Talk:Minetest

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

Google CTF entry[edit]

Minetest was used in a Google Capture the Flag entry: https://capturetheflag.withgoogle.com/#challenges/hardware-minetest This might help with notability; Minetest is definitely notable enough, but hasn't had enough news articles written about it to properly qualify. wizzwizz4 (talk) 10:37, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had this citation in the article at an earlier revision, but it seems to have been removed. The Google CTF citation and the CERN citation are the two citations I consider to be the most significant in terms of proving notability. Psypheriumtalk page 18:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I go to the link posted by Wizzwizz4, I can't see anything there about Minetest, which is the only reason I tossed it. Am I missing something? SoylentCow (talk) 14:39, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have to enable JavaScript and WebSockets and wait up to a few minutes. It's one of the fancy new “the browser is Turing-complete, so we'll write software instead of webpages” sites. (It takes twenty seconds to load for me.) wizzwizz4 (talk) 14:04, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The link no longer works correctly since the 2020 CTF began (no longer has 2019 CTF details). Liveoverflow has a write up of the challenge which might be admissible as a replacement citation. https://liveoverflow.com/minetest/ Psypheriumtalk page 09:12, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We can't use this, Psypherium. We are walking on coals here. I asked for help in #wikipedia-en-help, and they told me we need to remove all low-quality references. This reference is by ... someone. It will not work. SoylentCow (talk) 05:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I agree with that, it would be good to find a good source for this some day, but until one appears we can just go without that part. Psypheriumtalk page 05:43, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Minetest-Minecraft situtation[edit]

User:Dexxor Why was my edit reverted? I added a citation, was it not good enough? 98.10.48.24 (talk) 14:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Logged myself in. Realized that my Username isn't Codetoil on wikipedia. :p IAnthIsAwesome (talk) 15:00, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The comment on revert links to Wikipedia:No original research. It usually means one of two things: either you presented Your own conclusion based on the information in the references (while wikipedia should only present the information stated in the sources); or the source of information is unreliable.
In Your case both are true, as the source doesn't state that he was mistaken – it was Your conclusion and it doesn't matter much if it's obvious or not. Also user-generated sources are deemed unreliable.
I hope it helps. K4rolB (talk) 06:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I understand. IAnthIsAwesome (talk) 23:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But I'd like to mention that I only added the conclusion in the edit message, not the article. But I can understand the second one. IAnthIsAwesome (talk) 23:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

This subject doesn't appear notable. It its current version, I see one source cited that appears to potentially meet the WP:GNG, Saunders, and even it is pretty brief. Are there other reliable sources out there that are independent and have covered this subject in depth? VQuakr (talk) 07:18, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I accepted the article at AfC. I judged the French article in MathémaTICE showing its use in education and the Saunders article to be independent and reliable enough. Enterprisey (talk!) 07:47, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MathémaTICE isn't a source in the context of notability; it uses this software as a teaching tool but doesn't provide WP:SIGCOV. VQuakr (talk) 10:02, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It looks to me like the article includes extended information on the topic of Minetest, so it would count as significant coverage. How much more information would it need in order to qualify, if it doesn't already? Enterprisey (talk!) 10:09, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that between the mentioned Saunders article and Pauty-Combemorel research paper it is enough to meet WP:GNG considering the fact, that these are not alone as multiple other articles mention Minetest briefly. IMO, It sums up to definitely notable enough. – K4rolB (talk) 15:56, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a notable article, with at least two high quality, independent sources, no matter how you evaluate: the interview by Wikinews, and the journal article in Linux Magazine. There are more acceptable sources here, but the bottom line is, this article was already evaluated for notability and restored back from being deleted. The reason it was deleted in the first place was that people kept putting in trash sources, like github and Minetest's official website. I just deleted several of them again. These sources, failing notability guidelines, should not be put back in. Instead, all of our effort should be focused on finding more high-quality sources. If we have to trim the text because someone thinks "citation needed", so be it, but please, no more trash sources, or we risk another deletion. SoylentCow (talk) 03:33, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SoylentCow, I would actually have to disagree with the most recent couple of edits. I would judge those citations to be acceptable per WP:ABOUTSELF: I would hope it's uncontroversial to cite GitHub for version numbers. Not all sources used in the article need to pass the criteria for sources that are part of GNG (or at least, I'd be surprised to find any indications of that in policy; please let me know if there are any). Enterprisey (talk!) 03:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Enterprisey Perhaps you are right about github refs, I am not particularly well versed in differences between the criteria used to un-delete a deleted page (they seemed VERY strict) and the criteria used to keep the existing page. SoylentCow (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SoylentCow, would it then be possible for you to undo the linked edits, while leaving out any content you particularly object to? I could also put the citations back, but I didn't want to do so without a discussion here; let me know which you prefer. Enterprisey (talk!) 01:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Enterprisey I be honest, this was kind of knee-jerk reaction to notability banner someone put in. I really think we must NOT cite Minetest's website, that just looks bad, but if you want to put the github links back in, I really hope you know what you are doing. Thank you very much for engaging with me on this. All I want is for this topic to be fairly treated by the Wiki, and since I am fully convinced it meets the notability requirements, I am very worried about technical details which may trigger another deletion request. SoylentCow (talk) 09:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing wrong with self-sourcing non-contentious content to the subject's website or to GitHub. Sources connected to the subject don't cause a subject to be considered non-notable, there merely aren't considered in a notability discussion. VQuakr (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Folks, I have been told by officials in Wikipedia IRC that in the absence of English references, we could use good sources in other languages. There are in fact many high-quality sources for this topic in various European languages, including Russian, which I am fluent in. This would be a great way to cross-reference the existing text, and/or to change it for the better. SoylentCow (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, all else being equal we prefer English language sources since that is the language most of our readers are fluent in, but it is not a requirement in order to use them or establish notability. The relevant policy is WP:NONENG. Looking at the Russian language WP article I don't see any additional sources; which are you proposing to use? VQuakr (talk) 09:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VQuakr Oh I just remember something I've seen on the net. Like I say above, I do believe there are at least 2 excellent English references already here to address specifically the notability guidelines. But if this article can be improved by referencing sources in other languages, then we should do that as well. SoylentCow (talk) 09:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikinews isn't a source from a notability context per WP:SELFPUB. VQuakr (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Minetest Is Not A Game.[edit]

I personally "play" minetest. It is a sandbox, but minetest itself is a game engine, not a game. It is used to run games like the minetest_game. I would recommend that it would be called a game engine instead of a "video game". Thank you, Prairie Astronomer Contributions 15:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even according to the official website, it is considered a game engine. Games are downloaded separately from ContentDB. The minetest_game isn't very much of a game either, it is intended to be a platform for moddding to add onto it. The Minetest_game provides the world, the player just needs to mod it as they so wish. Prairie Astronomer Contributions 15:45, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should the Minetest_Game game be made into a new article by using text from the gameplay section title text or should the gameplay be moved into a section title under games for over 100 games that now work with the Minetest engine? I think seeing there are over 100 games now a games list may also be a separate article, though these games can also be listed under the games section title under games, than each game can be made into a separate article, if these games are notable.Other Cody (talk) 16:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any of the games need its own new article, however a game list may make sense. I would say that maybe the gameplay section should be renamed, and slightly rewritten to better showcase what it is. Also, I noticed that it says ships with devtest. Shipping with devtest may or may not be true depending on who compiled the game for the specific download section. I swear I have seen the username OtherCody somewhere on minetest. Prairie Astronomer Contributions 16:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe [| here] is where you have seen the name Other_Cody at. Thank you for the information, Prairie Astronomer. https://content.minetest.net/ is a site to search games for a list of games for the engine.Other Cody (talk) 17:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have seen it in game. Do you know a player named PrairieWind? That would be me. Anyway, I am not sure what to do about it personally as a for sure thing. Prairie Astronomer Contributions 17:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have used the name Other_Cody on some Minetest servers like Tunnelers' Abyss, the main Capture the flag server, and some other servers, and may have seen a player named PrairieWind on some servers before. Some servers like "Wild Wild West / merc5.kith.tech port 31005" may also not be up now, or may have changed domain names or other things. Though anyone can also use any name on Minetest servers, so not all Other_Cody's on Minetest servers may be me or all PrairieWind names may have been you. Also I think anyone could have used Other_Cody on Wikipedia, before I used it. I think the Capture the flag game is a game that can be added to a list of games, though I did not yet start a list of games on Wikipedia. With over 100 games, all of them could be added in a list or only very notable games, or game at least in the main content database of the Minetest website and not at other sites.Other Cody (talk) 18:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WWW indeed. I am trying to get Raptor to bring it back. The more notable games would be a good idea. MineClone2, Minetest Game, NodeCore, Exile, Glitch, Mesecraft, quite a few popular ones. Prairie Astronomer Contributions 15:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This software is not developed in Finland[edit]

This article is in the category "Video games developed in Finland". This is incorrect or at least very inaccurate. This software like most other FOSS ones are developed by many developers across the globe. If no one disagrees, I will remove the page from the abovementioned category a few days later. --Farooq (talk) 17:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, from what I gathered, the game was developed in Finland for the first six months before more developers around the world started joining. Hmm, since we don't have categories like "Video games originally developed in X" or "Video games originating from X" etc., I think it's ok to keep the article in Category:Video games developed in Finland so it stays in the Finland category tree where it belongs. But I added the "originated in Finland" to that category's description. 85.76.99.0 (talk) 09:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Originated from Finland" makes much more sense. But still I think it's unfair. If you want to take the game play idea, it was taken from Minecraft. If you want to take the percentage of game code, I'm pretty sure the majority of SLOCs are not written by a developer in Finland. Plus the category says "Video games developed in Finland" which is very misleading and different than "Video games originated from Finland". --Farooq (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to properly get sources for floss software and culture?[edit]

I see a [| tag] for "sourcing here is really bad, most is directly to wikis, repos, forums, etc." though seeing this game is mostly compiled from a repository and development may be done in the https://dev.minetest.net/Main_Page or the forum, wiki, etc. how should floss games and things like textures, information about the floss games, sounds, and other things have citations added?

And which citations of this article's listed sources may not be reliable?

Other Cody (talk) 17:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Minetest&oldid=1207943583"