Talk:Tom Chilton (game developer)

Kalgan allows for other classes to easily dominate the Paladin class.

Not trying to troll or anything, but look it up on google and youtube. ;/

And try searching for old posts of his on the Everquest forum. I doubt they're still their though. - Joe

Personal

This section seems redundant, not to mention its been the site of most of the vandalism on this page Jklharris 09:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The entire article seems to be written from the standpoint of someone biased against Mr Chilton. It also needs better sourcing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramajuko (talk • contribs) 23:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday, I removed a lot of vandalism from the article, as well as a paragraph that had both verifiability and NPOV issues. In essence, it accused Mr. Chilton of having limited experience playing his own game (so to speak). The opening phrase "Many players feel" attempts to skirt this issue, but in my view does not justify the inclusion of this paragraph. Someone added it to the article again (including a glaring typo/misuse of a word - obviously it was simply copy/pasted), so I had to remove it today. If you think it is a valid addition to the article, please do not just add it in again - discuss your reasoning here. - Glynth (talk) 22:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Deletion Potential

I just want to add in some quick thoughts on the deletion potential of this article since it doesn't seem to be addressed outside the complaints about vandals.

Regardless of the current state of the Blizzard / Warcraft Community, Tom Chilton is one of the lead developers for currently the MOST POPULAR game in the world. With 10 million subscribers, the efforts he added into the game's development should be recognized heavily. An article regarding this individual does deserve to be in existence considering he is a lead developer.

Beyond that, the contents of the article are what should be in question, not weather the article itself should exist or not. Tom Chilton has certainly made his mark on the world to the point that a wiki article for this individual not only deserves to be existence, but in good faith of the wiki project, must be. --151.199.226.77 (talk) 19:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

World of Warcraft is not the most popular game.

http://www.wonderlandblog.com/wonderland/2008/04/maplestory- 71m.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MapleStory

Tom Chilton is also attributed as the one who single handedly ruined Ultima Online. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.136.30 (talk) 06:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Bias

Even ignoring all the vandalism, this entire article is just full of bias. Basically this page reads like it was written by WoW General Forum trolls. For example: I have never heard it suggested by anyone that somehow balancing for teamplay rather than for 1v1 caters to "hardcore" (a term that is not defined or linked to a definition) instead of "casual" (again, same problem) players. Plenty of games favor team effort over singular effort and could still be considered easily accessible (or "casual"). For example: Baseball or Gin Rummy. I would suggest scrapping the entire thing and starting over with a neutral article. 68.207.126.7 (talk) 21:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Also, as for the "rocking an s3 weapon" reference, I believe (but am not certain) that it is from one of the discussion panels at Blizzcon 2007. Videos of these panels are available on YouTube, but I don't have time to watch them right now. http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=lemonsoon&p=r is a good starting point. There was a "Raid and Dungeon" panel, a "Class" discussion panel, and an "Items and Professions" discussion panel, all of which were attended by Chilton (I believe). If someone with more time on their hands wants to find the actual video with the quote, please update the article according. 68.207.126.7 (talk) 21:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Why does this article exist? It seems this person is not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. I suspect it was self created and violates several Wikipedia guidelines. 208.203.4.140 (talk) 21:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It exists for the same reason that articles about other game developers exist. He is a very influential developer and is known in the gaming world not to mention that he is the lead developer for the largest MMO in existence. I'm very sick of Wikipedia's standard of deleting articles because they "Feel that they aren't necessary" and they "violate Wikipedia guildlines." That mentality is destroying this site and useful information is becomes more difficult to find. 134.129.71.172 (talk) 18:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

This is absolutely not "self created". It was created by a World of Warcraft player. No one would create an article about themselves with such negative bias (other than a troll). 68.207.126.7 (talk) 19:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

"Kalganism"?

What is this crap? This page is getting worse all the time. It's basically a place for players to mock this person. This page is an example of why wikipedia fails. Editors have no clue who this guy is, and there's too many pages for them to police all of them, so people just put up insulting crap about whoever they want to link to other people and giggle about it. This page should be reduced to the facts alone ("Tom Chilton is lead game designer in charge of pvp/class balance/whatever") and locked. 72.189.248.245 (talk) 21:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Kalganism is the system in witch one abuses power for their own desire ignores important issues or believes they should be better or beat somebody for no reason also there should be some work done on his "work" for Ultima Online the game he is credited with ruining —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.149.100 (talk) 03:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Those are the actual facts surrounding patch 2.3 and the furor it caused, mainly centering around Chilton. Facts can be good or bad. I'm sorry that the page doesn't meet your standards of being all "fluffy fluffy froo froo," but sometimes, the facts hurt. Greatcow95 (talk) 00:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It's Probably also worth mentioning that the term has been thrown around elsewhere since it's been coined. Also, it's not as if this is the community attacking him for one patch. He has a nice history throughout the dev cycle of WoW as well as with Ultima. As the above message reads, Good or bad, the truth sometimes isn't made of bunnies and roses. 134.129.71.172 (talk) 16:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The fact that a bunch of disgruntled World of Warcraft nerds are pissed off with him for nerfing the classes they play is not notable. I will keep removing the entire retarded and un-encyclopedic "Kalganism" section until an editor gets a clue or I get banned.203.97.214.247 (talk) 07:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Then you will be banned. Not only are you abrasive, you are doing little more than trying to hide the facts. This is why we need this page protected again. Greatcow95 (talk) 23:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't even play your stupid game, conspiracy theorist loser. I'm removing the section because it's unencyclopedic and embarasses Wikipedia, in addition to being potentially libellous as this is a biography of a living person. 203.97.214.247 (talk) 01:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

You can call it bias and unencyclopedic all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you're an idiot and NOT the offical say on what does or does not belong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.190.131 (talk) 04:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Lets be reasonable here. The video game industry is a $10 billion a year industry and is one of the main choices of entertainment for those of late generation x on. At the core of that form of entertainment is the videogame developer. Developers like Shigeru Miyamoto are stars in their own right for the games they have developed. They are the directors of the 21st century. A developer like Tom Chilton is just as any director is open for criticism of his work. Michael Bay has a criticism section you know. If you don’t like video games because they never appealed to you or are simply not part of that generation too bad. They are huge and will only continue to grow as the older generations die. Grow up and get with the times please.GTTofAK (talk) 21:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Protection

This page needs protected again. They are deleting factual information presented on this page. Greatcow95 (talk) 22:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Forums and patch notes don't meet the rigorous sourcing requirements of WP:BLP, particularly regarding controversial and contentious material -- have reliable secondary sources reported any of this? Such sourcing is critical on biographies of living persons. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Chilton is too small of a fish to really be hit by a secondary source, especially on something like bias in one facet of an online game. In addition, the "Kalganism" debacle was brief in its initial run, due to another "blue" threatening the board with banning for continuing Kalganism posts. While the initial Kalganism post on the Warcraft boards hit 13 pages of responses, this happened in one day. Unless someone was "on the inside," there is no reason to even think something was really going on; it would have been someone thinking they were attacking Chilton.

While the attack on Chilton may have been uncalled for, (and it was, considering it's much better in a professional sense to pick at the company and not at a person) the issue isn't in the verifiability of the information (it's there), but rather the verified information is not in the preferred form. It's unfortunate that it is this way, but it is a very unusual case in terms of the brevity (the threat from the "blue" came a little over a week after the "Kalganism" debacle). Any input would be highly valued on this unusual case. Perhaps creating an additional page? This way, everyone is satisfied.Greatcow95 (talk) 02:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, is impersonating a Wikipedia editor or administrator allowed? Greatcow posted a semi official-looking notice on my talk page complete with danger icon, stating "This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing." As far as I can tell Greatcow is neither an editor nor administrator and has no authority to make such threats. 203.97.214.247 (talk) 02:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Let me put it in words you'll be able to understand then (personal attacks): if you weren't such a retard, you'd understand how the warning system works. You've been warned at least once on the very same page by someone that doesn't appear to be an admin either. Maybe if you took the time to learn something instead of doing just personal attacks and random deletions, then you'd understand. I guess some things are just too hard to do, huh?

For right now, the current revision of the page will stand, simply because I'm sick and tired of you resorting to personal attacks on the edit page and in the discussion page. Seriously, if you need to attack someone over the internet, you really need some help.Greatcow95 (talk) 04:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

1) The current revision will stand because Luna Santin told you you were wrong, and not for the reasons you just claimed.

2) You are abusing the warning system by giving me a warning that is designed for bad faith posters. I note you have been admonished for this before on your talk page. Please learn the difference between a bad faith edit and a good faith edit that you happen to disagree with. 203.97.214.247 (talk) 06:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

You were warned three times by people you happen to disagree with. To be honest, you've been warned SEVEN TIMES for this kind of crap (honestly, how many warnings does it take for someone to be permanently blocked???). When several people have a problem with one person, it usually isn't the fault of the several people. In addition to this, I'm willing try and make it work out for everyone's benefit, including you and your deleting habits on here. Perhaps you were too blinded by rage, which seems to happen very often with you considering your history here on Wikipedia. Seriously, you need help--go and get it.

As for Luna, I do look forward to working with you in terms of making this work, considering the rather unusual nature of the "Kalganism" debacle. Greatcow95 (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting experiment. Will telling me I'm angry enough times make it so? I'll guess we're going to find out. :) 203.97.214.247 (talk) 03:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

"Kalganism" is not remotely notable enough for Wikipedia. It's that simple. - Glynth (talk) 05:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The term is popular enough to have wedged its way into MANY circles and has an entry in Urban Dictionary. It might be some what derogatory in nature, it has a president for the legacy this individual has obtained (good and bad). --151.199.226.77 (talk) 23:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Repeated vandalization (editing in insults) by user Mkrysinski. Requesting ban. Wikster E (talk) 18:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Why are any negative changes to this page reverted?

While Tom Chilton currently has a prestigious job as a lead software engineer at blizzard, he is unpopular among players. Any negative or controversial changes on this page are immediately reverted, how is that NPOV? Is this page watched by someone affiliated with Blizzard? Or did I miss something that different rules apply because he is still alive?

Feel free to add factual information about his career/success of the game. Noting that he is unpopular might be tolerable, but any attempt to explain his unpopularity comes off as childish and unsubstantiated. 151.203.224.129 (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

This emasculated article says nothing

Many of the things that makes this man famous are the negative things about him. By reverting anything negative added to the article, this neutered mess is the result. This is as POV as if the entire article was written with a negative tone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.233.148.176 (talk) 02:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

If that's your opinion, then you obviously don't know what POV means. -- Glynth (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

CRIPPLE FIGHT!!

Ok on a serious note... the battle over this guy is getting stupid. I have broken so many wiki rules I honestly deserve six bans by now. BUT... you guys make me look tame. You supernerdz know the rules.. don't post anything without a provable link to back it up. "Mr eatadick ruined ultima online blah blah ..." I don't think it matters even if players rioted over it. Unless the company says that exact thing in a press statement I don't think you can put it in a wiki article. You can say players physically rioted though (if the did and a newspaper recorded it). They didn't. They bitched and cried in forums; Just like you lot. Which means you can't just slap it in the article. You ignore the rules because you're passionate about it. Well, I can respect that. It's still no reason to break the rules. I'm a massive troll sometimes true. But in some cases it takes a troll to soothe a troll. I said all this in a manner some passion raged person can understand. Dig through the net. You're bound to find some usable info to wreck this guys wiki article. And the pansey wiki nerds hiding behind the pc screens screaming at you because they're only 90lbs and afraid of anything bigger than a french fry.. can't say a word. Because it's provable factual information. Trust me the info is out there. Trolling is perfectly fine... if you can back it up with proof :D

Most acceptable places to get information btw is any place that can be bitchslapped with legal trouble for misinformation. Wiki can't. This place is clever. They let you lot do it. that's all. yes I used foul language and insulted just about everyone but jesus; but it seems to be all you guys understand.