Talk:Gameplay/Archive

From NSwiki, the NationStates encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Gameplay FAC Vote (9/5/4) CLOSED

Please remember to sign your votes with 4 tildes (~~~~) and update the vote tally when you vote.

Support

  1. I'm self-nominating this page as a FAC. → Fris Θtalk 20:01, 22 Nov 2004 (GMT) My intent was to codify the different levels of playing experience in NationStates, and I had hoped that others would step up and add any significant areas I missed. Since no one has added anything, I guess I did ok. Also, I'd like to see featured articles represent a broader base than just natives and regions, and this is the best Gameplaying article I've seen.
  2. Very comprehensive and informative analysis. -- Wilem Engelking 11:27, 9 Dec 2004 (GMT)
  3. As said above very factually correct and informative TBF 21:01, 28 Dec 2004 (GMT)
  4. In addition to what has already been asserted above, I believe it to be well composed. Rechze(talk) 09:07, 7 Jan 2005 (GMT)
  5. Agree (every time I try to edit I get logged out) Nevareion --80.3.160.8 13:08, 7 Jan 2005 (GMT)
  6. At first glance it seems like it should be common knowledge, but when I think about it, it's really very informative and useful. Ceorana|Φ 03:14, 21 October 2005 (GMT)
  7. Tetris brings up a valid point, but there's the contingent that doesn't know this (n00bs) - and if even they may not read this, it's good to have it up on the front page. Plus, it's well written. I like it. --Pacitalkia 21:36, 12 November 2005 (GMT)
  8. I like the article. As Pacitalia pointed out, not everybody knows about it, and it is a good example of a mechanics related issue that is important to the game. Mikitivity 19:06, 10 December 2005 (GMT)
  9. I think it's a great article for those who are new to NationStates and don't really know what to do, or how to do it. --Valori 13 February 2006 16:21 (GMT)

Oppose

  1. Its a good article, but shoudnt most of this already be common knoledge to NS players? --Tetris L-Shaped Block 16:09, 10 August 2005 (GMT)
  2. I agree with Tetris L-Shaped Block on this. I mean, it is a good article, but everyone is supposed to know so. There is no need for such a good article. However, congrats Fris, it's a good page --Smertios 15:57, 17 November 2005 (GMT)
  3. Well written, but all NSers know this, so this is not that important of a article.--Swilatia 00:39, 9 February 2006 (GMT)
  4. This is an alright article, but the sections themselves are very small, there are no images or really anything to stop it being solid text, and it's hardly on the most rivetting of subjects. Praetonia 14:49, 14 February 2006 (GMT)
  5. I think it's good and well written, but on the jolt forums there are already a dozen stickies about this. Kinda over-the-top, if you ask me. The Mystery Man 14:16, 12 March 2006 (GMT)


Neutral

  1. This isn't the best article I've seen, but it isn't the worst, either. I don't like it, but I don't hate it. Improvements to this article might change my position. Nanakaland 19:59, 11 Mar 2005 (GMT)
  2. There's no real defect with the article in my opinion, but I don't think think it is quite up there as an example of the best of NSwiki, even though it is quite a good explanation of gameplay. --Pantocratoria 07:59, 23 Mar 2005 (GMT)
  3. It seems to be a very good "cover-all" type of page, but I'm not certain if it would introduce a lot of information that would be new to the reader. Most people know a good deal of the information presented before they even find the NSWiki. Good information however, so while I am officially neutral, I would lean it towards Support if it had a teeny bit more information, and maybe a slightly different format. GameJunkieJim 04:19, 11 Jul 2005 (GMT)
  4. It's a very useful links repository, and a great starting point - but as mentioned by others, it's not actually that typical an article, nor necessarily a good format to follow in terms of format.Gruenberg 17:33, 9 August 2005 (GMT)


Comments/Questions

  • To be fair I think it has got too many tiny paragraphs with small titles and I'm not too fond of the indents either. The game terms table should also be moved down and placed in context by integrating it in the 'languageplay' section IMO. Its cluttery, at present. I'd rework it but I would like to have opinions on this first, if possible. -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 12:10, 7 Jan 2005 (GMT)
  • Given how long this has been at vote, I would like us to move towards a consensus. In my view, 9 support to 9 non-support means it should not be featured. I would welcome renewed discussion, however. ~Gruen2alk 10:24, 6 September 2006 (GMT)
  • While I disagree with Gruen's characterizaton of 'neutral' equaling 'non-support', I've gone ahead and removed the FAC nomination. It's had plenty of time to garner enough support, and it didn't. - Fris 14:29, 25 February 2007 (GMT)