Talk:Planetarion - Wikipedia

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, January 30, 2009, see discussion.
No Consensus, May 9, 2007, see discussion.
Keep, August 25, 2006, see discussion.

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

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Untitled

[edit]

No mention of The Concordium! Bastie 18:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is the estimate of no more than 70,000 players sourced somehow, or original research? It seems pretty unlikely to me that there were that many multis in Planetarion. 80.202.98.214 12:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Best source I have is http://www.clawofdarkness.com/pawiki/index.php/Round_5, this can generally be trusted, but it's not really proof

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/archive/index.php/t-27153.html gives verbatim round 5 post by Spinner. http://www.princegaz.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/planetarion/news2001.html also gives information detailing pay-to-play change. Despair 21:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

God, I remember playing this back in high school; can't believe it's still a going concern. Mackensen (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked in on the last few debates on whether to keep this page or not. Obviously I'm not entirely unbiased in this respect, but given the fact that the game has been running for seven years, has had well over a 100,000 active accounts during it's most popular times, has spawned several other online games in its genre and has been played at several of two hugely popular LAN events, I think it's notable enough to keep an article about. Given the fact that even in a Wikipedia discussion there are many people stating that they have played the game at some point, it should indicate that at the very least knowledge of the game's existence is rather widespread on the Internet. My actual question though, is what kind of sources would make this game qualify as notable - considering that the game's zenith was about 4-5 years ago, most fansites and sites actively featuring PA will have ceased to exist or have moved on, and I doubt one of the early popular games will feature in many articles of scientific value. Leshy 12:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, another ex-PAer here. Imho this page should be kept. Planetarion is a huge part of the internet gaming legacy. It's backstage politics, it's huge popularity and really active community during r2/r3/r4/r5 was know in the whole universe! If the article gets deleted from wikipedia, at least someone setup a wiki in some other host with some of the game's history - alliances (WaC, BlueTuba, Fury, Legion, RB, Elysium) and people (Syn Sid et all)!

Agreed, article needs more detailed information on the early rounds at least. It was a huge phenomenon back in 2000/2001. Even people who didn't usually play computer games got involved. 2fort5r (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign language references

[edit]

The following to be worked into the article:

A translation via altavista bablefish should help get the gist of them. Marasmusine 07:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similar game

[edit]

When Planetarion began charging players many people moved to a very similar, but still free, game which involved mechs rather than spaceships. Does anyone remember the name of this? Is it still running? 2fort5r (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Planetarion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090228231953/http://www.mpogd.com/gotm/ to http://www.mpogd.com/gotm/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090228231953/http://www.mpogd.com/gotm/ to http://www.mpogd.com/gotm/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]