Talk:Second Life/Archive 7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

Employee Editors?

How do people feel about Linden Lab employees editing this page? I work there, and some of the stuff in the open source section is wrong. We're not, for example, moving to Jabber any time soon. No one is currently working on it and it's not on any schedule I've seen. But I doubt that's been said publicly. Jamescookmd 06:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The threshold for inclusion is verifiability not truth. If there have been statements or information presented that indicate these things are true, then whatever goes on internally cannot be put in the article unless there is some verification.--Crossmr 15:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Plus, its a great way to lose your job :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.149.229 (talkcontribs) 00:23, 13 August 2006

New World Notes as reputable source

Just wondering why, other than being in blog format, that New World Notes is not a reputable source for information.Signpostmarv 08:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

blogs aren't typically accepted as sources because of their self-published nature, but I've read his credentials and he was, at least at one point, a professional journalist so he meets WP:V, but the blog can only be used to cite his opinion on matters, it can't be used to put forth facts.--Crossmr 13:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Is there a difference between posts when he was reporting as Hamlet Linden, and when he was reporting as Hamlet Au ? eg when he was a company employee and when he wasn't.Signpostmarv 18:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Well when he was a company employee that was when he was a professional journalist, because he was hired to write about something by LL, even if it was their product. You might look more critically at the posts he made while he was an employee as its rare for people on the payroll to be as critical about something involving the company as they should be.--Crossmr 18:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Splitting hairs- he was hired to write about the activities of the users of LL's product, not the product itself. What about cross referencing blogs or forum posts he's used to quote from ? Since I've seen from the edit history that neither blogs nor forum posts are citeable.Signpostmarv 11:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Then it becomes original research. If you're putting forth facts, theories, conclusions etc you have to base it on reliable sources. Since you wouldn't be using reliable sources you would end up violating WP:OR. While he was hired to write about the people and not the product, he was still on their payroll. So if he were to give an opinion that contracted what another reliable source said while he was on the payroll, you might not take it at face value. Anything you want to reference from him would have to be done something like this "According to Hamlet Au..." or "Hamlet Au writes..." etc--Crossmr 15:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Croquet Project..?

Why would the Croquet project be considered a competitor of Second Life? Just because it's 3D doesn't mean it's a competitor of them. That's like saying Mario Cart or Halo 2 is conflicting with them. Croquet has nothing to do with Second life. --71.118.168.253 06:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

because you can build a virtual 3D world in it?--Crossmr 15:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
You can create a virtual world in "Sim City," "RollerCoaser Tycoon," or the upcomming game "Spores," too, but I highly doubt anyone would consider them compeditors of Second Life. --71.118.168.253 06:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Those are all off-line software. Croquet is online software same as SL.--Crossmr 15:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
If you get into splitting hairs, Spore is an online game, but it's single player. One of the main points of spore is that it's Massively Single Player. Besides AIs that Residents have written themselves with the built in tools (the lack of a name tag is a big hint that it's not a Resident), there are no NPCs- no computer controlled players in Second Life, so any online single player game can't be compared as a competitor to SL.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Signpostmarv (talkcontribs) 12:35, 17 August 2006

Requirements section

Isn't this just a bloated version of what is displayed (or should be displayed) in the infobox ? Signpostmarv 02:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Notable Users

We might consider forking this section. I've done this on other articles and its benefited them. These lists can become large and unwiedly as time goes on because they potentially could become infinitely large as more and more people join a service. A nice intro paragarph than a "see list of notable users for further info" usually suffices.--Crossmr 04:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

What about yanking out the text of the Resident Created Content and the Subcultures and countercultures section into a single article about Second Life Residents (eg Resident (Second Life) as I have suggested before) ? Pretty much all remaining text would refer to Second Life the 'platform' (since the list of users, the text about the groups and cultures surrounding the users, and to a certain degree, the stuff they can do in Second Life are all sort of related). Signpostmarv 17:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
That sounds like a perfect idea.--Crossmr 18:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
If there's no opposing arguments by Saturday, I suggest whoever has the time free do the move do it :-) Signpostmarv 03:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I guess that since it was my idea, it'll be my job :-P Now... to track down the right template..... Signpostmarv 03:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Trivia /List of avatar names. Since there are now 600,000 users the fact that Doctor Who, Economists names are being used is pretty irrelevant. You could also add poets, England Cricket players, and many other categories to the list. This section should be 'pruned'. OldNol 6 September 2006

Official statements that require login to view

I can sort of understand saying that a link cannot be used as a reference if it requires a login to view, but ruling it out because it's on a forum despite the statement being from a company employee, and thus an undeniable official statement o_O ? That's kinda odd. Signpostmarv 22:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

That's something that is in the process of being addressed I believe. Currently forums are unuseable as a source for anything. They're just not considered reliable. Personally, I'm neither here nor there as long as the identity of the individual making the statement can be verified, but thats not a majority view point. The other issue we have here, is that non-company employees can be made lindens. So for joe six pack, without further digging its not obvious whether or not this person is a company employee speaking for the company.--Crossmr 23:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Uhh, as far as I can tell, if a Resident's last name is "Linden" then they are a company employee. Once they stop being a company employee, they don't have access to that name any more. The Linden in this case was Robin Linden e.g. Robin Harper, who I believe has been with Linden Lab since the company was formed. How are you forming this opinion that anyone with Linden for a last name is not a company employee ? Signpostmarv 02:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
The link we're using as a source for Feted Inner Core led me to believe that not everyone with a Linden last name is a company employee. I also recall hearing that discussed in world as well that not everyone with a Linden last name actually works for Linden. Its something you can ask at WP:RS. To me, if you can credibly identify who the person is, it should be allowed, but currently guidelines don't permit it, I've been working on a proposal for blogs Wikipedia:Guidelines for Citing Self-published Blogs, and it could be extended in theory to cover this type of post to a forum. But its far from gotten any kind of concensus at this point.--Crossmr 02:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
If you're referring to James Wagner Au, you'll notice that he was under contract as Hamlet Linden[1], and once the contract was up, he created a new account- Hamlet Au[2]. Anyone with a Linden last name is under the employ of Linden Lab. Once they're no longer under contract, their use of the Linden account is revoked. Plain and simple. BTW, to me this sounds like arguing that the world is curved but having to state that the world is flat untill you can get proof. Rules are good, but rules can be really stupid. Signpostmarv 02:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually I'm referring to the text of the story on the Feted Inner Core where it mentioned something about non-employees becoming Lindens, ... to graduating older players to becoming Lindens. It says they are possibly graduated to become Lindens, doesn't say specifically employees. As far as rules, you're free to argue it, as moot as it is in this case, on WP:RS. But as a general rule they don't accept forums as sources for anything here. I'd like to see an exception made for statements made by people who own the forums.--Crossmr 03:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
If you've checked Linden Lab's Employment section [3], you'll have noticed that part of the requirements for some of the positions is a preference for applicants to have had experience in Second Life. Torley Wong is one such person who went through the process of being a Resident to being a Linden [4]. Signpostmarv 08:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Any statements by company employees should be seen as valid statements, regardless of the media those statements were carried upon, be they website, press release, blog, forum, or used napkin. As long as said statement is available to the public of course :-P Signpostmarv 08:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Virtual Communities Catagory List question

Why doesn't Second Life appear in the Virtual Communities List? If someone could add the code for it to appear there, I think that would be great. Magnum Serpentine 9-20-06

MySpace is a virtual community. Second Life is a virtual world, thus it is listed in the virtual world communites sub category of virtual communities. Signpostmarv 18:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Huh!?

Would an editor who knows this subject please edit the opening statement to met wiki guidelines, e.g.: a succinct description for users who do not already know the subject? At present it sounds more like a religion or a place to have your cadaver frozen awaiting future reanimation than the fascinating ad medium it is. Thanks. —GearedBull 14:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Page name

I see no need for the disambiguation on the page name. Would anyone object if I moved it back to Second Life? Cheers --Pak21 17:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. WP:D and WP:NAME generally imply that an article's title should only include a disambig term in parentheses (such as "online virtual community") if the root of the title requires disambiguation. In this case, if there were several articles whose titles should be "Second Life" (eg. "Second Life (book)", "Second Life (movie)", "Second Life (album)"), then the disambig term would be necessary. However, no such disambiguation is required here, so this article's title should simply be "Second Life". —Slowspace 20:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I've moved it back. --Carnildo 22:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Employment

I'd be curious to know if some people get regular employment in the Second Life universe. I imagine that such a salary would not meet minimum wage standards for westerners, but for those in poorer countries 1$ per hour could be rather interesting. A Sunshade Lust 20:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

They definitely do. Anshe Chung made herself a millionaire on the game, and many people work service jobs (bartenders, dancers, etcetera) to make money in-world which they later cash out.
155.247.166.28 23:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

BDSM in Second Life

Interesting article, just FYI. BDSM blossoms in Second Life --217.227.18.77 15:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Ya know I think this page just might have been vandalized.--162.95.80.197 (talk) 19:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I did what I couldd to remove it. Hope I did it right. --Murphoid (talk) 19:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Anyone know why, when you search Google for 'Second Life', the link to this page, which comes up third or something, has the tag 'Second Life is for people with no life?' I can't find that text in this document. I'm not offended or anything in fact I hardly use SL, but I guess it should probably be removed.--Lopakhin (talk) 13:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Some idiot replaced the page!!!!

512 newbie land sales ended a year ago

About a year ago Linden Labs ended the $1/sq m "First Land" sales to newbies. All land is done by auction or resale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.4.138 (talk) 04:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Law and order SVU

Something probably needs to be added to the Popular Culture section about the recent Law and Order SVU episode that investigated the role a Second Life like program, Another Youniverse, played in a kidnapping/sex crime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.120.244.122 (talk) 03:57, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

criticism?

I just finished reading an article in a periodical that was rather critical of the game. This article mentions nothing of sex, gambling, child pornography, the issues the government has with it, etc. There is virtual real estate, and the government is challenging that along with all of the transactions occurring. Some people are making lots of money on this site. I even read about some virtual terrorist group, the libertarian army or such, that operates on the world.

Registry values

Anyone know if SL creates any values in your system registry besides those in HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT/secondlife and HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SOFTWARE/Linden Research, Inc.? SteveSims 21:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Note: These values are for Windows XP.

Brazil

About my recent edits, the first official Second Life outside U.S. is up and running [5] [6] [7] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.79.45.74 (talk) 13:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

I've corrected this portion of the article. Brazil does not have its own grid or servers; it only has a localized portal onto the standard main grid, as the articles and especially the portal site itself make clear. The portal is operated by a separate company in partnership with Linden Lab. Agateller 21:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
And I've expanded it a bit but I need some help: can anyone find an appropriate source discussing the older Linden-run German, Korean and Japanese regions from mid-late 2005 onwards? That only one I could come up with is a forum anouncement and that's not usefull because it requires a Second Life login to access. EllePollack 15:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Other virtual worlds

It may be useful to have this list somewhere, but I don't see why it belongs in this particular article. I'll place it here so it is not lost. I suggest it be incorporated in some more general article about virtual worlds and that this article cross reference to it somehow:

[[8]]20p (talk) 13:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Metamagician3000 12:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

What about VREng ? http://vreng.enst.fr/html/index.html

allix 21:21, 06 February 2007 (GMT)

The flat earth-like environment

Last I checked, the earth wasn't flat.

Signpostmarv 21:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that phrase is stating two separate facts:
  1. The SL world is flat (ie. not spherical)
  2. The SL world is Earth-like (ie. consisting of land, sea, sky, Sun, Moon, etc)
Perhaps a comma between "flat" and "Earth-like" would helpful. —Slowspace 23:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Fixed. TerriersFan 01:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
déjà vu. Fixed again. Not sure who changed it into a link to Flat Earth, but I'm sure that's definitely not the meaning meant there. —AySz88\^-^ 00:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I have something to add to that, I talked to an admin about this topic and directed them over here, this was about 2 months ago. As far as i'm aware if you try the beta grid the land has a "spherical"(sp?) look to it. They are trying to fix the objects and other aspects to put on the main grid but I believe within 5-6 weeks it should look "round"CrazySain (talk) 00:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

External Links are a Mess

Also see #Mainstream_Media_Coverage_section

Most of the external links do not comply with Wikipedia's guidelines for External links. Most importantly, only a few of the links have any symmetry with this article. Most are dealing in topics related to Second Life in general. Many seem to contain excess advertisements. Many seem to be listed to promote the website itself. Frankly, it's just a mess. I have a feeling that this is fan created article.Testerer 06:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, why not fix it? Take out the links you consider inappropriate, giving your reasons. It all helps improve the article. Metamagician3000 07:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I think you'll find that most articles are fan-created or heavily fan-edited.
The external links section was a mess back when every single SL-related blog got listed. Now it's just a matter of running through the news links, turning it into an Second Life in the Media section, and using each link as a reference instead of a slice of the external links section.
Signpostmarv 09:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I was going to let the "fan created" bit go, just this once - obviously, it is vaguely insulting even if literally true, and is irrelevant to the merits of the material under discussion. People do seem to find it difficult to stick to the merits. Metamagician3000 10:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that having a "Second Life in the Media" section is really necessary. Look at articles such as the Wii or the iPhone, which obviously have had mountains of media coverage, but they don't have a media section in the article. Instead, I have begun transferring individual SL news links to more appropriate locations, as references – see the talk in #Mainstream Media Coverage section. —Slowspace 10:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, there mere fact that someone suggested a "Second Life in the Media section" proves my point that perhaps much of this article, and others related to 2nd life seem to be lacking some NPOV. All external links must help directly explain what Second life is. Not a review of the game or community itself in some magazine. I understand the importance of fan created content, however, it shouldn't stray from a sound NPOV style. Honestly, if only 25,000 people play this game at one time, it might not be as notable as many other games. 3 Million accounts on the other hand is signifigant. But it is a bit fuzzy how 3 million accounts translates to a daily max of merely 25,000 people. I really just stumbled upon this article and one related to it and saw how much help it needs. That's why I posted. There is alot of good here, but some cleaning up is needed. Testerer 18:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

External Links are still a mess. Despite putting up the {{External links}} template, and a reasonable 5-line comment in the 2007 section, people are still coming along and adding new links :-( The problem is that the section has reached critical mass – it looks like an intended repository of links. I've converted the sub-sub-sub-categories into simple bold text, in an attempt to reduce the ridiculous proportion of space that the External Links section takes up in the Contents. —Slowspace 01:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, let's be ruthless about getting rid of external links. No argument about that. Metamagician3000 02:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I've totally removed the "mainstream media coverage" part of the external links. I think the onus should be on anyone who wants to restore one of those links (obviously, it's all in the history) or add new ones. How much are you folks willing to support me on this? Metamagician3000 02:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Very bold of you, Metamagician! I have been tempted to do the same thing myself... My only reservation is that some of those links might actually contain genuinely useful info, which could be referenced into the article (or another SL article). But overall, I think it's the right move; otherwise, people will be forever adding new links. I will continue assessing the deleted links from the archive when I can, and restoring any which I think are valuable. —Slowspace 04:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[un-indent] As a handy place for my own reference and anybody else's if they like, I'll put all those external links on a user sub-page, here. Anything valuable will still be easily at hand as the old version of the article sinks deeper into the history. Metamagician3000 04:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The major issue I see here is that almost all the references we have for this article are primary sources, whereas the media coverage were secondary sources, which are highly favoured for verifiability purposes. My slight worry here is that the links will just sit on Metamagician's page and we'll never get them into the article. Cheers --Pak21 08:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Understood, but at least you know about them. ;) So go ahead and raid them for info if there is likely to be citable stuff there. Metamagician3000 12:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Sign-ups

I just tried to sign up for a basic account without using an SMS number, credit card number or PayPal account. So the part about obsoleting those requirements is false. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.68.227.35 (talk) 04:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

The fact that you can sign up with only an email address makes the other methods obsolete.
Signpostmarv 14:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Delete?

Just wanted to mention.. this game looks like shit. What kind of crap is this? No wonder no one plays it, nor is it really that notable. In fact, I'd vote for its deletion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.191.69.149 (talkcontribs).

Your comment "No wonder no one plays it" is quite simply nonsense. There are between around 20,000 and 50,000 people playing Second Life at any time of the day. Second Life is actually attracting the same sort of attention now that the Internet did in the early-mid 1990s, so to say it is not notable is also incorrect. Your opinion that "it looks like shit" is not only ambiguous and vague, but simply that: an opionion. Unless you have recently been promoted to the role of god almighty I don't think that automatically makes it a universal truth. StanPomeray 12:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Second Life has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources as required by the core policy of attribution. Your personal views on the quality of Second Life are not relevant to whether it should have coverage on Wikipedia or not. Cheers --Pak21 15:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Second Life clearly reaches notability requirement to merit an article. Commercial pros/cons of products really don't have that much place in wiki. It is true that SL has not been that commercially succesful. Do a google search on "Second Life" and you won't find many significant user community efforts. Like you would for something like World of Warcraft ("WoW"), which triggers huge projects like wowiki, allakazham, thottbot, not to mention all guild sites and the UI addon sites and efforts - even cartography sites. SL simply has not appealed to the gaming community, nor has it (like WoW has) taken the traditional gaming community and expanded the appeal. The section in the article that tries to bone out "actual" usage stats seem to me to be a reasonable attempt at objectively saying the same thing (e.g. "yeah, not many people are actually willing to pay for this"). However, that said, SL is a very interesting experiment in online environments, including fairly novel ways of building a business, like virtual product placements and other comarketing efforts. The explicit emphasis on building an economy is also very interesting. One might argue that SL is in many ways a more visionary and innovative attempt at MMO than other (more commercially succesful) projects, including WoW. Their press coverage is partly caused by this element, which underlines that yes, it's certainly notable enough to be covered. --Psm 19:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Second Life IS a user community. Why are you expecting to see one outside SL? Anyway, IMHO SL is more of a "casual game", so no, you're not going to see the hardcore gamers raving about it. They're all playing WoW. SL is too freeform for them. And some would argue that Second Life is not a game, but is in fact Serious Business. 71.87.39.165 (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
There's a fundamental category error in calling SL a "game". It doesn't have to be Serious Business to not be a game per se. Is using the telephone considered "gaming"? Is standing around a cafe considered "gaming"? Is the new product in beta from Google, "Lively!", a "game"? I don't think so. SL's an online environment which happens to require a fairly heavy gaming machine to render decently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.120.93.146 (talk) 01:56, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Finally, if you look at the article, you'll see that the amount of sign-ups is increasing exponentially. Now, if it is a bad as you say it is, why is it so popular?

Well again, the good/bad issue isn't relevant for notability, but the level of interest (quantity) is. So, not that it matters, but amount of sign-ups does not signal quality or even popularity, critics of SL would argue that it's simply an effect of massive media coverage. SL is free to try out, so of course it attracts a lot of people. The question is do they stay and/or do they care very much. But again, none of that is relevant from a notability standpoint. Though the wiki article should somehow also capture any material criticism of SL, and/or at least reference where it can be found. Not so much because wiki is about pro/con arguments, but because in the specific case of SL, the controversy surrounding the level of media interest is part of what today makes SL notable. --67.170.225.125 14:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Formatting

I've reverted the most recent formatting change to the external links section: if they're "too small" in whatever style you're using, the correct action is to change your style, not to change the markup on the page itself. By changing them to bold text, this makes it impossible for other users to change the style to how they like. It's a markup language we're using here, not a layout language. Cheers --Pak21 08:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Pak, I was too ambiguous in my edit summary! When I said "subcats too small", I meant that the subcategories are too short to be warranted. I didn't mean that the actual text size was too small! "Linden Lab" only contains 2 links, and "Audio and video media" only contains 5 links, so I think it would be better just to label the groups of links with bold text, rather than create actual subcats for them. (Remember, every subcat shows up in the Contents, and this really isn't necessary here, since the subcats are very short.) —Slowspace 14:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
That explains things a bit :-) In that case, I think I'd say that if the subcats don't have enough entries, we should just remove the headings entirely. Cheers --Pak21 14:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)