Talk:Tremulous

message: Why is it tagged as a strategy game? It's simply an FPS. (CS has much more strategic elements, yet I haven't heard anybody calling it a strategy game.)
--Zslevi (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategy game? 

message: I don't think that trem uses a pre-determined number of kills per team to advance to the next stage. The advancement target is dynamic as it can change as more or less players join or leave the match. Perhaps the article should reflect this? --Al Fonz 09:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  Remember, be bold! --Film11 19:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classes 

message: I wrote a new version of the article in order to make it more suitable to Wikipedia. I m a Tremulous' player so my opinion may be biased but i do think an article about Tremulous should stay in Wikipedia. It has as much or maybe more players than Nexuiz or Warsow. However, i do admit that the previous version was absolutely awful (mostly copied from the official website). So pls check my version, correct all my English mistakes (i m not a native English speaker) and i hope we will make it a good enough article to remove the "Unencyclopedic" and "notability" templates.
Ksempac 17:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total rewritting of the article 

message: Questioning the notability of the game is ridiculous. Their are two linked reviews (both from well-known gaming/software sites), and a popularity poll on Planet Quake that Tremulous won. Aside from that, their is no set policy on the notability of video games. The article was essentially fine the way it is, and fit in right along-side the other video game articles on Wikipedia. I'll be adding a few more things later, but I'm removing both notability and unencyclopedic tags. Sephylight 04:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. In the references, I count ONE news story, a note about the free textures, and two highly unreliable sources. The poll even states that the results can easily be tampered with and provide inaccurate results. As for Moddb, there are absolutely no inclusion criteria for getting a mod listed. All a ModDB article establishes is the the mod in question exists, but not it's notability. I'm re-adding the notability tag until you can find better sources. Reviews for preference, not fan-manipulated votes and a self-made database article. And all the external links are for either official pages, fan pages or clan pages, all of which are most definitly not valid sources for establishing notability. The Kinslayer 12:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what the policy is on the notability of computer and video games, but I agree with Sephylight. This game also features in some list articles: list of free first person shooters, list of open source games, list of freeware games, and possibly others. Guyjohnston 13:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm gonna ignore the lists for now, since that's a whole deifferent arguement (but in short, being on a list in Wikipedia is generally consiudered the least notable form of notability.) The key with notability is multiple, non-trivial, independant third-party articles/reviews. A proper article (and this is defined as a minimum of half a page usually) is not an interview with developers, an advert or a printing of a press release. Independent third-party means that the magazine/website/whatever shouldn't be connected to the game/mod in any way (as is the case with fan sites, which makes them unreliable), and most importantly, links must be provided to all articles used to support notability claims. Just saying, for example, 'It was mentioned in PC Zone a few months ago' would NOT be accepted by most people as a reasonable support to notability. I think I covered everything, but I'll be happy try and answer any other questions. The Kinslayer 13:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a few bad points in your argumentation. First, there are lots of articles on Wikipedia about free video games with absolutly no reference but arent tagged (some examples are : Nexuiz, Warsow, or the little Mono_%28game%29). Actually, most of the articles about free video games are lacking references. Yet, i dont think they should be tagged either. The lack of reference is because game-related websites/newspapers focus on commercial games rather than freelly available games to help their readers determine whether they should buy the game or not (if a game is free, a player can download and try it by himself). Second, Tremulous has more than 300 000 downloads on Sourceforge ( http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=14890 ). Even if you consider some people downloaded it multiple times, that's still a pretty big number of downloads. That's why i think the tag should be removed. Ksempac 15:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have say that 'but X, Y and Z have are similar to this and no-one's saying anything about them' arguement holds little water simply because usually all that's happened is no-one has noticed those articles yet. Every single time someone brought up those articles as examples on a talk page or AfD, the article ends up being tagged, or worse, deleted. I whole-heartedly agree that freeware games are hard to establish notability for, and I believe efforts are being undertaken by the CVG project to establish some guidelines for Freeware notability. The tag is only there to show that the article is lacking in a certain area, it's not a nomination for deletion. I'm not saying I think the article should be deleted, I'm just trying to highlight an area the article seems to quite badly lacking at the moment. It's not just about good reviews and media coverage though. If the game has been officially recorded as the first to do something important in gaming, or is unique in some other way, then that tends to be an acceptable alternative. I'd recommend going to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer and video games and requesting some people come and give their opinions on the article. Maybe someone can suggest or find something that's currently being overlooked. The Kinslayer 15:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And looking at those three examples, two technically qualify as speedy deletes due to no assertion of notability at all. Only the third one is notable, due to it being picked up by a branch of a well-known long established organisation. So two of your three examples would probably end up being deleted after an AfD. Please don't take that as a threat though, I'm just trying to explain the reasoning behind asking for better sources for the article. The Kinslayer 15:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm willing to concede on the poll issue; however, calling the other reference link (aside from the NewsForge article) a "self-made database article" is simply incorrect. It's quite clearly a link to the review written by a ModDB staff member. Which can also be accessed, at the moment, by going to ModDB's "Features" page. http://features.moddb.com/ That being said, I feel that it currently has two reliable sources for verifying its notability. As a regular peruser of deletion discussions on Wikipedia, I'm of the opinion that the article would withstand an AfD entry.72.161.242.113 21:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  
I think it should be kept because:
- It has 713,115 downloads at source forge at the time of writing. The real number is higher, as various linux repositories are not added to the count. 
- There are 129 tremulous servers running not counting the repeating occurances of tremulous 1.1.0. (there are about 100 mostly without players) I counted the 129, so just download tremulous and count the servers if you wish to verify.
- On those servers I counted 407 players on an amsterdam wednesday evening around 7. This means that the USA is still working and these are likely to be a larger number of users than the europeans. 407 is already a large number.
Thus the number of downloads is comparable to the total number of citizens in the dutch capital amsterdam I reside in. If that number is not enough to support notability I am offended. 
The other numbers show that the game is used intensively by many. All are statistics verifyable by anyone. 
On the other hand I hope that having a large fan base will no longer be considered a cause of notability. I hope to remove the entry of britney spears myself :).
Guidocalvano 18:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability in question? 

message: I'm here from the request on the cvg assessment page.  This article has been rated as a start class article.  To improve it to B class, a few things need to be done-
# - The lead needs to be rewritten.  I should be able to tell what this article is about from reading the lead without knowing anything about Tremulous, ioquake3, or even Quake beforehand.  As I know only a little about Quake, and couldn't tell what this was other than some free game built off of a quake engine(?)
# - The history (now development) section needs to be revised from a neutral pov.  NPOV statements are- "it wasn't initially hugely popular" and "likely due to the fact it was now completely free of charge".  The section also needs to be written as flowing prose, rather than sentence-long paragraph things.
# - This is the hard one- there needs to be a Reception section.  Most of the modification section can be deleted and the rest merged into this section.  What this means, though, is that you need to find more references from good sources.  Which, as said above, is really hard for something like this.  I agree that you have enough now to withstand an AfD on a good day, but you need a bit more to make B or higher class.
# - The good news- I really like the gameplay section.  Congratulations on not making it a puffball of a game guide.  Overall, I think this article is a really solid, if a bit on the short side, Start class article, and I am marking it as such.  --PresN 03:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CVG Assessment 

message: Since the above assessment was done a year ago and a lot has changed since then, I'm requesting another review of the article to get others to have a look and see what should be done next. Srhuston (talk) 05:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Video Games Peer Review 

message: Due to various mechanical errors, as well as rhythm issues, I've issued a cleanup tag. Also the "slang" section needs to be reviewed, as a lot of it is either superfluous, unsubstantiated, or Internet common use (wtf).
Kazmarov 08:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put the most commonly used Tremulous abbreviation, and I agree it should be reviewed.
ReciProcate 20:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup tag added 

message: I added an administrator section to the article, could a Tremulous player please look over this and fix up any mistakes I made. Thank you. Also I am thinking about adding a small section on kicks and bans. Does anyone object to this, also maybe we would like to add a section on buildings such as overmind, machine gun turrets, armory, etc. I may be to busy to this soon, so could someone else do this if they could? Thank you again --Robin63 18:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm of the opinion that an Administration section would do little good, and is -- especially in it's current form -- unencyclopedic. Especially considering that there are currently three different forms of administration used: r1, tjw's, and the trem base install system. As such, I'm going to remove it for now. Someone can bring it back and work it up later if they feel it has merit. Sephylight 10:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Administrators 

message: I started a section on classes, but it is incomplete, could some please help improve this? Thank you --Robin63 20:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that subsections of the Gameplay section could briefly outline classes, weapons, and buildings, and would be useful as a counter-part to the very summarized main Gameplay section. However, in it's current form, it's just clutter. I'll remove it for now. Sephylight 10:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classes 

message: Mods are currently outlined in a few brief sentences under Reception. I'm very strongly of the opinion that the mods in progress right now aren't notable enough for their own section yet. Also, it's very POV at the moment. I'm removing it. Sephylight 10:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: most of them are complete now. 03:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Good job Sephylight, I think you re right. Actually, I m getting really tired of all the Tremulous' players who have no idea about what should or shouldn t be in Wikipedia and add some crap to this article. Everytime a wikipedian cleans this article, 3 or 4 guys come, add useless sentences and then the article ends up with the clean-up tag. We re stuck at the same point we were one month ago when the CVG project assessed the article Ksempac 07:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Certainly there seems to be no point in having just a plain list of some mods that are available out there - that's what the project's own website is for.  There's no need to list them for the sake of listing them, Tremulous would continue with or without the mods. Srhuston (talk) 00:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I have added a simple section about mods (it need some work but IMO it's acceptable for start). I definitely think they should be noted and quickly outlined, because mods are important part of every game. Please, discuss before removing ;) Miko3k (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

text: qstat tells me that neither Balance nor Relics still runs (unmodified) on any Tremulous server. I would thus question its classification as a notable mod. For what it's worth, the list of current mod names (fs_games) reported by qstat are:
 $ qstat -R -tremulousm master.tremulous.net | \
   grep -E --only-matching game=[^,]* | sort | uniq -c
      3 game=arcade
      1 game=arcade16
      9 game=base
      4 game=base2
      1 game=dnc_madcat
      1 game=farm
      1 game=lakitu
      1 game=mgdev
      2 game=mod/base
      1 game=stfu-trem
      3 game=tremx
      1 game=tremx-kor
--81.86.216.220 (talk) 13:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mods to Tremulous 

message: Hey, I searched the English article for information on the Blaance or TremX and I havent found anything. I'd love to add something but I cant because: 1. I dont know much about either, 2. I haven't gotten those to work on my computer. ReciProcate 18:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Many people already tried to add some reference to theses mods but they were removed because : 1- Lack of notability 2- Wikipedia is not a game manual or a list of mods. Ksempac 12:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At least there should be a list of mods available for tremulous. What does this have to do with being a game manual. (other way around Shall I remove game-play section?) Some of them are notable enough at least among tremulous community like mgdev, and arcade mod. 03:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You've also reverted at least three other edits which took that section out - think about why it doesn't fit in the article.  Just a list of mods, most of which are by the same person and none of which really matter to Tremulous in general, doesn't fit in this article.  If you feel like they absolutely must be represented, then write up a section which describes them and flows with the rest of the prose - or find someone else who can/will.  Just tacking up a list of mods with no other information than just their name does nothing for a reader except confuse.  Srhuston (talk) 00:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you stop reverting I can add more info about them. At least you can give some time before reverting. Insta revert is against the idea of wikipedia, articles grow with time. ( You are the one reverting my changes then talking about revert war. ) At least the names of the mods need to be mentioned.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.254.102.215 (talk) 12:28, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Growing with time is one thing.  Adding what amounts to a placeholder which doesn't fit with the article doesn't, it could just as easily be put here and someone who has the time to write it up can do so later.  As for reverting, it's no different than any other article where someone might add a line such as "Some crap about foo should go here" and it gets removed until someone with the time and ability to add crap about foo can do so - this isn't a stub article, it doesn't need an outline to be built on, but can stand alone as it is, so it shouldn't be junked up with things until someone else can come around and expand on them.  What you've added this time around is a much better, and more workable point to build from about mods for the game.  Srhuston (talk) 12:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balance/Tremx 

message: Please refer to WP:EL for information on what is and isn't appropriate to link to in the External Links section. Sephylight 04:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone is removing very useful links about this game.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.136.250.120 (talk) 22:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

text: While Lord Undergarments is adding his aimbot link, and chastising others who remove it as pushing their "personal adenga (sic)". Srhuston 19:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Hey guys, I'm kinda new to wikipedia, so I'm still learning about the rules of various stuff. I know that for games such as Call of Duty you are not allowed to post pictures you took in game here because it is a game you have to pay for but is it the same with Tremulous? I mean am I allowed to post a photo that I took in game for Tremulous because it is free and open-source? Answers would be appreciated. Thanks. 
~Moose --Mooseberry 23:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding pictures to this artcicle. 

message: I have reverted the post about Tremulous being inspired by Natural Selection.
I am making this post, because many people seem to think that Tremulous was inspired by, or was copied off of Natural Selection, when it in fact was not. 
Look at the second FAQ question and answer at the number two link.
--Mooseberry 22:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tremulous being inspired by Natural Selection 

message: I'm a heavy Tremulous player and no one I know in the game's community can corroborate this "World Tremulous Title" tournament with 1000 players over three days. It's also just plain impossible to cycle 1000 players through 1v1 matches in three days because of general logistics. My guess is the person who added in this particular section just wanted to make himself look good on the wiki article, which is an insult to Tremulous and Wikipedia alike. Unfortunately I'm too lazy to figure out the process of removing that section without it being reverted as an attempt at vandalism, so I'll leave this in the hands of whoever reads this next.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.62.210.207 (talk) 23:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "World Tremulous Title" - bogus section 

message: not useless It is included in many other wikipedia articles
:And most articles that have a trivia section also have tags talking about how they're un-encyclopedic and should be removed.  No sense adding one just to gather another tag for the top of the article. Srhuston (talk) 00:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Trivia" - section 

message: as of now it is more than 800k according to the developers
And perhaps a link to the Mac port? I've only found an Apple mirror and that is it. Sebastian Kaczorowski (talk) 05:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "downloads" 

message: "Tremulous is licensed under the GPL, although it includes code from other projects that was released under other GPL-compatible licenses. The game media is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. The textures were previously licensed for non-commercial and no-derivative use only; the latest release removed the texture restrictions."
* this mention license of textures but not the other media. Please be consistent either remove all info about media license or add sounds. definitely some sounds are not CC-SA 2.5. " Most of the sounds were made for Tremulous they are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. Some of the alien sounds are from a free sound CD." This is correct and can be verified.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.254.102.215 (talk) 12:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  media asset licenses 

message: I've noticed that there seem to be an awful lot of external links. I reckon that the list needs to be trimmed down to about 5 links or so, perhaps maybe the main site, wiki and a couple of fansites. To be honest many links may be in there to promote clan based sites, I don't know, but having read wp:links I reckon we should get rid of some of them. ۩ Dracion ۩  ✎ ✉ 15:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, Wikipedia is not here to advertise the game, it's here to document it in an encyclopedia article for those people who are interested in the subject. Also, just because the official site has a link to a guild site doesn't make it eligible to put on the page. Secondly, there are many map repositries, so for the sake of fairness none should be added. Thirdly, if people want to find the Mac build, they can do so from the official site. Please red WP:Link before adding anything to article. And please sign your comments. ۩ Dracion ۩  ✎ ✉ 18:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: I just added a bunch of references, so I removed the citations tag. If anyone still thinks it is lacking (the Gameplay section looks somewhat bare, but most of that is covered by the manual) then feel free to re-add it. Also if anyone thinks I've been overzealous, especially with the SVN commit messages, tell me.
One of the issues I still have with this article, though, is that it has a tendency to repeat itself itself. The Mod of the Year competition is mentioned several times, along with the general objective of the game. Just a thought --benmachine (talk) 19:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference additions (and some other thoughts) 

message: website gives "diagnose connection problems" page 89.204.249.30 (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tremulous.net seems to be down 

message: I'm sorry, but there are still quite ways for this article until it can be B-class. It will definitely hit C-class standards if:
# You use the "author", "publisher", and "date" parameters in your references if possible.
# Expand the lead with an additional paragraph using Gameplay aspects.
# Use 
# Check IGN, Gamespot, 1up, and other more reliable sites as sources. Use direct quotes in the references section as well.
# Is there a plot in this game?
Do those and you'll be all set for a re-assessment! --haha169 (talk) 03:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: Does it really matter? The way that part is written seems of dubious notability. I tried to make it seem more like it has a point (that some community members have become developers), but it's still pretty weak.
M. Kristall (talk) 21:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was probably me who added this, and looking back I'm not really sure why I did. I think it's important to mention the degree of community modification (since servers running unmodified 1.1 are virtually nonexistent these days) and linked to that would be the introduction of community members into the development team. I agree, though, that the relevance of these additions is overstated in the article. --benmachine (talk) 18:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who has commit access? 

message: Are called frags, or maybe Kills. The term "evolution point" appears nowhere in the Tremulous source code or manual. Please don't re-add this without finding an official source which names them as such. --benmachine (talk) 17:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alien currency 

message: discussing as per comment in external links section http://tremulous.net/wiki/
82.24.241.9 (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to tremulous official wiki? 

message: Nothing for 3 years?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tremmaester (talk • contribs) 20:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tremulous is dead? 

message: According to Moddb tremulous gamedata license is not CC-BY-SA 
"The next release is complete code and balance wise. After four and an half years of work they were ready for a new release. However, the developers noticed a license issue in the current version. Most of the sound files come from an unknown origin" Also some game maps contain Non commercial licenses, for example "ATCS" map contains a by-nd-nc license Tremaster (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing issues 

message: Don't be too harsh wad (WAD is a doom file :) ). I typed a bit of an update and it got reverted. Couldn't even get an opinion, got reverted that fast.
Fine. 
I'll type it again tomorrow WITH "third party references". Christ. Like, proving players moving from server to server can be done by stating it? Since there is no other way of doing it.
What was your problem wit the update anyway?
Does a forum thread as a reference meet your V criteria?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.254.235.186 (talk) 22:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Forum threads are not appropriate per WP:RS, which is the main guideline on identifying reliable/unreliable sources. Eik Corell (talk) 02:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Now now, Eik. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Tremulous. 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:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080724061933/http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/721/721108p1.html to http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/721/721108p1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is a really, really ambiguous thing. If we say 'anyone who has contributed to the source code' I might even be included in the group, and I do not consider myself to be part of them. I can't say either, that timbo being the intellectual owner of the game, is the only member of the group (Like ZUN and Team Shanghai Alice? Hah) as this is an open sourced game and many, many contributes have been made by various users. How much does a user have to contribute before he can be considered 'part of the team?' Is /dev/hc considered a darklegion developer, even though he's probably contributed thousands of lines to the source code? Are the in-game credits considered the 'final statement' of who is official? What about the Mercenaries Guild? The source code of Tremulous even depended upon the {MG} clan and its resource bank before it went down (which is now backed up by several users such as kdude63). I know this has been discussed to some extend on the GrangerHub forums, but as they usually happen, it just turned into a debate that lead to nowhere in particular. But the current state of this open sourced community makes things really mushy and this wikipedia article can't really grow without any hard evidence to cite or concrete definitions.
ZdrytchX (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Darklegion Group / Developement / Develeopers - Who are they?