Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OurColony

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:51, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OurColony.net

[edit]

Not encyclopedic style. Also nothing more than an advertisement for this particular gaming service. In its initial form, it was nonsense. I tagged it as speedy several times and there are a phalanx of anon editors who kept removing it too fast for an admin to see it. Then they expanded it to more than nonsense, but it still shouldn't be kept. So I put it up for VFD. Katefan0 04:07, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks

  • Hmmm..... tempting, but no. Above by 172.140.124.211 who has been editing the article and also contributed? below. Katefan0 22:17, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)


This is the latest microsoft viral marketing scheme...
much like the ilovebees.com and the spam remarks all call true.
211.26.126.91

This would be a great place to organize our thoughts, as we are having difficulty on the actual site's forums. It worked surprisingly well for ilovebees.com and I don't see it as spam or advertising. It is simply a game, which we can explain and dissect here. -Stiver 129.100.200.44 04:28, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. You can use your user pages, though, to communicate and post whatever you like. DDerby 05:40, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Um, I don't think we want to encourage people to use their user pages as dicussion forums for purposes unrelated to the development of Wikipedia. We're here to build an encyclopedia, if I recall correctly. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete unless completely rewritten and notability established. Right now the articles seems to be a cut and paste job from the website with some other confusing info stuck at the bottom. --Fuzzball! (talk) 05:14, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • delete no longer worth of speedy, but it is a blatant advertisement. DDerby 05:35, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Whatever this is, it's not an encyclopedic article. -- Curps 05:38, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Save It! We're not discussing, we're explaining. Every time there is a fact, it is added. I agree it needs to be cleaned up a little, but it is informative, not an ad. "A comprehensive reference work containing articles on a wide range of subjects or on numerous aspects of a particular field, usually arranged alphabetically" We are making a reference. This page is very similar to the Google wiki page. Simply an explaination. Google is a website, owned by a huge company, however instead of being a game it is a search engine. You coud argue that you are advertising for Google, but you aren't. You are explaining. What happens when someone wants to know what this game is all about, where will they turn for a reference??? Wiki. -Stiver 129.100.200.44 06:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'm working on making this more informative, although this is my first wiki entry. Give it time to grow and be more informative. Jonamerica 06:30, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • It does not read like an encyclopedia article. At all. That's the main problem. A secondary problem may be that the topic is not notable enough, but it's almost impossible to tell, given the current state of the article. -- Curps 06:46, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • Nothing a little clean-up can't fix. -Stiver 129.100.200.44 06:55, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • """Keep"""

The article has been severly cleaned up and improved 211.26.126.91

  • Gve them a little while to clean up this wiki. It has just been up a little while. They need time to get things in order.
  • Delete. The article seems almost nonsensical enough for a speedy, but not quite. The state that this VfD has been left in alone is enough to make me want to see the article go, and I can't even figure out what's going on here. Sock puppets? Overzealous article authors who don't know how to sign their vote? Either way, it needs to go. Arkyan 10:06, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Kill the socks! Delete as nonsense. Radiant_* 10:18, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Gaaah, delete. Go start a blog. FreplySpang (talk) 13:08, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, there's an article on the Haunted Apiary, so why not keep this ARG as well? Needs a lot of clean up though.--Matteh (talk) 14:33, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • delete there is another article, ourcolony that is better organized. Let's delete this one and we can continue to grow the better. jonamerica 09:37 10 Apr 2005 (CDT)
    • Recreating the same article under a different name -- good heavens, aren't we clever. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:32, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • It was not recreated to avoide deletion Jonamerica 11, April 2005 04:27 (UTC)
  • Delete and replace with a Redirect to Ourcolony. Dave the Red (talk) 18:08, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Ok, since the redirect option is no longer viable, just delete it as not-notable. As a side note, I think Haunted Apiary could be deleted on the same grounds. Dave the Red (talk) 03:29, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Evidence to consider If I'm reading the histories of the two pages correctly, Ourcolony and OurColony.net, The Ourcolony page was created Apr 8th by User:Uvulabob27, while this deletion request was started Apr 10th, the same date as OurColony.net anonymously was started. How could Ourcolony have been created to "evade deletion of OurColony.net" two days before the deletion request began? I have worked on both, they could easily be merged. Personally I think Ourcolony is better organized. User:Jonamerica
    • p.s. I'm new to wikipedia, OurColony.net's history does not have the same "(started article)" as Ourcolony, so I may be wrong on the start date, or this might be because the page was started anonymously, I'm not sure.
  • Comment I strongly object to the redirect of Ourcolony to OurColony.net. Jonamerica's notes above are correct. I can see why one would like to have both articles deleted, but making such decisions based on false claims sets a very bad example, last but not least for the affected newbie. Rl 09:21, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • I have looked back through the history and while it is true that the Ourcolony article was started prior to OurColony.net, it was but a stub until Jonamerica began adding to it -- which was AFTER this VfD vote began to look bad for OurColony.net. If he wants to improve the article, that's fine and even encouraged by Wikipedia policies, but improving an article on the same subject that's not being considered for VfD is just a way of circumventing the process. Improve the one under consideration now, not the one you know isn't under the gun. It's a bad faith move, in my personal opinion, though perhaps some leeway can be given for inexperience. · Katefan0(scribble) 12:55, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • Fair enough. It just hit my soft spot because it's such a pleasant surprise if the principal author of a VfD article tries to improve his work rather than acting his rage out through vandalism. Rl 13:49, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • In all honesty the only reason I moved from working on OurColony.net to Ourcolony was because it was a cleaner slate with which to work. I voted early on to keep this article and only once I found the second did I reverse my decision on that voted and post the information here. It may have been a mistake to work on Ourcolony while OurColony.net was under review, or it may have been a mistake to report the existance of Ourcolony here; I thought I was doing the right thing by reporting it, as there is no need for two articles. At the time OurColony.net was poorly formatted, and a cut and paste job from the ourcolony.net website, while Ourcolony had a good start, thanks to Uvulabob27, who created the article. All I'm asking is that the two articles be judged seperately. I'd be happier with the redirect removed and Ourcolony under it's own VfD. Jonamerica 13:54, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete CDC (talk) 16:34, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I started the OurColony.net entry without knowledge of the other one. I created beause I knew and visited the Haunted Apiary entry and saw how much publicity it got. I know I'm not very good at wiki, seeing as it was my first entry ever, but I believe that with sufficient clean-up, and given time to gather more facts, this entry will be worth it. This is an event in history, I mean how many people know what the first Emperor of China's name was, now how many people know what an Xbox is? I suggest keeping one of the articles and/or merging them. Not deletion. -Stiver 129.100.200.44 22:51, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • All user's edits are to this article and VfD.
  • Keep, there's already a group a people willing to make the article conform to Wiki standards. Lets atleast give them a chance. --Kross 01:43, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Despite what people think I believe that this page has (in only a few hours) become much better and is not spam but rather an encyclopedic resource.--213.75.12.26 10:20, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • User has a dozen edits only.
  • Keep, Very interesting Xbox 360 marketing, as I Love Bees. --Mateusc 01:46, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep it.. If wikipedia has a IloveBees entry, why not a ourcolony.net entry aswell? Good place to keep track of what's going on.
  • We need to keep this wiki. It's a great way to log the progress and happenings of the game. Anyone looking to start playing can easily catch up on the breakthroughs made and puzzles solved. Huge viral campaigns like that of ILB and OurColony make an impact on society and culture and are important to be recorded and remembered.
    • Above by User:65.120.80.8. Again, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. Instead, why not start a blog? · Katefan0(scribble) 14:25, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
      • If this is not a forum, why you alltime try justify? Katefan0, seems that you repented to have indicated, knows it made for pure vanity and arrogance... --Mateusc 17:27, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • I don't understand what point you're trying to make, so I don't really have a response. · Katefan0(scribble) 18:54, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
          • Get a job and stop to nominate stupid VfD's. --Mateusc 23:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable enough for me. ARGs aren't exactly common. Xezbeth 14:43, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and clean it up, or if all else fails Merge with Xbox 2 or whatever it is. Yes. I started Ilovebees. I also abandoned it once it had a regular group of people editing it, since I lost interest rather quickly. This is not ilovebees, this is something else that frankly I haven't even heard of until I received an email about it. Additionally, using it to log what happens next isn't really against the Wikipedia charter, but wouldn't ARGN setup a MediaWiki for each ARG? Maybe content should be cut and moved there. Now if you don't mind, I am going to look into this. Ghost Freeman 15:25, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • I'd really like to know why ARGN or the community hasn't even made the slightest attempt to setup a MediaWiki or another forum to coordinate efforts on this ARG. It seems commonplace, considering there was one for Ilovebees. Ghost Freeman 16:05, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • ARGN does have a forum, they also have an IRC channel for ourcolony running on irc.chat-solutions.org. -Jonamerica 17:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Notability ARGs are growing, Haunted_Apiary was just nominated for a webby award in the Games-Related catagory. -Jonamerica 17:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - WikiNazi go home
  • Keep Look, if ilovebees stays...ourcolony stays. To keep one without the other would seem very unfair. This won't hurt you a bit to let us keep it. Katefan, if you are so against it...there are PLENTY of other wikis you could read. Let us have our space and go back to doing whatever you were doing before this witchhunt. 1st off from your summary as to why it needs to be deleted you were misinformed (a.k.a. made wrongful assumptions). As a result of those wrongful assumptions you attempted to delete something on false pretenses. This ARG deserves to be in wikipedia. It is informational and historic amongst others uses. Realize that you were mistaken about it's purpose and leave us be. Otherwise ilovebees shouldn't be allowed to exist either. This is not meant as a personal attack anymore than your attempt to delete our communitie's wiki is a personal attack. Find another witch to hunt..leave us alone. Do you have ANY idea how many people are a part of this? One person...YOU....is starting the effort to stop it? Leave us be. Give this a chance. We can edit it. You have no idea the talent that the 1000's and 10's of 1000's of us can bring to this place. Let us exercise our right to us this wikipedia. It's NOT GOING TO HURT YOU. Just leave us alone. Give this a chance! ----tcpvtec
  • Edited by tcpvtec...A 1st time editor but long term wikipedia user. Not much of a contributor to the wikipedia (yet). Don't use that against me. I haven't found anything yet that I wanted to contribute to...except this. Make sense? This one wiki could bring 1000's to wikipedia. I fell in love with wikipedia the 1st time I found it. Let others find it. Leave us be! ---- tcpvtec
    • Just for the record -- all these new folks attacking me and leaving personal screeds against me in various places seem to think that somehow I am pulling the strings on this VfD vote, like if only they could either persuade or bully me to pull it down all would be well. I have no control over the vote once it's started, just for the record. I can't stop it and I can't delete it, even if I were inclined to do so (which I am not). I'm just a user like anyone else and the VfD will run its course no matter what. · Katefan0(scribble) 03:02, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • OK. Ourcolony.net seems to be a pioneer in ARGs, and there seem to be a lot of people who feel passionately about keeping this. Whearas I'm only mildly inclinded to delete it. So I change my vote to Abstain. Dave the Red (talk) 01:13, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Keep. Hello, this is of course something historic, just as much as having information about government war bonds from the 40's has relevance. It's kind of ridiculous to go around deleting things because you don't like it.

  • Keep The article is looking fairly encyclopedic; significant ARGs represent very enthusiastic communities, and are more significant (imo) than non-collaborative games with similarly-sized audiences. +sj +, who still has vivid recollections of The Beast
    PS - according to the terminology in the article itself, it should be moved to OurColony, not OurColony.net. I've moved the article back there (VfD and all); clearly there should be only one article. +sj + 07:31, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Can I remove the VfD? I will remove in 2 days, anyone disagree? --Mateusc 16:39, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • No, you can't. An admin will decide when the vote should be closed and what should be done with the article. · Katefan0(scribble) 19:46, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep As others have pointed out, it would seem incongruous to allow ilovebees.com to remain but to delete this. Also, I daresay that consensus has more-or-less been achieved and admins should consider closing the vote. VoiceOfReason
  • Keep I also think that this article should be kept. Atrophied
    • Above user has two edits, one to OurColony and one to this VfD. · Katefan0(scribble) 20:49, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
      • Seniority does not change the validity of one's vote. If a user with 2000 edits can vote without explaining the reasoning behind it, a user with 2 edits should be permitted to as well. If you suspect sockpuppetry, say so, that would alter the validity of the vote. Sockatume 17:36, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • Anon votes or votes by people with very low edit counts are still votes, but they can be discounted at an admin's discretion when the vote is closed, as per Wikipedia's policies. It is common practice, therefore, to point these things out when they occur, and has nothing to do with suggesting sockpuppetry. It's nothing to get offended about. · Katefan0(scribble) 03:11, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
        • Didn't mean to come across as offended there, I'm not, just thinking around the interesting situation we have on the Wikipedia with regards to newcomers voting and the lack of a requirement to justify votes. Sockatume 18:49, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I believe it should stay. JyThanatos
    • Above user's only edit is to this VfD. · Katefan0(scribble) 13:15, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
      • Katefan, can you explain why this page deserves deletion and ilovebees.com does not? Or do you think ilovebees.com should be deleted too? (Note that I have a handful of diverse edits.) VoiceOfReason
        • See my comments above. · Katefan0(scribble) 15:13, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
          • Apologies, I missed your earlier comment regarding ilovebees.
            I think there should definitely be a bias against deletion of articles. As long as it's not nonsensical, what is the harm in keeping? It has, as others have said, drawn new readers (and contributors) to Wikipedia, and it's information. It may not be of terribly wide interest, but I'm sure the reign of Henry_the_Lion isn't of terribly wide interest either. Five years from now, somebody will say to himself, "Hey, remember that OurColony thing? I wonder how it turned out." Is there any reason why he shouldn't be able to come here and find out?
            Regarding your earlier objection, it should be clear by now that this article is in no way a "discussion forum", but an encyclopedic description of the game and a list of challenges. VoiceOfReason
            • I agree that it's vastly improved over what it was before, and I did consider whether I should change my vote... but ultimately, the article is about what amounts to a gigantic advertisement for Xbox and its parent company. I'm against Wikipedia articles that function as corporate press releases, and it doesn't change my opinion that this one is presented in the form of a game or challenge. I do appreciate your enthusiasm though and can see how someone could get drawn in. · Katefan0(scribble) 21:04, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
              • As Jonamerica points out, Wikipedia has pages on The Noid and "Where's the beef?". Much pop culture originates as marketing campaigns. The article itself isn't an advertisement; it's an article about an advertisement. Providing factual information about the advertisement should be kosher. (In the nature of full disclosure, I should add that the aforementioned parent company happens to be my employer. I am not, however, in any way affiliated with Ourcolony. I don't even play it.) VoiceOfReason
  • Delete. Marketing campaigns, almost by definition, will be forgotten in a few years. Nothing of lasting interest. Isomorphic 02:35, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Apple's 1984 Commercial. New Coke. "Pepsi Challenge" of the 1980s. Coke's 1971 "Hilltop" ad. Toyota's "Oh What a Feeling." The Noid. Where's the beef?. I remember plenty of useless junk, but for those that don't there's wikipedia. But seriously, this ad hasn't run it's course yet, and who knows how big it'll become once it nears the end. It may be forgotten or it may be talked about in university marketing classes for years. Right now we have the opportunity to document it fully, as it progresses, before it becomes a faded memory. -Jonamerica 04:20, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Wikipedia no doubt already has, or soon will have, an article on Alternate Reality Games. They're an increasingly commonplace marketing tool. It'd be useful to have a couple of articles on them around as examples of the form. Sockatume 17:36, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Do you not see the ammount of people this is bringing here? I am now currently looking through and planing to contribute to this site now that I have found it. JyThanatos
  • Keep- As a centralized place for information, even if it is a marketing campaign, it is a website that people would like information about. I for one used wikipedia to glean information on the ilovebees.com campaign. This was mentioned on CNN, and NPR.
  • Keep- The Ourcolony game/event/marketing campaign is a notable subject with not only immediate relevance, but probably historical interest as well. It is unsurprising that the people contributing to the article are fans and participators. I have no doubt that the people contributing to the Harry Potter article, for example, are also fans and participators in Harry Potter activities. On top of that, the article's existence is a positive influence on the Wikipedia community -- drawing new members who would otherwise be unaware of the encyclopedia. Personally, I feel the mere fact that the article is up for VfD sends the wrong message to all these new eyeballs: It suggests that this is an insular and snobbish place, rather than the open and communal environment I believe it to be.--07:52, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)~ Justin Bacon

tcpvtec I already voted to Keep. So when does this end?

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/OurColony&oldid=1138191778"