Talk:Dim3/Archive 1

message: Dim3 is a great engine, however, it DOESN'T come with full documentation.
I just added to The page, see the part with libraries, but i can't work out witch version or higher?
Yes, dim3 is awesomeness but there's only API documentation. If you need help with it you can visit the forum ;).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.123.140 (talk) 20:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

message: Okay well thats not good. Right now its only linked from the list of game engines. I tried just game engine under open source, but I guess its not notable enough to go there. We need some more links.  Gordon CSA 20:27, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned 

message: Okay well thats REALLY not good :(. What else should we change to change this? Tmsgames 00:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article needs reliable, independent, and non-trivial sources showing that the engine is notable.  See WP:RS and WP:NOTE for more information on what this means. - TexasAndroid 15:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Considered for deletion 

message: Good job guys, its no longer orphaned or an ad! :)
And by the look of it, with nothing but a lot of apathy and one keep on the deletion page, it won't be deleted. Gordon CSA 22:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some problems fixed 

message: Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dim_3#Dim_3 and say what you think about it being deleted, only one person seems to think it should be deleted (against 4). Also, alex, write *Keep before you're statement. Tmsgames 02:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do note that the opinion of accounts that have few or no edits on the project outside the subject, generally referred to as Single Purpose Accounts, hold very little weight at deletion debate.  It's far too easy for one person to create an army of accounts and appear to be many.  So discounting the opinions of the SPAs on the debate, it's actually more like only 2 keeps at this point, not 5 or 6.  There is also the fact that deletion debates are not really votes.  A single strong, well-reasoned, policy based argument can trump many weak arguments.  Numbers can come into play if both sides in the debate have well-reasoned arguments.  In the end it's up to the closing admin to weigh the arguments on both sides and come to a judgement.  At this point, if you could just provide a few reliable, independent, and non-trivial media sources discussing the engine to prove it's notability once and for all, you would easily trump my arguments.  Lacking those, the article IMHO still fails to show that the subject is indeed notable. - TexasAndroid 15:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion discussion page 

message: (copied from AfD)
I don't quite understand the citations. Could you give an example of a citation for a map editor?Tmsgames 23:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just link to a site saying what the editor does. Basically, no information should be unsourced - so if someone adds that tag to a statement, then that means a source for it should be provided. If the only source is the program itself or your personal knowledge, that would be original research. If there is no information on this editor available anywhere, then best to remove the section on it (Wikipedia should not be the only place in the internet providing a certain information - it's an encyclopedia after all which therefore collects existing information). --Allefant 01:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "citation needed" templates