Talk:Puzzle Pirates

message: There is a question at Talk:Secondary color that I asked a while ago that still hasn't been answered. Any comments on what to do at either this article or the Secondary color article?? 66.245.71.17 02:16, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Secondary color

message: Is that why Puzzle Pirates featured in the PoCap games website? 
Because their games are similar to PopCaps' games? I guess it is. 
Ok, now I am sounding like an idiot. But Puzzle Pirates is awesome, 
way better than PopCap games. Who created Puzzle Pirates? My username
on Puzzle Pirates is also Hastalavista. Hey to all my friends on 
Puzzle Pirates!  Hastalavista 07:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure it's just that they have an advertising deal with Popcap.  You'll want to see Three Rings Design for the people who made the game, or check the YPP wiki. AySz88^-^ 12:33, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puzzle Pirates Game 

message: I added some information, such as the fact that shipyards produce bludgeons and that familiars never decay.
~Remalle
: Thanks for the new information.  The paragraph about decay specifically mentions manufactured items, however, meaning that familiars and trinkets are implicitly not included.  I took that part out, and fixed up some punctuation, too.  =)  Powers 02:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some random stuff 

message: Does this really belong in this article? It isn't anything to do with Puzzle Pirates, other than the little bit about games being easily portable into Puzzle Pirates. Adrian 04:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is a little tab in the Parlor interface that points directly at it. But given how little attention it gets I suggest merging it unto Three Rings Design. Nifboy 04:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the single little paragraph in this article is appropriate, given the connectedness between the two.  However, any further expansion of the topic should go in Three Rings Design.  Powers 12:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game Gardens 

message: Fairly sure the YPPedia fits in :Category:Computer_and_video_game_wikis, but as it doesn't have a seperate article, it can't be listed there despite being entirely relevant to the category and potentially useful. -Heartofgoldfish 23:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Frankly, most Computer and Video Game Wikis are probably not notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia; the fact that there is a category that they could fit into is not sufficient reason to write one.  However, in the case of YPPedia, the wiki is hosted on Three Rings' servers and is officially supported (complete with Nemo-graphics); that may be notable enough to merit a brief article.  Powers 01:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[YPPedia]]? 

message: Pirate badges are mentioned under the Navigation puzzle, but there's no explanation on how to get them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.80.167.6 (talk • contribs) 
: Badges are purchased on doubloon oceans.  I'll take a look to see if that section can be clarified.  Powers 17:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to earn Pirate Badges? 

message: i think it should be mentions that there strict banning rules get your computer banned if your sibling/ anyone other gets banned on you computer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.60.227.148 (talk • contribs) .
: Association with a banned account get your computer TAINTED, and no, I don't think that'll be necessary.--Remalle 21:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banning rules 

message: The new puzzle, called Treasure Haul, which is only accessible at certain points in blockades should be added in the page. I cant add this, as I don't know enough about the puzzle. XeroTheGreat 5 June 2007
Another new puzzle came out, Weaving, as another crafting puzzle. Someone should add that up, I could write about it but I'm no expert. To who corresponds (talk) 00:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in there.  What article are you reading?  =)  Powers T 14:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it after investigating a bit =) still open to improvements though. To who corresponds (talk) 20:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puzzles 

message: I dont agree with having the usual requirments for the ranks i think they should be removed.
--Tjayh913 23:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ranks 

message: I've added pictures direct from Yppedia that depict the types of puzzles. One picture for each type of puzzle (multiplayer, crafting, and duty). Carousing puzzle pictures are obviously not needed. Please do not add more pictures as it is unneeded. I added three to simply show SOME of the puzzles. If someone is interested in the game they can go to the actual website and see all the puzzles. -- ZookPS3 17:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures  

message: In regards to Gamigo, there is mention of Three Rings' relationship with them, found on YPPedia - the claims mentioned there are that Gamigo was not keeping the game client up to par with the English servers, which led to the termination of their contract.  Finally, I noticed that there are almost no citations whatsoever in this entire article - there should be.  Puzzle Pirates is a popular enough game that references should not be hard to find. X-Kal (talk) 07:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to add that, in the online gaming world, the official forums often serve as the place for press releases.  In terms of what should be considered a 'reliable' source, anything that is posted by the game's administration should be treated as a press release. X-Kal (talk) 07:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  They discuss many things on the boards, not just canon.  When they come out with a PoEmail (press release) about it, then it will be here. Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love 01:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  And announcement posts made by administrators are not canon? X-Kal (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The OMs generally post funny things all the time, or post things to get user input.  That doesnt necessarily mean that it is a definate.  In general, forums aren't allowed as a reputable source anyway... it must be an official statement. Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love 14:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: I've opened up a discussion on the verifiability page here so we can all see once and for all the official word on the forums... Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love 15:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion has now been archived and is found here. Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love 11:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Whoa.  That discussion does say alot about Wikipedia policy.  Has it come to the point where the subjects we write about are expected to conform to our idealised method of news releases that an official forum post doesn't count, but if they want to be included in wikipedia, they should do it more formally?  I am deeply saddened.  On a second count, however, I do want to re-address the PoEMail - there *IS* a place to find a repository. http://yppedia.puzzlepirates.com/Poemail - but then, you have to ask whether or not YPPedia, the game's official wiki, counts as a reliable source.  There are some great sources out there, but it's hellishly rough to find sources that pass wikipedia's standards when it comes to online games. Now that I've read through it, though, I'm glad you brought it up.  I simply don't know enough about protocol to have pulled that one off. Finally, I still insist that when it comes to game mechanics, it is always more reliable when you get it directly from the game designers. X-Kal (talk) 05:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I should have brought up the yppedia as well, but at the time the problem we were having was with the foums.  But I'm sure that wouldnt work either, as they could say its a game guide.  I'm sure that yPP will eventually bust out and be featured by 3rd parties eventually... and until then, this article will be mostly uncited.  (However, if people really cared, they could click the link to the yppedia and they would see what we're talking about).  Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love 09:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a little late to the party here, but ... this is ridiculous.  Yes, we need third-party sources for most things.  However, for things like game mechanics and other things that can use first-party or self-published sources, the forums are absolutely viable.  We know it's developers posting that information, so it's fine.  Likewise, any article on YPPedia in the "Official" namespace (such as "Official:Colonisation") should be fine to use.  Powers T 12:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You cant unilaterally say that its fine.  We are governed by guidelines and MOS's... if you want to take it up with WP:Verifiability again, go ahead.  Qb | your 2 cents 18:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no need to "take it up" with that policy, because that policy doesn't prohibit first-party sources.  Powers T 23:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Where I was coming from is that if it's a forum post that was made by a member of Puzzle Pirates staff (like an oceanmaster, developer or other administrator there), then it can probably qualify.  If it's not written by Puzzle Pirates staff, then it definitely can't pass the WP:Verifiability guidelines. In short, it should be arguably official, or it can't be used as a valid citation.  X-Kal (talk) 23:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Has anyone opened that link?  I specifically asked exactly about postings from the staff, and the verifiable people said No.  I will revert if I see anything cited to a blog or the forums unless you get the green light from verifiability.  Qb | your 2 cents 00:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: QB, one person responded to your question on that talk page.  One person does not constitute any kind of authoritative judgment on the matter.  Powers T 13:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Then ask again.  Seeing as how many people edit that page on any given day... I'm sure folks believed there was no reason to repeat what someone else had said.  But pose the question again.  Qb | your 2 cents 13:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If that one person is part of the administration, sure, that's an authoritative judgment, and we've gotta go with it.  As much as some people want to see this as a democracy, it's not - I've had to swallow some disagreeable responses, myself.  Speaking of which, are we talking about a specific case?  If so, it might be helpful to learn about what it is to see a little context.  X-Kal (talk) 14:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The only time one person can make a binding judgment is a WP:OFFICE action.  Powers T 13:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Game Forums and Citability 

message: i feel that there is a bit of a bias towards popcap in this article (repeated mention of their games as influence, 
blatant name dropping that i already removed [seriously, who would confuse a puzzle pirates puzzle called 
alchemistry with popcap's puzzle called alchemistry? people who aren't sure what page they're on. and 
they're beyond help anyway]). i realize that they and three rings have some sort of advertisement deal, 
but i do not think this should affect an encyclopedia page concerning their game. 71.134.232.194 (talk) 22:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I honestly have never noticed it before... linking to other pages is common.  I didnt see a problem with it, but dont mind your edits.  Qb | your 2 cents 22:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  PopCap advertisements in article? 

message: Is foraging considered a game?  I know there's a control that lets pirates forage, if they have a labor badge.  However, there's no puzzle associated with it.  Is it considered a game in its own?  Any thoughts? X-Kal (talk) 23:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Theres a puzzle on subscribe oceans... I've played it.  Wouldnt know about dub oceans... thats not my thing.  Qb | your 2 cents 00:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Holy smokes!  I feel sheepish now.  I wonder how I missed the announcements.  Yeah - the puzzle is there.  The only difference between the subscription and doubloon oceans should be that subscribers automatically get their 24 hours of labour per day, while players on doubloon oceans need to buy the labour badge. Thanks, QB!  X-Kal (talk) 02:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahhh... yeah.  You guys on the sub oceans are probably getting more out of this puzzle anyway.  I'm out of labor after playing the silly thing for 3 minutes.  Qb | your 2 cents 11:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I thought for sure writing "In August 2008 Foraging became the newest puzzle in the game" would be clue enough.  ;)  Powers T 13:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ahh, that, I didn't notice, either.  I guess I make mistakes, now and then.  Now, do we need to cite it with something like Release Notes?  Wow, this puzzle is seriously brand new - I've been off Puzzle Pirates nearly all week. X-Kal (talk) 14:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foraging 

message: This word does not belong in wikipedia as, well, it's not a word.  It's informal and should be replaced.  I am specifically discussing the section on crew rankings, although I haven't read the entire article.  In fact, the whole section appears to be a single person's opinion, and should be rewritten or deleted.  However, at the very least, the worst stat for statistic must go. 24.5.115.75 (talk) 08:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it is an accepted word, but I do agree that it's probably a bit too informal to be used in an encyclopedic article (non-English speakers might also find it difficult to understand or translate). In fact, the word might not even be appropriate; perhaps "ratings" would be better. Maybe I'll do something about it later. --Emerson85 (talk) 17:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the word "stat" 

message: Random player here, just coming to say the Weaving puzzle has been launched and the article should be updated accordingly.
-Anonymous  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.183.190.83 (talk) 00:06, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote a small paragraph. Could be improved by someone who knows more of the matter.To who corresponds (talk) 20:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Puzzle 

message: Why is this game listed as an MMORPG? It clearly is not an RPG, anyone who has played it can tell you it is a massively multiplayer online puzzle game, not RPG. An RPG implies there is some kind of overall plot or story to be told, and this game, having the servers being roughly 80% player run, is clearly not an RPG. Is it lumped into the RPG genre because it is the only puzzle game to fit the MMO criteria? This should be fixed. Nokota (talk) 21:02, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Although I am not sure what you mean by "having the servers being roughly 80% player run". Elizium23 (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  MMORPG?