Talk:Habbo/Archive 1

message: What is the required bandwidth needed to use Habbo Hotel? DyslexicEditor 16:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dialup is fine, the hotel will take a long time to load but it will function fairly well once it is loaded. --james // bornhj (talk) 16:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  bandwith required? 

message: Let's limit our discussions to Habbo Hotel and stop with the flame wars, ad-hominem blanter, and personal attacks. I suggest those involved (and you know who you are) read up on the talk page guidelines.  Seicer (talk) 03:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved most of the discussion to an archive page since it exceeded the KB limit per WP:ARCHIVE standards. Do not add to the dead or smoldering comments there.  Seicer (talk) 17:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussions 

message: Go to habbo hotel, in gaming area, go to poolsphere.  Raid is still going on.  DyslexicEditor 16:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Verifiability

message: Unless this is sourced, I'm going to delete it.  Go on Google News and you'll find various mentions of Habbo Hotel.  What you don't find is anything about the so called racism and the "raid" that took place.  Why?  Because it's neither encyclopedic or newsorthy and no one cares.  Get some sources. - Hahnchen 23:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If I was a reporter, I could make lots of money on this story.  DyslexicEditor 23:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure you could have made some money with the Something Awful Dating Game raid (http://www.somethingawful.com/index.php?a=325) too.  But wait, you're not a reporter.  And if you were, no editor would print your piece, because no one cares. - Hahnchen 23:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Good for them. Wikipedia is not the place to find out. --james // bornhj (talk) 05:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy section 

message: I am in Habbo Hotel in poolsphere and all of the blockers keep saying "WE'RE FROM WIKIPEDIA.ORG".  I would upload a screenshot, but I fear that it would be deleted due to some strange copyright issue.  I think this is a problem for wikipedia. Todd Lanuzzi 07:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It'll be the same trolls as before, angry that we won't let them have a mention in this article. --james // bornhj (talk) 07:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Almost seems as if we need the semi-protected status back again.  Seicer (talk) 12:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Curious. What level of external coverage would be valid to warrant a mention here of something like this? Not trolling here, just genuinely curious. While it was trolling of Habbo when they did this, it WAS wide scale and pretty massive. Personal opinion over whether trolling (for whatever ultimate reason) is right or wrong should play no role in whether some sort of event is notable. From a purely clinical, "did it happen?" standpoint, it was a notable event as a major online service/community with millions of subscribed users was crippled. rootology 16:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Let's just leave the semi-protected tag on. Vandals from other web-sites, after their stunt, will only degrade the quality of the article.  Seicer (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Vandals 

message: I remember when I used to go on this people used hex editors like art money to change the apearance of there characters beyond what the game allowed. Do you think this should be noted in the history section or have its own section?
: No. See: WP:NOT.  Seicer (talk) 19:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hacking? 

message: Keep this in mind when editing. This article (and Wikipedia on a whole) is not:
*"A place for opinions on current affairs" should not be included because it leads to a soapbox-type discussion. It also leads to a few dedicated users to advocate their "pet views" that can lead to trolling (see prior edits in the Discussion).
*"A soapbox." Wikipedia is not here to spread propaganda; doing so violates the neutral point of view stance.
*"For self promotion." Some users were involved directly with the "raid" and therefore should not be editing the article since they were directly involved.
*"A collection of links." Some want to include links to the video or other non-encylopedic links. Wikipedia does not condone link spam and is not a collection of links. It is also not a collection of photographs or media files (or their associated links).
*"An instruction manual." Instructions on how to "script" the hotel (or hex edit using Artmoney, whatever) are not acceptable on Wikipedia. hope you don't mind me adding to your list :) --james // bornhj (talk) 13:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the Afro plus suit and tie some kind of historic style, like Malcom X, maybe?   So familiar.  Anomo 22:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Think about it for a second, it's a bunch of black guys in afros and suits blocking hallways, pools, and anything else available while shouting various memes and generally making asses of themselves.  There's no historical value at all, it's just plain funny.  Maybe not to the bystanders, but to the trolls themselves, it's a lolfest. 70.236.65.180 22:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What this article is NOT 

message: This article is way too large for a rather unimportant service such as Habbo Hotel.  The feature section is basically a gigantic advertisement.  More should be focused on the analysis and impacts and problems of the service rather than a summary of what every feature is that exists in the game. Countchoc 01:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the article is reading very much like an advertisement. It is also very lengthy for a multiplayer game, where most of the games of similar nature are very short.  Seicer (talk) (contribs) 02:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article should be trimmed? 

message: I think that the raids are not notable enough for wikipedia, but for a smaller wiki they are.  There is a factual wiki here http://trendpedia.elwiki.com/Habbo_Hotel that mentions the raids.  It also includes habbo.com's viewpoint on the raids, which might make one regret the raiding. Playingviolin1 05:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Notability of the Pool Closed Raids 

message: The mods are letting the blockers stay in the room without bans and kicks. THIS IS IMPORTANT! Anonymouses 04:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Appearantly not that important that it needed to be at the top of a talk page that contained shouting (e.g. topic all in caps). Please read up on WP:TPG and note that the discussions must be verifiable, and that discussions in the talk page is for research and discussions pertaining to the Wikipedia article, not about the game itself. Keep all rumours and the whole "pools closed" lot out of this talk page.  Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe that will teach Sulake what will happen when they decide to give in to Mods whinging about getting too many Calls and changing what the CFH is compeletly about. At the moment, if you report a doorblocker you end up getting banned -- benzo  ♠♠ 09:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The mods have backed down.

message: Every time I enter a name it says "This name is not available" HELP! Moistener 18:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a help forum for the game, nor is it a place to complain or whine about the game in general. Use this Discussion page to discuss relevant topics regarding the Wikipedia entry.  Seicer (talk) (contribs) 22:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  help!