User talk:Chaos5023

Player versus player

Not sure if you saw this, but I was trying to find an old reference to PvP muds and realised it had been removed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Player_versus_player&action=historysubmit&diff=371875159&oldid=371874781 (cur | prev) 17:01, 5 July 2010 AzureFury (talk | contribs) (19,525 bytes) (→History: Why are we still talking about MUDs in the 2000's? WP:WEIGHT. Also delete mention of China, this article is not about China.)

It's bit worrying to see people removing mud references just because it's 2000. Do you think it's worth contesting? KaVir (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I do; that was a bad edit. Best to restore the MUD material with some sourcing, though. Probably Designing Virtual Worlds and Playing MUDs on the Internet will have plenty to work with. —chaos5023 (talk) 21:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

They stripped a good deal of the player vs player article, which I wrote the majority of. I think finding more references to re-include some key MUDs in the history section, at the very least, is called for. Donathin (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I restored the PKK bit, but my book collection is pretty small. I will keep looking, but I'm hoping Chaos5025 will come to the rescue with his library of sources. KaVir (talk) 20:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully that'll happen, though I don't remember seeing much about PKK. We'll see. I'm on vacation away from my books right now, so it'll be a minute. —chaos5023 (talk) 20:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Well the PKK bit was just a small section, and I've added a reference to Bartle's book, so hopefully that'll be enough. It would be nice to restore that section of PvP in muds though, perhaps if we can found some references to notable PK muds (sadly GW never seems to get any book mentions, but we might find something for some of the older PK muds). KaVir (talk) 20:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Mudlle

I missed the {{distinguished subcategory}} on [1], good catch. But this raises the issue: why is Category:MUD programming languages marked as a distinguished subcat? Certainly it's in a large category (Category:Domain-specific programming languages) that would benefit from diffusion, and certainly that category has many other subcategories to serve that diffusion function.

But perhaps you have more insight into this.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 21:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Be careful when you use rollback and only use it against vandalism. This edit was not vandalism. Garion96 (talk) 17:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. I've replaced the rollback with an explained reversion. —chaos5023 (talk) 17:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Low fantasy

Cool Chaos, you probably know better on the issue, I took the examples from High Fantasy article. I'm not particuarly a fantasy reader, but I'm huge fan of Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. I do not go much beyond that.

Lord of the Rings is not the best example of High Fantasy (its not actually set on a "secondary world") nor is it an example of Low Fantasy from the criteria both articles define. Its roughly somewhere in between. Part of this seems to be Tolkien wasn't intending to "write fantasy" per se, but was trying to create more of a contemporary mythology for England. Magic in his books is very low key... I'd compare it closer to a fantasy series like Pendragon Cycle (although Tolkien's is not histroical fantasy like that series), but both share extreme limited use of magic (magic is portrayed as being either something natural or something of 'devil' essentially).

It sounds like WOT is something similar as far as "mythical history" epoch? 137.222.231.108 (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)