http://www.straight.com/article-145642/digital-stars-converge-city-vidfest - some discussion regarding year zero arg and upcoming projects. AtaruMoroboshi ( talk) 13:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
It seems fairly clear to me that Judefrancis is determined to harmonize this article with 42 Entertainment's current website. Unfortunately, this is an encyclopedia that collects verifiable facts (some of which are historical), and its goals are not the same as a corporate website designed for (current) marketing purposes. I suggest that Judefrancis is anything but impartial here, and should recuse his or her self from editing this article in the future, avoiding any further revisions to verifiable facts just because they don't help sell product today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Br0930 ( talk • contribs) 13:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
After a lengthy conversation I had with the folks in the #wikipedia-en-help IRC chat room, I have been encouraged to attempt to engage Judefrancis in a dialogue regarding the information contained within this article. It's apparent that Judefrancis does not want certain historical information to be published on this page, and I am curious as to why that might be. In an attempt to compile the most complete and unbiased article for this company, I spent a good deal of time this week gathering facts and references, most of which Judefrancis feels should be left out of the article. I believe that Judefrancis continues to have a conflict of interest ( WP:COI) in regards to this company's Wikipedia article, and I urge him/her to comment on why they have made the edits to this page that they have. Argguy ( talk) 14:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Pursuant to the previous section on Judefrancis, I would like to open discussion on the inclusion of the names of former employees of this company. Those names are part of the public record and I can cite numerous references which support their historical relevance to this cpompany. Because this is an encyclopedic article and not a profile of the current state of affairs at the company, I believe that the historical content (including the names of former employees) is more than relevant to this article. I cite the Wikipedia entry for Bungie as an example of how historical information has been used in an article about a particular company. I'm curious to hear others' thoughts on this. Argguy ( talk) 14:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Please note that due to recent edits by a person at IP 71.249.244.191, the basis of which removed verifiable historical content, I have sent a notice about a possible Conflict of Interest (COI) to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard Argguy ( talk) 22:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
It appears that several employees who have left 42 Entertainment have attempted to hi-jack this page for personal gain. Referencing recent articles and talks researched in the past 12 months, such as Maxim, Wired, MIT Sloan appearance, Lynx Dubai, GameBeat, LA Times, NIN.com and USA Today, it is clear that 42 Entertainment is an established company with many employees who pull off amazing things. Reference Maxim's article, which has an interview with Jordan Weisman himself about the current leadership of 42. Having the article focus on old founding history (since when has that been relevant 6 years later?) and employees who have left to do other things seems self serving and promotional for ones who have left. ARGguy specifically seems to have an agenda that is very selective of information that is included on 42's page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ARGgirl ( talk • contribs) 14:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that this section should be simplified, for example, by stating how many awards each game has won rather than the exact award recieved. Any objections? Smartse ( talk) 11:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm all in favor of simplifying or removing "Award" sections. I find them annoying. With a few exceptions (Academy Awards, for example) they are uninteresting. Rees11 ( talk) 10:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I've simplified the awards as we've discussed I should. I've found more problems though in that quite a few links don't lead to pages listing the awards. More significantly than that the awards really don't seem notable - there are literally hundreds of other companies awarded the same awards as them. I think it is still too much like WP:DIRECTORY and it may be best to remove them all except perhaps for the Game Developers Choice Innovation Award which at least doesn't seem to have been awarded to just about every company in the world! What do you think? Smartse ( talk) 19:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Please note the following investigation that involved editing of this article: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Judefrancis/Archive Smartse ( talk) 15:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm a new user with an interest in and an extensive knowledge of marketing, entertainment, and media in general, including but by no means limited to ARGs. I've just made a relatively small edit—my first on Wikipedia—expanding the Year Zero portion of this article. I'm aware that this article has a contentious history, and I'd like to state straight away that I am neither an employee nor an owner of 42 Entertainment nor of any company affiliated with it. I was disturbed to find this article listed in the Talk section as a stub, and with the community's support I would like to continue to expand it in ways that hopefully will not run afoul of any of the issues addressed below. (In particular, I will not be deleting any names.) As an outside observer, I consider 42 Entertainment an innovative company whose impact on entertainment and marketing far exceeds its size, and I would like to see this article reflect that. I also plan to make contributions to several other, non-ARG-related topics. Stuyvesant Street ( talk) 22:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
http://www.straight.com/article-145642/digital-stars-converge-city-vidfest - some discussion regarding year zero arg and upcoming projects. AtaruMoroboshi ( talk) 13:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
It seems fairly clear to me that Judefrancis is determined to harmonize this article with 42 Entertainment's current website. Unfortunately, this is an encyclopedia that collects verifiable facts (some of which are historical), and its goals are not the same as a corporate website designed for (current) marketing purposes. I suggest that Judefrancis is anything but impartial here, and should recuse his or her self from editing this article in the future, avoiding any further revisions to verifiable facts just because they don't help sell product today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Br0930 ( talk • contribs) 13:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
After a lengthy conversation I had with the folks in the #wikipedia-en-help IRC chat room, I have been encouraged to attempt to engage Judefrancis in a dialogue regarding the information contained within this article. It's apparent that Judefrancis does not want certain historical information to be published on this page, and I am curious as to why that might be. In an attempt to compile the most complete and unbiased article for this company, I spent a good deal of time this week gathering facts and references, most of which Judefrancis feels should be left out of the article. I believe that Judefrancis continues to have a conflict of interest ( WP:COI) in regards to this company's Wikipedia article, and I urge him/her to comment on why they have made the edits to this page that they have. Argguy ( talk) 14:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Pursuant to the previous section on Judefrancis, I would like to open discussion on the inclusion of the names of former employees of this company. Those names are part of the public record and I can cite numerous references which support their historical relevance to this cpompany. Because this is an encyclopedic article and not a profile of the current state of affairs at the company, I believe that the historical content (including the names of former employees) is more than relevant to this article. I cite the Wikipedia entry for Bungie as an example of how historical information has been used in an article about a particular company. I'm curious to hear others' thoughts on this. Argguy ( talk) 14:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Please note that due to recent edits by a person at IP 71.249.244.191, the basis of which removed verifiable historical content, I have sent a notice about a possible Conflict of Interest (COI) to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard Argguy ( talk) 22:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
It appears that several employees who have left 42 Entertainment have attempted to hi-jack this page for personal gain. Referencing recent articles and talks researched in the past 12 months, such as Maxim, Wired, MIT Sloan appearance, Lynx Dubai, GameBeat, LA Times, NIN.com and USA Today, it is clear that 42 Entertainment is an established company with many employees who pull off amazing things. Reference Maxim's article, which has an interview with Jordan Weisman himself about the current leadership of 42. Having the article focus on old founding history (since when has that been relevant 6 years later?) and employees who have left to do other things seems self serving and promotional for ones who have left. ARGguy specifically seems to have an agenda that is very selective of information that is included on 42's page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ARGgirl ( talk • contribs) 14:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that this section should be simplified, for example, by stating how many awards each game has won rather than the exact award recieved. Any objections? Smartse ( talk) 11:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm all in favor of simplifying or removing "Award" sections. I find them annoying. With a few exceptions (Academy Awards, for example) they are uninteresting. Rees11 ( talk) 10:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I've simplified the awards as we've discussed I should. I've found more problems though in that quite a few links don't lead to pages listing the awards. More significantly than that the awards really don't seem notable - there are literally hundreds of other companies awarded the same awards as them. I think it is still too much like WP:DIRECTORY and it may be best to remove them all except perhaps for the Game Developers Choice Innovation Award which at least doesn't seem to have been awarded to just about every company in the world! What do you think? Smartse ( talk) 19:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Please note the following investigation that involved editing of this article: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Judefrancis/Archive Smartse ( talk) 15:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm a new user with an interest in and an extensive knowledge of marketing, entertainment, and media in general, including but by no means limited to ARGs. I've just made a relatively small edit—my first on Wikipedia—expanding the Year Zero portion of this article. I'm aware that this article has a contentious history, and I'd like to state straight away that I am neither an employee nor an owner of 42 Entertainment nor of any company affiliated with it. I was disturbed to find this article listed in the Talk section as a stub, and with the community's support I would like to continue to expand it in ways that hopefully will not run afoul of any of the issues addressed below. (In particular, I will not be deleting any names.) As an outside observer, I consider 42 Entertainment an innovative company whose impact on entertainment and marketing far exceeds its size, and I would like to see this article reflect that. I also plan to make contributions to several other, non-ARG-related topics. Stuyvesant Street ( talk) 22:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)