perhaps i am retarded but what is all this CITATION NEEDED stuff about? how could you ever cite that the game was made by people on these forums? no article or anything like that exists of me, chef, bort, and drule all SHAKING HANDS and saying we are forming T.O.G. to make barkley. how can you even prove the game was made in game maker 6.1 but not take our word for it on other stuff? also about the game having two versions, this is a 100% fact (i myself have the rm2k version on my HD right now) unless the citation refers to the fact that game maker isn't more powerful and flexible than rm2k. it's not like someone could edit the article and say barkley was made by JOE GIBBS because there is no proof whatsoever of this. the readme even has my website and drule's website listed which both shows our real names so this really doesn't make any sense to me.

so maybe i am stupid or something but how does wikipedia work or are people just being gaywads about this?

you are a dumbass. noncommercial game screenshots are covered under fair use.

so maybe i am stupid or something but how does wikipedia work or are people just being gaywads about this?

Every single piece of information on Wikipedia must be verifiable or eventually deleted. Citations consist of reference to a secondary source; say, a news article or essay or study. Every single (with some bizarre image rules) piece of information on Wikipedia must also be licensable under the GNU Free Documentation License. Copying and pasting the post from this topic is simply not acceptable, nor does it comply with NPOV rules.

so will GW sue or will someone sue GW?
I think not.

does that crap reallly matter?

Every single piece of information on Wikipedia must be verifiable or eventually deleted. Citations consist of reference to a secondary source; say, a news article or essay or study. Every single (with some bizarre image rules) piece of information on Wikipedia must also be licensable under the GNU Free Documentation License. Copying and pasting the post from this topic is simply not acceptable, nor does it comply with NPOV rules.

noncommercial game images = fair use
you don't need citations on everything, just stuff that isn't completely NPOV

i think its ridiculous you ask for news/essay/studys for a free game made by 4 people made in GAME MAKER.

come on TOG sue wikipedia for using illegal information.

I am all for integrity dude but holy fuck you are a huge jackass about this

perhaps i am retarded but what is all this CITATION NEEDED stuff about? how could you ever cite that the game was made by people on these forums? no article or anything like that exists of me, chef, bort, and drule all SHAKING HANDS and saying we are forming T.O.G. to make barkley. how can you even prove the game was made in game maker 6.1 but not take our word for it on other stuff? also about the game having two versions, this is a 100% fact (i myself have the rm2k version on my HD right now) unless the citation refers to the fact that game maker isn't more powerful and flexible than rm2k. it's not like someone could edit the article and say barkley was made by JOE GIBBS because there is no proof whatsoever of this. the readme even has my website and drule's website listed which both shows our real names so this really doesn't make any sense to me.

so maybe i am stupid or something but how does wikipedia work or are people just being gaywads about this?

It wasn't the case a while ago, but Wikipedia is incredibly strict about citations nowadays. Most articles without them will be tagged and eventually deleted in the course of a few days at the most. In Gaiden's case, a link to TOG's homepage or the OP of this topic will be enough to cover a citation on most parts of the article. Also, I know DJH47 seems to be being harsh about all of it, but while I liked the original article better myself, it honestly would not fly at all under the standards that Wikipedia operates on nowadays. Wikipedia is especially harsh towards what they see as joke articles, and it likely would have been deleted within a few days. That's just how it is.

oh well, we should just get a real page up on gwiki and list it as an external link on the wikipedia page

huh yeah, sorry to say this guys but DJH47 is right. I mean I know the very ESSENCE of the game is to be sort of funny and ridiculous, but we have to write the wikipedia article in all seriousness, or itll be labeled as a joke article and be constantly pruned and attacked by the wikipedia peoples, we dont want that.
Making it a real neutral article but linking to a ridiculous GW wiki one could work though.

Chef - if you could make the 'Falling Down' track into a ringtone MIDI I would love you forever.

Haha dare i say... ?

That is fantastic.

Why the fuck did you (or whoever) remove the fucking story?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donkey_Kong_%28video_game%29

They all have story sections, why can't this one?

Yes, removing the story was unnecessary. There is nothing wrong with a story description on Wikipedia articles.

Yeah, I am glad people are defending my hard work.

I mostly don't understand why the article was tagged as having an IN GAME STYLE VOICE or ridiculous, as most of it is almost "factual". That is the real story, that is the features listed on the game, and THAT IS THE WAY THE GAME WAS PROMOTED AND SEVERAL WEBSITES WHo REALLY features Barkley on their sites.

Because it's not presented as a encyclopedic (key word, encyclopedic, look up what that really means and how it applies to an article) article by Wikipedia's standards. It's that simple.

Yeah, I am glad people are defending my hard work.

I mostly don't understand why the article was tagged as having an IN GAME STYLE VOICE or ridiculous, as most of it is almost "factual". That is the real story, that is the features listed on the game, and THAT IS THE WAY THE GAME WAS PROMOTED AND SEVERAL WEBSITES WHo REALLY features Barkley on their sites.

no, man, hardly any of it is "factual". well, what is left NOW is, but 9/10 of the features werent, for example

it was a pretty bad wikipedia article, and the bits i post about are the only bits im defending. my main point now is there was no need to remove the story seeing as it WAS the game's actual story and other game articles have their stories posted.