Talk:Theorycraft

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

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

Atomas (0 participants)
PLAY: The Games Festival (1 participant)
FloodSim (1 participant)
Kunimitsu and Kunimitsu II (1 participant)
Blast Monkeys (0 participants)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (5 participants)
Purple Francis (8 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (4 participants)
Dr. Wily (10 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (3 participants; relisted)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Nomination for deletion

Firsts of all, thanks to User:Jsfouche for telling be about the nomination. :) "Theorycraft" is clearly a neologism, so let's read Wikipedia:NEOLOGISM. I didn't create the article to promote the use of the term, but to cover the subject. I checked articles like game theory to check whether both were synonims and found that they aren't, so instead of changing that article. I put a notable and reliable secondary source that describes and analyses the term. The activity of finding the best way to win a game seems notable to me. Let's hear other opinions. Good bye! --NaBUru38 (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Theorycraft" has a different more common meaning than the one defined in this article. The Urban Dictionary defines it as: "Theorycraft refers to any game strategy that exists only in theory and never actually put into action." see Urban Dictionary for an explanation. Since that kind of tiresome activity happens all the time in online games the term is useful when wanting to discount said behavior with just one word. No reason to put it in Wikipedia though. I vote for deletion of this article. Topdown (talk) 06:59, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This neolog (neologistic?) term already has a word attributed to it: theorizing. All this "article" does is promote ignorance of the real term. Agree with nomination for deletion.

Also, one of the criteria for deletion is: "Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia." The term "theorycraft" was made up on forums, places where game-specific terms are thrown around. This is one such term.

Please just remove this "article" already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.148.114 (talk) 04:24, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.148.162 (talk) 20:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While it is a rather game-specific neologism, I wouldn't say "theorizing" sums it up precisely. A better analogy would be Powergaming. And yes - it is a rather niche game-specific term, but pages for similar niche terms exist, where the only difference is they've been around for longer and have thus gained a bit more general acceptance. Example: Munchkin_(role-playing_games)

Still, the second half at least should be axed without blinking an eye. Unlike the general concept it is almost entirely comprised of game jargon that would hold no meaning to anyone who doesn't already know what it says. Martixy (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]