Ultima Online on wikipedia.

[morPR]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_Online

It's a decent write-up but they refer to Third Dawn as a fourth expansion. Wasn't it the third, hence the title? I remember being very pleased when LBR came out. I had new items to craft plus the game had a plot somewhat with the robo-Blackthorne in it.

They also gloss over the reforming of the Trammel (and Felucca?) world with the Mondain's Legacy release. They added some hard dungeons along with Heartwood town introduced in Yew. Heck, they don't state the default client has become ML either.

I won't bother mentioning AOS.... but it has gotten old hat for a new facet to be added and selectable from the moongate menus. The Second Age areas (commonly called T2A) were added onto the world to be hard to access from the outside and introduced two towns to the game. So I wonder why they rebuilt the first two facets to include ML content?

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

UO's wikipedia page, the last time I tried to do anything with it, was dominated by people who hate the game in general and/or hate Trammel (and by extension most things about the game most players actually like) and/or both.

I tried to change it only to see my stuff undone within 2 hours at most, 30 seconds at least.

After that I gave up with a shrug.

-Galen's player

 

[Tazar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_Online

It's a decent write-up but they refer to Third Dawn as a fourth expansion. Wasn't it the third, hence the title? I remember being very pleased when LBR came out. I had new items to craft plus the game had a plot somewhat with the robo-Blackthorne in it.

They also gloss over the reforming of the Trammel (and Felucca?) world with the Mondain's Legacy release. They added some hard dungeons along with Heartwood town introduced in Yew. Heck, they don't state the default client has become ML either.

I won't bother mentioning AOS.... but it has gotten old hat for a new facet to be added and selectable from the moongate menus. The Second Age areas (commonly called T2A) were added onto the world to be hard to access from the outside and introduced two towns to the game. So I wonder why they rebuilt the first two facets to include ML content?

My guess is that they are counting the original release as #1, then T2A, Renaissance, and then 3rd Dawn as the 4th. The title "Third Dawn" came from the addition of the old "3D client" rather than the 3rd expansion.

 

[Ox AO]

I tried to change it only to see my stuff undone within 2 hours at most, 30 seconds at least.

-Galen's player

Hate to tell you but Wikipedia people use scripts to set their agenda of hows things should be even with games. The fastest scrips win on the political issues. Wikipedia desperately needs rule changes with minority view(none script views) on how things are.

 

[cazador]

If you don't like it..you could always create your own I guess.. A few inaccuracies but nothing really major

 

[Ox AO]

If you don't like it..you could always create your own I guess.. A few inaccuracies but nothing really major

No, i disagree. When it comes to controversial issues wikipieda is horrible even when it comes to UO it is bad. I call it the power over Galileo syndrome. Where only the predominate view is shown. They even state that is their rule which is laughable.

When it is a non-controversial issue is the first place I look usually.

 

[cazador]

No, i disagree. When it comes to controversial issues wikipieda is horrible even when it comes to UO it is bad. I call it the power over Galileo syndrome. Where only the predominate view is shown. They even state that is their rule which is laughable.

When it is a non-controversial issue is the first place I look usually.

Can you explain what's controversial so I can review I just briefly scanned the site

 

[Ox AO]

Can you explain what's controversial so I can review I just briefly scanned the site

sure no problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_online

Then read GalenKnightawke post and ask him what he wanted changed. It doesn't matter how bad Galenknightawke's view of Ultima is if had at least a little support he should have his view posted.

Galileo had some support but it wasn't the predominate view. If he was showing his views today the Earth would still be the center of the universe according to Wikipedia.

 

[Uvtha]

sure no problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_online

Then read GalenKnightawke post and ask him what he wanted changed. It doesn't matter how bad Galenknightawke's view of Ultima is if had at least a little support he should have his view posted.

Galileo had some support but it wasn't the predominate view. If he was showing his views today the Earth would still be the center of the universe according to Wikipedia.

I don't think Galileo is a very good analogy, because his contention is provable. His view would be the predominant view today because it's verifiable.

 

[Ox AO]

I don't think Galileo is a very good analogy, because his contention is provable. His view would be the predominant view today because it's verifiable.

Galileo is the perfect analogy i have no doubt about that.


At the time it wasn't provable it was only a hypotheses it wouldn't even make it to a level of a theory.

Ok.. 'today' might be miss understood

If wikipeida was around in Galileo's time....

Is that better?

 

[hen]

Galileo is the perfect analogy i have no doubt about that.


At the time it wasn't provable it was only a concept it wouldn't even make it to a level of a theory.

Ok.. 'today' might be miss understood

If wikipeida was around in Galileo's time....

Is that better?

Think Erastothenes proved it long before Gailileo's time. Galileo was just reposting stuff and the Pope gave him an infraction for thread necromancy.

 

[Ox AO]

Think Erastothenes proved it long before Gailileo's time. Galilelo was just reposting stuff and the Pope gave him an infraction for thread necromancy.

Erastothenes measured the diameter of the earth, the distance too the moon and the sun he had no role in determining the earth revolved around the sun.

I don't know what you are refering to about Necromancy?

The pope was upset with Gailileo because he implied that he(the pope) was a simpleton in his book.
Before that they were friends

 

[hen]

Erastothenes measured the diameter of the earth, the distance too the moon and the sun he had no role in determining the earth revolved around the sun.

Yes he did. Maybe it was deleted off wikipedia before you saw it.

 

[Ox AO]

Yes he did. Maybe it was deleted off wikipedia before you saw it.

NICE!

 

[virtualhabitat]

I don't think Galileo is a very good analogy, because his contention is provable. His view would be the predominant view today because it's verifiable.

perhaps Galileo isn't a good analogy, but not because anything he said was provable.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/sep/11/philip-roth-wikipedia

This story (see the link) Author Phillip Roth is unable to edit the wiki page of his own book.

"In a detailed open letter published by the New Yorker, Roth reveals that he petitioned Wikipedia to delete the "misstatement", but was told "that I, Roth, was not a credible source: 'I understand your point that the author is the greatest authority on their own work,' writes the Wikipedia Administrator – 'but we require secondary sources.'"

 

[Ox AO]

perhaps Galileo isn't a good analogy, but not because anything he said was provable.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/sep/11/philip-roth-wikipedia

This story (see the link) Author Phillip Roth is unable to edit the wiki page of his own book.

"In a detailed open letter published by the New Yorker, Roth reveals that he petitioned Wikipedia to delete the "misstatement", but was told "that I, Roth, was not a credible source: 'I understand your point that the author is the greatest authority on their own work,' writes the Wikipedia Administrator – 'but we require secondary sources.'"

That is funny and so Wikipieda idiocy.
The primary source isn't a credible source. that is classic.


I still think Galileo is a great analogy. It shows how the minority view can be correct but will never presented on Wikipeida.

 

[cazador]

Yeah..I'm going to bow out on this, still don't see the UO controversy... before I become "the" troll and get banned again for it..

 

[The Zog historian]

Yes he did. Maybe it was deleted off wikipedia before you saw it.

No, that was actually Aristarchus. That's something Wikipedia cannot teach.

 

[hen]

No, that was actually Aristarchus. That's something Wikipedia cannot teach.

Actually it can if you type in Heliocentrism.

 

[The Zog historian]

If you know what to look for, and not relying on a Wikipedia page you suggested was wrong.

 

[hen]

If you know what to look for, and not relying on a Wikipedia page you suggested was wrong.

Aristarchus is credited with suggesting it first. Erasthothenes proved it first as I said in my original post.

 

[The Zog historian]

Aristarchus is credited with suggesting it first. Erasthothenes proved it first as I said in my original post.

No, Erasthothenes most certainly did not. He calculated the Earth's size, but a heliocentric model can hardly be inferred from that.

Please spare us your junk science. Go add this to the Wikipedia entry if you really know so much better, and I will be happy to revert the page from your vandalism.

 

[Ox AO]

Aristarchus is credited with suggesting it first. ...

You are correct Aristarchus was the first to suggest the earth revolved around the sun but it wasn't the predominate view. It was Galileo that wrote a book on the subject and insulted the pope and with a great deal of controversy was able help put to rest the idea that the earth was the center of the universe.


But the central point was that Wikipeda doesn't allow varying points of view. Which is why this thread was started. It was people like Galenknightawke that tried to correct the UO page but wasn't able to.

This is why I call it the power over Galileo syndrome. I am not sure what the propaganda technique is but it works very well.

There isn't a lot we can do about it unless we get a group together and agree to change a specific statement(s) on the page and keep visiting the page to correct it. As they use scripts to keep it updated we need a group. Since UO isn't a huge controversy it could be done.

 

[Uvtha]

lol... I feel bad for saying anything now, seeing how this has degraded to historical knowledge **** swinging.


Back on topic... wikipedia is imperfect, if you can believe it.

 

[Zosimus]

Close your eyes

Forget everything

Go insane

 

[Eärendil]

Point is: The Wikipedia-Article is crap. Unfortunately, this is true for the German version, too. It is less controversial, but short, lacks information and it is not up to date. How is it in other languages?

 

[GalenKnighthawke]

Just took a gander and, while it is not a well-written or informative article, it's actually not as bad as it was when I had my instant re-editing incidents.

That'll give you an idea, I think.

It still has the negative tinge; note that it opens by telling you about how low a % the game has of all MMO subscriptions in 2008; nothing about when a Mythic person said that UO was still "wildly profitable" at 100k subscribers at or around that same time. But I didn't see, in the 10 second glance I took, the obvious tinge of "Trammel killed UO."

Then again I only took a 10 second glance.

The wikipedia is, generally, both great and horrible, both at once. Don't trust it for anything that has any consequence. But it can be valuable for questions of no import ("who played guitar on that album?") and as a starting point.

-Galen's player

 

[Aran]

Close your eyes

Forget everything

Go insane

Too late.

 

[morPR]

My guess is that they are counting the original release as #1, then T2A, Renaissance, and then 3rd Dawn as the 4th. The title "Third Dawn" came from the addition of the old "3D client" rather than the 3rd expansion.

That's crazy talk. The original release of a game shouldn't be seen as an "expansion".

Let me count..... T2A One.
Ren Two.
Third Dawn three.

 

[Tazar]

That's crazy talk. The original release of a game shouldn't be seen as an "expansion".

Let me count..... T2A One.
Ren Two.
Third Dawn three.

It's Wikipedia... what do you expect? Most likely someone started the page with the "Ultima Online Releases" and somewhere along the way it was converted to "Expansions". This is part of why I've never liked Wiki's.

 

[Ox AO]

It's Wikipedia... what do you expect? Most likely someone started the page with the "Ultima Online Releases" and somewhere along the way it was converted to "Expansions". This is part of why I've never liked Wiki's.

If it is non-controversial such as JC the Builder's, Cogniac's and Nimuaq UO guide wiki's can be fantastic.
I bet even they have issues that would be interesting to this thread.

 

[hen]

That's crazy talk. The original release of a game shouldn't be seen as an "expansion".

Let me count..... T2A One.
Ren Two.
Third Dawn three.

Then don't see them as expansions, see them as releases. Who are you anyway and why are you here?

 

[Zosimus]

Now now Tazar. If I need to know something in GW2 I Type /wiki <search term> in the chat and it will open my browser and redirect me to the official wiki article and information I need.

I wiki


Seems most issues on wiki is the information is copyrighted material being posted from another website or such which is why things get removed besides the general issues. Not sure why you all can't change anything and it would be hard to fathom a person sitting on UO wiki 24/7 just to make sure there stuff was not changed and if it is they change it back.


As I said.....


Go insane!

 

[Ox AO]

Not sure why you all can't change anything and it would be hard to fathom a person sitting on UO wiki 24/7 just to make sure there stuff was not changed and if it is they change it back.

They don't sit 24/7 their computer does.
They use scripts to make sure their pages / issues doesn't get changed.

I believe they even have pre-made scrips at Greacemonkey just for wiki sites

 

[Orgional Farimir]

You are correct Aristarchus was the first to suggest the earth revolved around the sun but it wasn't the predominate view. It was Galileo that wrote a book on the subject and insulted the pope and with a great deal of controversy was able help put to rest the idea that the earth was the center of the universe.


But the central point was that Wikipeda doesn't allow varying points of view. Which is why this thread was started. It was people like Galenknightawke that tried to correct the UO page but wasn't able to.

This is why I call it the power over Galileo syndrome. I am not sure what the propaganda technique is but it works very well.

There isn't a lot we can do about it unless we get a group together and agree to change a specific statement(s) on the page and keep visiting the page to correct it. As they use scripts to keep it updated we need a group. Since UO isn't a huge controversy it could be done.

I like carrots!!!!

Sadly there isn't a dancing carrot option.

 

[Zosimus]

Somebody explain to me then why is wiki so important to UO in todays genre?


It's not like it's actually giving you in-game information how to craft or do this and that. Thats what Stratics and UO forums are for. It's really just information based on fact, half truths and assumption from what I took from it. Some of it can be very close to the truth but some of it's far fetched. In the end doesn't matter what the wiki site wants to make UO sound. It really doesn't provide any useful information. Not like a kid or teenager is going to run to UO wiki first to decide if they want to play UO lol. Sometimes over analyzing everything on games takes the fun out of gaming. Even on UO home page it has Stratics listed not wiki.


I am going to close my eyes

Forget everything

Go insane

I have people to kill, content to play and have fun in GW2. That is my insanity.

 

[Ox AO]

Zosimus do you always close your eyes and forget every time you read?

For a lot of people Wikipidia is the first place they look. If they read a positive post at wikipidea they will look more into it.

 

[Zosimus]

Zosimus do you always close your eyes and forget every time you read?

For a lot of people Wikipidia is the first place they look. If they read a positive post at wikipidea they will look more into it.

LOL. I almost fell out of my chair. Wiki is not going to make or break UO or turn off possible players. Use Bing and Google when you type in Ultima Online. UO.com is always first and that is the link people will click. On the main site it has Stratics and fan-sites tabs.

The UO wiki site even in the talk section is sparse and last talk was done in may of 2012. The GW2 wiki is more like Stratics with game information and all what is needed for a player to learn. UO wiki is just the basics of the game, and issues, and releases and such. Stratics and UO forums has a ton of information concerning the game than wiki.

Reddit is the place where serious gamers go to to learn about games. Not wiki. If wiki is such an issue than maybe you all should make an issue on Reddit. It's more about freeshards than anything. You all are missing possible players by neglecting using Reddit to help promote the official game.

http://www.reddit.com/r/ultimaonline/


I may close my eyes but I sure don't forget. I have seen many arguments just over what is written within wiki for any topic. People dispute what is posted on any articles. Just like we are disputing how important or not wiki is.

 

[virtualhabitat]

I like carrots!!!!

Sadly there isn't a dancing carrot option.

 

[Aran]

Reddit is the place where serious gamers go to to learn about games. Not wiki. If wiki is such an issue than maybe you all should make an issue on Reddit. It's more about freeshards than anything. You all are missing possible players by neglecting using Reddit to help promote the official game.

Reddit is a disgusting hive of perverts and shut-ins. Suggesting people go there should be a crime against nature.

 

[Shamus Turlough]

I like carrots!!!!

Sadly there isn't a dancing carrot option.

 

[Lady Storm]

"Claps" way to go Shamus! hehe

 

[Petra Fyde]

If you prefer your information in wiki format, then the one to consult is obviously uoguide.com
I tend to hope people will enjoy our uo2.stratics.com information, which tends to be presented a little differently, but then I'm biased.

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

I was reading this thread and I just HAD to add my two cents...

At the University I am currently attending Wikipedia is NOT a credible source, period. In fact one of Luc of Legends professors said and I quote: " If you believe anything in Wikipedia is 100% credible then you are a moron." LOL Luc's a senior so she gets all the tough upper level Profs. Personally I would never ever, ever cite Wikipedia on any research paper, because I wouldn't want the prof. to deduct points from my paper, laugh at my citations, and/or flunk my paper.

 

[Aran]

Well, duh. Wikipedia isn't a primary source.

 

[Jirel of Joiry]

Well, duh. Wikipedia isn't a primary source.

I know that! It isn't even a secondary source. I was just saying.

 

[The Zog historian]

I know that! It isn't even a secondary source. I was just saying.

Well then, I'll have to edit Wikipedia's entry on itself to extol its infallibility!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia