Wiki: Blockland

[gordonrox24]

All references are helpful, but one of that size is not enough to support an entire article.

[Ad Bot]

[Marcem]

It's not supposed to.  Are you braindead?

[Tom]

I really don't see why you need to come up with great references for a game. Its like a book, you can give a report on the book just from reading it, like you could write an article about features of a game by playing it.

[Noretic]

I don't think we should even bother with the wiki. All we're going to have is friends editing it, and then friends on our back because of its content.

[gordonrox24]

I really don't see why you need to come up with great references for a game. Its like a book, you can give a report on the book just from reading it, like you could write an article about features of a game by playing it.

I understand, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an essay or report. The World Encyclopedia doesn't add info based on experience, they add info based on reliable, proven and provable facts.

I wish it were that easy.

[Menen]

Theres roblox friends editing it,


<!-- Stop putting TBM links here, Nobody cares.---~~~~ -->

I put that there a few years ago and they stopped, Shall i do

<!-- Dear Roblox, Stop editing blocklands wiki..---~~~~ -->

I cant wait to see the day that some annoying Blocklander goes to Edit the Roblox Wiki (If there even is one)

[Ladios]

The World Encyclopedia doesn't add info based on experience, they add info based on reliable, proven and provable facts

Provable facts.
Ok then.
Fact: Blockland has physics. Proof? Well obviously videos showing it doesnt count for whatever reason so perhaps a picture in game would work? Only problem is it is a still image so there is no proof that brick is following the laws of physics. Well then record images of it moving? No, thats a video which isn't allowed. Therefore Blockland does not have physics as you cannot prove it.
Infact with recent technological advancements, photomanipulation is all the rage. All these "pictures" of this game "Blockland" could easily be faked, therefor they are not reliable sources, and thus there is no proof that Blockland even exists at all!

[WhoDa?]

Since Yesterday...

If that is true I will totally fail at life.

[Tom]

I understand, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an essay or report. The World Encyclopedia doesn't add info based on experience, they add info based on reliable, proven and provable facts.

I wish it were that easy.

All the facts in the world are based on experiments and observations. How do you think the first encyclopedias got their information?

I can go into Blockland and prove that it has physics.

Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.

Provable facts.
Ok then.
Fact: Blockland has physics. Proof? Well obviously videos showing it doesnt count for whatever reason so perhaps a picture in game would work? Only problem is it is a still image so there is no proof that brick is following the laws of physics. Well then record images of it moving? No, thats a video which isn't allowed. Therefore Blockland does not have physics as you cannot prove it.
Infact with recent technological advancements, photomanipulation is all the rage. All these "pictures" of this game "Blockland" could easily be faked, therefor they are not reliable sources, and thus there is no proof that Blockland even exists at all!

Epicly correct.

[Duckmeister]

Wow, it's pretty sad that this gordon guy started the deletion, but then he has the nerve to come here and say "blame wikipedia not me"?

That's pretty low.  You, and everyone else knows that the Blockland article fits the rules perfectly, and it's under no infraction.  Ulterior motives or not, you're obviously deleting it on non-existant technicalities that you proceed to blame on other people once you are confronted.  Please stop while you still have 1% of your life.

[gordonrox24]

Have any of you ever contibuted to a nexus on Wikipedia. I think not, if you have, you would know that the article does not follow the rules. It is a in terrible contradiction of WP:POV.

A youtube video is not allowed. A picture does not prove facts, it illistates. A news article, a write up from a reliabe source is what Wikipedia sees as notable.

I am following all of Wikipedia's guidelines. If you think not, report me to an administrator. That will not work, as a user with roll back rights (the right hand man to the admins) put the article up for speedy deletion.

I am sorry guys. Blockland is a great game. I admire it's phsyics and graphics. Baddy is a a genius, but the article right now is not at Wikipedia's level.

[Tom]

I would like to get some non-Roblox and non-Blockland players opinion on this.

Create a list of reasons it does not follow the rules.

[Duckmeister]

First off, I have contributed to Wikipedia.

Second, if you actually have read the rules, software articles are eligible for deletion under any circumstances.

Third, because second is true, means that instead of deleting it, you need to help improve it.

Fourth, you have a news article explaining the new physics at www.blockland.us, the main page of this website you feel so comfortable to boss around.

Fifth, you are obviously not the user with roll back rights, and therefore are completely able to be reported.

I think the argument is over.

[Jervan]

A youtube video is not allowed. A picture does not prove facts, it illistates. A news article, a write up from a reliabe source is what Wikipedia sees as notable.

I am following all of Wikipedia's guidelines. If you think not, report me to an administrator. That will not work, as a user with roll back rights (the right hand man to the admins) put the article up for speedy deletion.

Right, so you put the article up for deletion instead of just coming here and posting what needs changed? Not only would the whole community have reacted better, it would probably be quickly fixed.

The only reason there is so much controversy is that you were quick to put the article at ransom even though (supposedly) you play Blockland. So it really does seem like you want it gone when you put one and two together: you are an enthusiastic ROBLOX player and you chose the high road (albeit insisting on the Wiki's behalf).

[tails]

That will not work, as a user with roll back rights (the right hand man to the admins) put the article up for speedy deletion.

And as i said, its software, it can't be speedy deletion'd

Also you spelt alot wrong in that load of writing.