Talk:Neopets/Archive 2

message: For the "Guide to making neopoints" link at the bottom of the page- is it really fair to do this? There are just so many guides out there, and the site is not affiliated with NeoPets.  Maybe this can also be seen as POV.  Personally, I think since the site is not affiliated with NeoPets, it does not really add to somebody's knowledge of NeoPets, and since there are so many sites aiming to do what that one does, I believe that the link should be removed altogether. -Frazzydee 23:23, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Guide to making neopoints" link 

message: "There are also Neopets versions of popular fantasy animals, such as dragons and dinosaurs".
Dinosaurs are real animals, NOT fantasy animals!
:Fixed. -Frazzydee 18:20, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fantasy animals? 

message: Are Chias realy golpher-like?  I'm not too shure.
Joiz 02:28, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
:Agreed. Better to use as examples pets where the original animal is clear to everyone. (The Lupe is a good example.) I would mention the Pteri (a bird) or Bruce (a penguine) instead. Aranel 00:29, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golphers? 

message: I'm thinking about adding images for each of the neopets on their own pages (ie put a picture of a Nimmo on the Nimmo page, Blumaroo on the Blumaroo page, etc). My question is, does anyone know how to handle the copyrights on these images? Bbhtryoink 02:14, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The Neopets Terms and Conditions page explains that images are free for use on personal, non-commercial web pages. I don't know about personal, but this ought to count as non-commercial. There's a certain copyright statement that they want to have included. You're right that it seems incomplete to describe the individual pet species without any images to clarify. Aranel 00:22, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neopets images 

message: I just edited one use of the spelling "color" since "colour" also appeared in the article. I couldn't figure out which was there first, so I went with the British spelling since the Neopets site actually uses British English except where someone forgot and used something else. I propose that this be the unofficial policy for pages referring to Neopets, since we've got to standardize it to something, and some of the terminology (e.g. the "Grey" Paintbrush) is going to require British spelling anyway. Aranel 01:08, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, neither is the "original" English language. They have both evolved. It's just that geographical, political, and cultural elements have caused the "original English language" to evolve into several branches (which continue to relate to one another). But that is neither here nor there: Wikipedia policy (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Usage and spelling clearly states that there is no preference for one regional variety of English. It has, however, useful to be more or less consistent within one article.  Aranel ("Sarah") 18:51, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: British English?

message: I'm considering writing up a bit on some of the controversy and news coverage Neopets has generated over the years (positive and negative), everything from articles about how some teachers use it as an aid to teaching basic economics to their controversial methods of gathering the majority of their income to the recent flare up in Australia. I'm not sure how helpful to the article this might be though. What do you all think? Reene (リニ) 15:16, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure that's very reliable, but I'll put a mention in the article, since it has details we don't have. --AySz88^-^ 17:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy and News Coverage 

message: "They can also read books and battle each other Pokémon-style." -Shouldn't this be "RPG-style"? After all, that style was used before Pokémon, right? --OGoncho 19:25, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. Edited it. I can see why a parallel to Pokémon was drawn, so I left that in, just worded it a bit better. Remove if you see fit. Reene (リニ) 22:12, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: Actually, Neopets battling is more like Pokémon than any other RPG. -- PinkDeoxys 23:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pokémon? 

message: === Summary ===
Evianhat claims they are Thomas Deaton, a long-lost co-founder of the Neopets website. Thomas Deaton is mentioned nowhere on the site itself and a Google search yields only one hit. User says their name was mentioned in a Flash years ago and that a letter to Neopets' legal department would reveal the truth. User claims others are being POV and biased in the removal of his name from the article and says he is merely adding what he knows as per Wikipedia policies and guidelines. User has violated the Three revert rule in an attempt to keep his name on the article. Three other users have disagreed with the changes and have reverted them. The issue is at a stalemate. Should this user be allowed to put his name on the article as a co-founder of Neopets?
=== Arguments ===
Thomas Deaton (User:EvianHat) claims they are one of two other founders of Neopets besides Adam Powell and Donna Williams. These two long-lost founders are mentioned nowhere on the Neopets site and a google search for "Thomas Deaton" +Neopets turns up only one hit. This user offers no proof to back up his claims save for saying that a Flash animation that was once displayed on the Neopets website five years ago (and has long since been removed) displayed his name as one of the co-founders. This is not only impossible to prove, but I have been a user of the Neopets site since less than 5 months after its initial launch and recall no such Flash animation. I do not feel adding Thomas Deaton's (or the mysterious fourth founder's) name to the list of co-founders is good for the article for these reasons. This is unprovable and of a highly dubious nature. I would also like to point out the Wikipedia policy Cite your sources. User is attempting to unfairly shift the burden of proof from himself onto other users. Reene (リニ) 03:05, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
Okay, how about if we do this:
We temporarily take down the part about me and Adam Garner for a few days.  In the meantime, Reene, someone such as yourself can send an email to neopets' legal department.  Ask them if Thomas Deaton and Adam Garner were founders of the neopets.com web-site and then wait for their reply.  If they confirm my claims, then we add the part back in about me and Adam G.  However, if they do not confirm my claims, then I will work with them and my attorneys to get some sort of verifiable document to you regarding this issue.
If, however, no one attempts to contact neopets regarding my claim, then we put my additions back in.
Does that sound fair?
- Thomas :)
:Please use this section to succintly argue your side of the issue and nothing else. Reene (リニ) 03:00, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
Reene -
I get the feeling that you aren't really looking for the truth here.  Why would you respond in such a manner to what appears to me to be a reasonable resolution to this issue?
- Thomas
==== Arguments for Thomas's addition to the article ====
awaiting email response from neopets' legal department, verifying my claims - thomas.
Here's a link to a page regarding the beginning of neopets.
http://wizardmansion.com/wizardpages/evianhat/neopets.html
Also, here's an independent reference:
http://www.cybren.com/team_deaton.html
I get a 404 error when I go to the wizardmansion link.
==== Arguments against Thomas's addition to the article ====
*There is no proof whatsoever offered to this date which suggests that Thomas or the fourth founder ever existed and/or were part of the Neopets project. As such, there is no justification for adding either to the article. One cannot cite a lack of facts. The burden lies on one who wishes to add the disputed fact, not on those who dispute it. - Vague Rant 04:34, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
*The thing is, every website that mentions Thomas seems to have been created by, well...Thomas himself. We need an outside source to really verify this. PMC 06:56, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting Comment: Thomas Deaton? 

message: Thomas Deaton (User:EvianHat) claims they are one of two other founders of Neopets besides Adam Powell and Donna Williams. These two long-lost founders are mentioned nowhere on the Neopets site and a google search for "Thomas Deaton" +Neopets turns up only one hit. This user offers no proof to back up his claims save for saying that a Flash animation that was once displayed on the Neopets website five years ago (and has long since been removed) displayed his name as one of the co-founders. This is not only impossible to prove, but I have been a user of the Neopets site since less than 5 months after its initial launch and recall no such Flash animation. I do not feel adding Thomas Deaton's (or the mysterious fourth founder's) name to the list of co-founders is good for the article for these reasons. This is unprovable and of a highly dubious nature. I would also like to point out the Wikipedia policy Cite your sources. User is attempting to unfairly shift the burden of proof from himself onto other users. Reene (リニ) 03:05, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
Okay, how about if we do this:
We temporarily take down the part about me and Adam Garner for a few days.  In the meantime, Reene, someone such as yourself can send an email to neopets' legal department.  Ask them if Thomas Deaton and Adam Garner were founders of the neopets.com web-site and then wait for their reply.  If they confirm my claims, then we add the part back in about me and Adam G.  However, if they do not confirm my claims, then I will work with them and my attorneys to get some sort of verifiable document to you regarding this issue.
If, however, no one attempts to contact neopets regarding my claim, then we put my additions back in.
Does that sound fair?
- Thomas :)
:Please use this section to succintly argue your side of the issue and nothing else. Reene (リニ) 03:00, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
Reene -
I get the feeling that you aren't really looking for the truth here.  Why would you respond in such a manner to what appears to me to be a reasonable resolution to this issue?
- Thomas
==== Arguments for Thomas's addition to the article ====
awaiting email response from neopets' legal department, verifying my claims - thomas.
Here's a link to a page regarding the beginning of neopets.
http://wizardmansion.com/wizardpages/evianhat/neopets.html
Also, here's an independent reference:
http://www.cybren.com/team_deaton.html
I get a 404 error when I go to the wizardmansion link.
==== Arguments against Thomas's addition to the article ====
*There is no proof whatsoever offered to this date which suggests that Thomas or the fourth founder ever existed and/or were part of the Neopets project. As such, there is no justification for adding either to the article. One cannot cite a lack of facts. The burden lies on one who wishes to add the disputed fact, not on those who dispute it. - Vague Rant 04:34, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
*The thing is, every website that mentions Thomas seems to have been created by, well...Thomas himself. We need an outside source to really verify this. PMC 06:56, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arguments 

message: *There is no proof whatsoever offered to this date which suggests that Thomas or the fourth founder ever existed and/or were part of the Neopets project. As such, there is no justification for adding either to the article. One cannot cite a lack of facts. The burden lies on one who wishes to add the disputed fact, not on those who dispute it. - Vague Rant 04:34, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
*The thing is, every website that mentions Thomas seems to have been created by, well...Thomas himself. We need an outside source to really verify this. PMC 06:56, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arguments ''against'' Thomas's addition to the article 

message: Thomas, if you're reading this, please provide some more concrete evidence. I was evidently wrong about our discussion before. Please don't add the material until we can get some more verifiable data. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:45, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  sigh 

message: The article states, "In March 2005 Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. announced the upcoming June 2004 release of Neopets: The Darkest Faerie™, available exclusively for the PS one™ and PlayStation® game consoles".  The dates are clearly wrong here, and could do with being fixed.
Also, there has now been official word on a Neopets movie.  Information can be found here.
-- Daniel Lawrence 20:18, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neopets game and movie 

message: Anyone else thinking that the list of pop-culture references is getting out of hand? I'm thinking maybe they should either be trimmed back substantially, or moved to an article of their. Something like list of references in Neopets, perhaps? Thoughts? Rho 14:09, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop-culture references 

message: There should be an addition made to the Controversy article: how addictive this game really is.
:Er...how is this different from any other game or website, or the internet in general? -Aranel ("Sarah") 17:04, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur with Aranel. Anything in this world is addictive. It all depends on the person's willingness to become addicted. --Sn0wflake 23:51, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

text: That may be of interest to really hardcore fans, but it's not really encyclopedic. -Aranel ("Sarah") 13:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  It has been generally shown that MMORPGs are addictive, as long as there's social elements, etc.  Whether or not Neopets can be compared to an MMORPG is questionable (there's usually a lot less social interaction on Neopets), but those who interact a lot in guilds, on the Neoboards, on fansite forums, etc. might indeed become "addicted". --AySz88^-^ 03:35, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy - Addiction 

message: I removed the usernames used as examples under Player Types. Sure, Helen (hrobi) and Jasmine (featheralley) are among the top battlers, but they don't need any more recognition than they already receive. --Ryan 03:55, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
Agreed. Just about everyone on Neo knows who they are, and nobody else cares. -- PinkDeoxys 13:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Player Types 

message: Someone suggested gameplay be moved, I think if anything should be moved, it should be Neoboards and social interaction? Maybe a Neopets Community article could be done? Anyone agree, disagree, don't care? SandBoxer
:I say, give both Gameplay and Society their own articles. They are quite large, but we could easily expand them further. Ryan 07:57, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
::Actually, I would much prefer that both sections be severely cut down. They are both way longer than the game warrants. There is nothing particularly unique about the Neopets online community - it's just another internet community. The current article is a bit too fannish for my tastes. -Aranel ("Sarah") 13:18, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving subsections 

message: The actual number of active accounts is around 11 million  and the number of individual users is almost certainly less than this. 
As mentioned in the article, the source link was broken; it was originally http://media.hasbro.com/pl/page.release/dn/default.cfm?release=259 but is probably now http://www.hasbro.com/media/pl/page.release/dn/default.cfm?release=259.  That is assuming that the press releases weren't renumbered when Hasbro changed their links.  The article in question is indeed Neopets-related, and a search for "Neopets" in their press releases only comes up with one result (oddly, it doesn't seem to come up with this one).
This article is from mid-2004 and actually doesn't say anything about the number of active accounts.  The text is currently commented out, and if there isn't anything more current, I think it should be deleted.  AySz88^-^ 22:12, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken source 

message: The Neopets has indeed been confirmed. Or atleast confirmed in the neopian times editorial. Though I cant remember the issue. But it is confirmed. -geovanny1991 
Ah is [] the link.    
Ahh ignore my last post. Wrong discussion. 
(moved above comments from other sections: AySz88^-^ 22:22, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unknown topic 

message: http://info.neopets.com/presskit/compinfo.html might be a better source for the demographic stats at the beginning of the article - but it isn't dated.  I might remove the part about "a Neopets-affiliated video game producer" and replace it with just "Neopets claims".  It'd probably be best to find some independent source on these stats, if possible.  AySz88^-^ 19:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated (?) stats 

message: What does POV mean?  -A Wikiguest
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.230.126.7 (talk • contribs) 00:51, December 7, 2005 (UTC).
Point of view - we try to write articles in a "neutral" point of view.  See the rules at Wikipedia:Describing points of view and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. --AySz88^-^ 01:31, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: Wow, someone was bitter when they edited this article.  Someone slap a POV tag on it! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DodgerOfZion (talk • contribs) 19:56, December 13, 2005 (UTC).
: It was a recent addition that has now been reverted.  If you come across something like that again, you can take a look at the Page History to see if it was a recent change and revert the article if it was. --AySz88^-^ 01:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV!