Talk:Xconq

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 October 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Jack Marston (Red Dead) (3 participants)
Joshua Tomar (4 participants)
Juhani (Star Wars) (3 participants)
Starwing Paradox (2 participants)
Pit (Kid Icarus) (13 participants)
Vette (Star Wars) (5 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Untitled[edit]

There's a sort of history at http://sourceware.org/xconq/family-tree.html, but perhaps someone more familiar with the development can help with the History section. Marasmusine 10:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the main author, I can add quite a lot, just have to be careful only to put in what is verifiable, and watch out for self-promotion... The screenshots are all GPL, would be good to upload a few to commons. Stan 13:44, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stan, thanks. I'll investigate the screenshots shortly. I understand your concern about self-promotion but feel free to keep an editorial eye on what I add :> I've only just come back to playing this game - I used to have an Amiga port about six years ago. Marasmusine 20:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although I've been looking, I can't find any references I'm happy with, so I won't contest the proposed deletion. (Unless Stan knows of anything.) Marašmusïne_Talk 17:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xconq is actually discussed in a couple books, but I'm on the road right now, so won't be able to cite them immediately. No, they're not going to be academic monographs. Stan 17:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds promising. What I've done is made a copy of this article in my user space, and will allow the prod to go through. Whenever you are ready to cite those sources, we can recreate the article. Thanks, Marašmusïne_Talk 18:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

I'm not clear on why this article is being singled out on the point of notability. Sampling in Category:Open_source_video_games shows few if any even have a single print reference, and nobody seems to be questioning their notability. This one has already passed rfd, so keeping the tag up is starting to look at an effort to delete no matter what. I could do more research, but I'm not motivated if nothing is going to be good enough here, while other articles are getting a pass. Stan (talk) 15:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want more information with regards to WP:GNG; i.e. where has it received significant coverage (a few possible books were mentioned during the AfD), and what they had to say about it, including WP:CITE citations. This will also fill another requirement in that articles should be built using information from independent, reliable sources (WP:V).

As for "singling it out", this simple isn't the case, as every day I'm tagging poorly sourced/unnotable video game articles, taking them to AfD or proposing them for deletion. However a lot of the time, these tags get removed (usually anonymously) without the issues being addressed.

If you prefer, I'll change this article's tag for a less "severe" one. Marasmusine (talk) 10:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stan, do you still have the Game Marugoto Pack for Macintosh page you mentioned back in the AfD? I'm interested in expanding this article again, and getting rid of the notability tag. I'm not sure what to do translation-wise yet, although I do own two Japanese dictionaries so I might have a stab at it. Marasmusine (talk) 17:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Google book search today shows multiple independent reliable sources, so I'm removing the WP:N warning banner from the article. ‑‑Yodin^T 16:04, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Windows[edit]

When was the MS Windows version produced? 2fort5r (talk) 23:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1999, first appearing in the 7.3 release, mid-2000. Stan (talk) 16:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]