Talk:Ballyhoo (video game)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] the frequency isn't trivia
The frequency AM1170 isn't trivia - or at least so trivia like "containing 19% Alcohol". For users who have only the "Lost Treasures of Infocom" Package it is useful - instead of searching around. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.223.105 (talk) 12:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- It's not really Wikipedia's goal to act as a replacement for missing manuals. The goal here is to document the game's existance and general notability. As such, specific but otherwise non-notable gameplay elements probably are trivia. — Alan De Smet | Talk 15:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- The point of the "19% alcohol" is to illustrate Infocom's humorous irony. There's still a lot of unencyclopedic "game guide" content that needs to be removed from Wikipedia; let's not add more. Ntsimp (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I contain the "Lost treasures" - without the freuqency - thererfore I found it useful. UNDO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.252.72 (talk) 22:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia's goal is not to replace missing manuals. We already link to scans of the manual if that is what is needed. — Alan De Smet | Talk 23:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Stop edit warring. One anonymous editor wanting game-guide trivia to appear in an article is not a consensus. As WP:GAMECRUFT says, "if the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it is unsuitable." Ntsimp (talk) 22:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Are you guys one (alan de smet, ntsimp) of the hidden groups that control (illegal) wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.219.115 (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Hidden Wikipedia Admin communication? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.219.115 (talk) 22:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, we're a secretive, all powerful cabal. The cabal has devoted two of its agents to deleting two words from one specific article. While to a casual observer this may seem amazingly minor, it's actually a key piece of our evil plans. Sadly, you've found us out, and we are defeated. Meanwhile, back in reality: I think Ntsimp has given a very solid argument for removing the exact frequency; it's gamecruft. Do you have an argument beyond you personally finding it useful? If not, it's just going to be deleted again. — Alan De Smet | Talk 22:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
ok - delete it! Yes - delete it - I (and most of the visitors) don't care anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.207.48 (talk) 21:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I thought, I give a useful contribution for owners of the "lost treasures of Infocom" (I'm one of them and I didn't know about the frequency as well as the last (lost) page - even I had viewed the given links. This is my oppinion! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.207.48 (talk) 21:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
maybe you (Alan & NtSimp) are right - therefor delete it; I give up :-( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.207.48 (talk) 21:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)