Talk:GameCrush

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reference format[edit]

This article now uses list-defined references. This means that the details and metadata of all reference citations are collected in the references section, and each is identified by a reference name. Within the body of the article, citations are made with markup such as <ref name="fwhy" />. This format means that the details of the citation meta data do not clog the body of the article when editing. It also encourages proper reuse of citations.

Please retain this format when adding reference citations to this article, unless a consensus to change it is developed on this page. Thank you. DES (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, currently, all references are cited using citation templates. DES (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reference volume[edit]

"but the website claims that it hopes to support other plaforms, such as the PlayStation 3, and the PC, with the popular MMORPG, World of Warcraft.[2][1][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]"

Holy footnote deluge, Batman! Is this sort of huge wall of citations needed to justify one quote? Is this part of a strategy to bolster the no-deletion argument? I don't recall off the top of my head, but I read a WP policy recently that said something about "reference bombing". I don't see how this contributes to the strength of the article.

Also, the number of quoted quotes, while taken from reliable sources, is such that THIS article now seems to be a regurgitation of the press release/reviews. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 22:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since the main point of the article, as I see it, is the reaction to the proposed business model, I felt it desirable to quote multiple sources to get as wide a variety of reactions as possible. In each case I included only a short part, usually a concluding thought, from the review or story. None are from the press release, nor do they mirror it -- indeed the majority are critical of the service, although not all are. Those references are not to verify a quote, but to verify the facts stated in the paragraph which they footnote. Most of the stories cited for their reactions also confirm the basic facts and are thus cited for that purpose as well. But if good-faith editors thing that fewer citations at that point are desirable they can edit to remove some, or discuss the matter on this talk page to come to a consensus on how many should stay, and which ones. If you seriously want to improve the article, as opposed to just deleting it, feel free to edit.
Since "multiple non-trivial sources" is an important part of demonstrating notability, they do IMO bolster the case against deletion, but you or others may not think so. But they also, IMO help demonstrate who widely this site was noticed and the range of reactions to it, which IMO is a significant part of the article. DES (talk) 13:58, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to me that someone is VERY concerned about possible deletion attempts. Site is notable judging by the attention it gets in sort-of mainstream media, but the article suffers from the insane amounts of references, just makes it harder to read. Pick the most solid refs and leave it be. Pär Larsson (talk) 03:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the site is back up[edit]

It went back online a couple days ago.--ILoveSky (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on GameCrush. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:GameCrush&oldid=1207355018"