Talk:Castle Adventure

message: From Wikipedia:Spoiler: Spoiler warnings may be used in articles whose primary subject is fictional, and where the editors proposing them have compelling arguments for their insertion.
It is the duty of the editor who includes the  template to justify its use. WODUP 04:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler 

message: The following external link has been removed numerous times (by myself and other editors), but keeps popping back:
*Castle - a modernized open source version written in Seed7
The reason for its removal is simple: the link supplied points to three screenshots of this purported clone. There are no evident means to retrieve said clone from the supplied link, though I suspect that one must download the entirety of Seed7 to access the sample program (which in turn requires Java). I should think that for the typical WikiPedia reader, it's a bit much to ask that they sleuth out where this clone may reside from the supplied EL. If the link doesn't provide more than sample screenshots of a clone labeled as an example implementation of a programming language, it should not be added back in. D. Brodale 19:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've been removing it as well.  It's linkspam, pure and simple. Xihr 22:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Hans, this has nothing to do with the *nix platform or a preference for Windows. Removing this particular EL sends no "sad" message to users of Unix-alike systems. Don't presume motivation that isn't there. D. Brodale 14:49, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just compared Castle Adventure and Castle. The only difference seems to be that the first one has links to download the source code (which needs a C compiler and the Allegro library) and the Win32 binary. Just to make it clear: Would it be okay if Castle contained links to download the source code (which needs the Seed7 interpreter/compiler) and the Win32 binary? Or the other way round: What should a linked page contain to be acceptable? Hans Bauer 08:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What validity do you think the comparison has.  That other site is a dedicated fan page.  This is an encyclopedia. Xihr 21:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Castle Adventure link leads to a page with the headline "My Games and Programs". This page contains information about a "Castle Adventure" clone, three screenshots and two links (to the source code and the Win32 binary). There are also links to other games and applications and to the Allegro library. It is by far not a dedicated fan site of the "Castle Adventure". There is only one page describing a clone of the "Castle Adventure". Everything else has nothing to do with the "Castle Adventure". OTOH the Castle link leads to a page which contains information about another "Castle Adventure" clone and three screenshots. The only difference is that there are no direct links to download the source code or executable (although there is a link named "Download" which leads to a download). IMHO the comparison is valid. Therefore I repeat my questions: What should a linked page contain to be acceptable? Would it be okay if there are links to download the source code and an executable? Hans Bauer 22:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The consensus in this very discussion was that the link should have been removed.  Please follow consensus. Xihr (talk) 22:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  There was no consensus in this discussion. There were two people who wanted to remove this link and two people who wanted to keep it. So I think that there was no consensus whatsoever. Additionally you are the only person talking about linkspam which is totally wrong. There are new arguments why the link should be kept (see above) and you just ignore this arguments to reach your goal to remove information. As I saw elsewere you are making a  Crusade aggainst the programming language this game is written in. Such a reason to remove something is totally unacceptable and could be seen as Vandalism. Would you please stop to remove valuable information and start to add information to Wikipedia instead. Georg Peter (talk) 06:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is vastly overstated.  Note that these links have been added almost exclusively by one person in many articles.  They're spam; that they're spam that you happen to think is useful doesn't change the fact that they violate WP:EL.  I'm not engaged in a crusade against a programming language, I'm engaged in an attempt to stop a spammer.  Which is what all Wikipedians should be doing. Xihr (talk) 07:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote to keep the link, since it is valid.  And who cares if it doesn't work under Linux?  Most things probably don't. Dream Focus (talk) 07:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I also vote to keep the link. I am sure that the link does not violate WP:EL, but probably people like Xihr don't care about votes and real reasons. Now even someone trys to delete the whole article... Adding information to Wikipedia seems to be unimportant this days. Deletion decisions are enforced by persons which are judges and executors at the same time. I think that all Wikipedians should stop this deletion madness because of notability and other arbitrary reasons. Zron (talk) 22:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I think theres a compelling argument that it may violate WP:EL in at least some way.  But I think this is an exceptional case.  We are talking about an article of a video-game that existed well in advance of the games our wikipedia policies and standards are built on.  So at times like these, I ask myself: Does the link add to this articles usefulness as an encyclopedia article? When I've seen this done on other articles, I generally feel it has. And given that this is an exceptional case, my vote would be for keeping the link.  Remember, consensus can change. Icemotoboy (talk) 02:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

text: It seems that the consensus has changed. The Castle link now looks much better than the last time I saw it. BTW. There are several links which have been removed by the person who started the AfD (Probably to prepare the deletion). I don't think that any of this links do violate WP:EL. Therefore I put them all back. Hans Bauer (talk) 13:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seed7 Clone (External Link)