcome.
.

Why then still exists:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MMORPGs

Jusu look at these entries!
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Star_Online_2
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoonZu

and compare to Cantr article!

I think that somebody just don't like us. This was the reason.
How to propose for deletion a page in wikipedia?

[Sho]

Wikipedia administration isn't perfect. A lot of articles that deserve deletion aren't deleted because there are only so many people who look for deletion-worthy articles. It took them weeks to get to the English Cantr article.

Some contributors to Wikipedia are more delete-happy than others, but none are out to get us specifically.

[Avathar]

beside the english version only the german version is also deleted. The Dutch entry and others are still available on wikipedia... They are translations of the very first english version...which wasn't very good...but at least they are still available

It is maybe bad for the overall advertisment of cantr...but for the specific languages it is still possible to get new players through Wikipedia...which is a good thing.

[Junesun]

The GAC and Marketing Department are currently debating how to achieve better "notability" according to Wikipedia's standards. I however believe that Cantr should already be notable enough to be included because of its unique concept and educational value and also because there are almost 200 other MMORPGs on Wikipedia, even works in progress, who all of them wouldn't satisfy the criteria for notability of web content. I believe Wikipedia might introduce a special subset regarding the notability of web games and also improve the deletion process to give the 1000+ admins less dictatorial powers. Anyway, if anybody would like to continue improving the Cantr II article, I have reposted it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Junesun/Cantr_II , where it can be edited to perfection before it is resubmitted.

[nitefyre]

Although this has been dead for several months now, as chronicled in Issue 7 of the Webzine ( http://www.cantr.net/e107/e107_plugins/ ... ontent.107 ), there has been renewed discussion over Wikipedia in the mainstream news as the New Yorker discovered a trusted, high-echelon self proclaimed professor of theology to be no more than a college drop out. This has been covered in the Times and the AP and elsewhere, so that story's easy to find.

However, as I was browsing the Economist yesterday, I came across an interesting article about Wikipedia that I thought to share: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/dis ... op_story=1 . Given Wikipedia's attitude towards Cantr, I thought it was very humorous that the Economist writes that "the effect [of Wikipedia] is rather like an online role-playing game."