Talk:Newgrounds/Archive 1

message: Someone is messing around with the Newgrounds edit page who happens to be spamming and vadalising it with the Freddyjrjr stuff. It's all false and Newgrounds has been around longer than Freddyjrjr.
--Number17 15:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Freddyjrjr

message: please stop messing, around with it, what it says now is what is correct. 
Newgrunds is a community that is in a constant state of change. The automated portal gets hundred(s) of movies a day, one of the most active message boards online, a staff that is invloved in a wide varietty popular websites, music labels and a Video game company and that generates news of varying levels of importance every day. Would you post in the nintendo discussion page and tell them to stop editing the page because its already correct.
Yeah, i agree, with him *points up*, it's always changing so this page will always need editing =P... How comes no one thought to add The Barney Bunch before me? -DeathMoth
----
im not sure the sections on the clock crew lock legion etc are unbiased,  although some seem to spam newgrounds this is not a fact and is a matter of oponion, anyone have any other thoughts? ill admit im not fond of the locks but i cant say there a spamming syndicate and the clock crew (the real clock crew) dont seem to spam
There are a lot of people who hold animosity towards said groups because they believe the whole crew is designed to spam, but these crews are not like myg0t. There are SOME members who spam and extoll the virtues of their clubs a little too much, just like religious activists and anyone who has a strong belief in what they do. They get supported by the crews because the groups work on preserving community and looking out for each other, although this is sometimes undeserved when they mass vote pure spam thanks to an inclusion of the group name, or back up very pious and perhaps bragging praise of said group.
These few people unfortunately cause people to believe that the crews are based entirely around self-aggrandizing and spamming. The crews in fact look down on such members for giving the group a bad name, but their ideal of supporting each other and giving everyone a fair chance to showcase their work sadly lets such people get through and corrupt the groups' public image.
Basically, assume good faith as per Wikipedia policies and judge such groups not by their past, not by their mistakes and not by their few corrupting members, but by the group as a whole, their more recent submissions and the sheer volume of work they've produced.
----
Why was the Clock Crew article deleted?
Because Wikipedians can't love. Put it on Votes for undeletion and get people to vote it back in if you want it back.
----
There is an article on Newgrounds in the Swedish Wikipedia too. (http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newgrounds)
----
Perhaps a mention of the Neo Geo would be appropriate? --Mylakovich 00:08, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  stop editing this page 

message: I've unprotected and implemented the new cat and the wikification of Clock Crew -> Clockcrew. Hope those pesky vandals have got bored and wandered off. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:06, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotected

message: does anyone else think the timeline (especially in 1999) needs to be cleaned up? im gonna try to do that one of these days, but you know....
if anyone could help with that, that would be mucho appreciated
--mysekurity 03:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleanup the timeline 

message: As I proposed earlier, this page is in desperate need of cleanup. Many events on that timeline are not important, and the article itself is way too large for a site such as this. Admittedly, Newgrounds is a very important site, but I doubt any article, based on a website or not, deserves this much information, especially since it is cluttered as-is. This article is in major need of a revamp, and anyone willing to participate will get my full support and assistance. However, the correct answer to the issues this article is facing is not to blank most of it. Some is (very?) important information, and deserves to be kept, such as bits about Alien Hominid, and certain parts of the timeline that are vital to the history of Newgrounds. Conversely, this tabloid-esque approach to the life of Tom is not useful, needed, or necissary. Thank you for reading this, and I hope you decide to pitch in. Thanks again, mysekurity 02:44, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Well, was it? According to Tom Fulp the creator of the site, it was, as can be seen here: . Although he is far from a neutral source, his claims should be taken in consideration. Personally, I can`t remember any flash portal before Newgrounds and almost certainly it was the first big and sucessful one. Thus, if it is impossible to verife this claim, then at least we should especifie that the creator claims this honour.--Vertigo200 12:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was Newgrounds the first automated portal? 

message: Am I the only one who disagrees with TITROTU's decision to remove the infobox? I think it's more appropriate than 2 pictures. Newgrounds IS a company. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TrashLock (talk • contribs) .
:If we're counting votes, I prefer the infobox. --Billpg 19:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The main reason I removed it is because it looked too cluttered. I honestly think that it looks better this way. However, if the majority feels that the infobox needs to be put back, by all means go ahead. --TITROTU 4:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info box 

message: Don't remove the essential links that I linked for things like Livecorpse's death, or for CerealBoxClock's death. They're important to that part.
That's all I need, and if you guys keep it up it's going to become a big hassle to deal with.
OI WTF M8 WUT DID AH SAY -Buddhist- 21:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do me a favor okay? 

message: I know user turnover at newgrounds is very high and the vast majority don't know the proper history of the site, but there is some very significant information missing from this article:
*Grounds Gold - The early incarnation of the user system running today
*Ross Snyder - The guy who created the entire Grounds Gold system and the automated portal is not mentioned anywhere in the article. 
*Development of the portal - Key dates of the development of the portal are missing. The portal was not always automatic.
*Development of the site - Lots of things like the developmental phases of the site - how the site used to feature only original content, have an entirely flash driven front page. Later the site used frames which was widely unpopular. The second version of the BBS (which is currently being used) etc.
--sebiv 17:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lots of missing information 

message: I'm the principal (but not only) author of the Criticism section. This section is occasionly deleted or generally messed with, usually by IP-address users.
I have to admit my experiences are personal, but I do feel that I have been restrained. My own experiences were in 2004, but I've only recently started talked about it, once I found that others had similar stories. I even edited the early revisions in this talk page before moving it into the main page after no-one had commented. Am I being unfair? --Billpg 20:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfiar? 

message: "Also, adware, spyware, or other unwanted programs were uploaded to Wikipedia." Huh? How was this done, and what connection does this have to newgrounds?--Dagibit 23:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference to Wikipedia

message: Due to the fact that the forums and the chat fail under WP:V and WP:WEB, they fall under WP:NOR. Thus, I have removed them unless anyone can proove otherwise.68.192.25.106 15:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal: 

message: I have noticed some people have been putting garbage on the page. Please lock this page from editing until people can maturely come to an agreement.
BurningAfterTheDawn 00:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock This Page, Please 

message: I've added a statement that Newgrounds have since changed advertising agencies. My only source is the second comment placed (anonymously) in my Newgrounds and Me article. 
This seems a fairly uncontrovertial statement which would be better backed up by some sort of officical announcement on the NG site itself. Does anyone have one?
An edit was also made today (by 81.101.58.1) removing a cite-tag, with the HTML comment that "Everything doesn't need a citation, it's common sense that advertising revenue pays for the content!". That is a very fair point. I've removed the word "only" from the original statement that Newgrounds is only funded by advertising revenue. Where other funding may or may not come from is not really interesting.
I have, however, restored the cite-tags to the 4-7 TB statistic and the note regarding Grounds Gold members. If this information is public knowledge, there should be something the article can point to. These statements provide balance to this section, so I think it is worthwhile keeping them in. --Billpg 22:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 28th May 2006 edits to Cirticism section

message: Since the siteadvisor image has been removed, I've added a link to the siteadvisor report on Newgrounds. If this rating ever changes, IMO, the link should removed from the list, perhaps to be replaced with a statement along the lines of "During (Month) (Year), SiteAdvisor revisied its rating from Red to (NewRating)." --Billpg 13:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 25th June 2006 - Siteadvisor image

message: Everytime somebody tries to create a StrawberryClock article or a Clock Crew article it gets shot on sight. There have been so many films featuring the Clocks though, that any reasonable person can see that covering them is not vanity. --NERD42  EMAIL  TALK  H2G2  UNCYC  NEWS  17:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Clock Crew and other animator groups deserve their own articles. 

message: In the begenning part of the article it's written "Tom is currently joined by a talented staff consisting of". Saying that they are talented is only an opinion not a fact, I haven't removed it so if anyone that is actually keeping an eye on this article and agrees with me please make the correction. --Dee' 12:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talented? not a biased word 

message: I believe this page should be semi protected, seeing as there has been several cases of vandalism by Newgrounds users themselves, mainly those without accounts or made one to spam, any thoughts? http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic.php?id=525000
Request has been put in to have this page semi-protected, we're waiting on admin to judge --Canadian-Bacon 18:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi Protection? 

message: The star Syndicate day is not commonly Celebrated, so i removed it, the SS-DT 2 day is more well known and used.
----
The Star Syndicate Died, there next flash is there last
· You were had. That was just a publicity stunt. The Star Syndicate is still active on Newgrounds 86.18.244.141 15:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Star Syndicate 

message: well i've been searching around the BBS and i think it's big enouph for it's own article it has thousands of users and it's own awards/trends and is very heavely linked with the admins and is the main way for the NG community to communicate and it's a very big community. what are your thoughts? CartoonDiablo 13:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The BBS section should be significantly smaller (see reasoning below), and the notable users and inside lingo sections should be removed, consistent with WP:V, WP:WEB, and WP:NOR.I'll not take action on the BBS section, other than to clean up and remove grammatical and spelling errors, until the vote is completed. However, I will remove the notable users and inside lingo section in consistent with the aforementioned policies. Moreover, the image of "Bedn" has an inappropriate license. [User:HowardSF|HowardSF]] 04:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBS in need of it's own article? 

message: We need to use real names in this article, not nicknames.  Who is liljim?  Using their online nicknames is not appropriate in an encyclopedia.  I can probably find out their real names if I want to.  Want me to?
Well stamper is Will Stamper I forget what liljim was and it never mentioned who ross was. 
CartoonDiablo 13:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use real names 

message: I am interested in doing what I can to get the tags removed from this article.  Right now, there are tags for references and cleanup.
The actually address of the NG HQ is in Glendale, Pennsylvania whatever vaule that may be.
References -- is there something that I am missing?  We ought to be able to take the website's own word when it comes to how many users and submissions they have and to who has sued them.  However, we could also say something like "by the website's account" if we want to be extremely picky, although I feel that this is not necessary.
Cleanup -- I have fixed many typos among other stuff.  Something else in particular needs cleanup?
:The article has no citations that are outside of the website itself. While we CAN cite the website, this is not optimal. The article is crufty to an extreme (Portal awards, Front page Icons, Site mascots have little relevence outside of the sites community).JBKramer 19:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, "technicly" they're not. Read WP:REF. Mackan 06:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and cleanup 

message: I have moved all 2005 articles to archive so that this disussion page confroms to wikipedia size limits. Kc4 05:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving 

message: I think a section should be added which explains how flash/audio submissions get submitted and what happens in the "judging period".  Does anyone know how it's done exactly?  Esn 10:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Section about "judging period"