Talk:Stars!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Video games (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

Moved back; it doesn't need a disambiguation, the exclamation mark disambiguates it. - Hephaestos 08:37, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)


Fleshed out the PRT's and LRT's and added HE (how could you miss one out? :P) Grey Area 09:30, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Trading Technology[edit]

In which way is it possible to trade technology directly (as implied)? As I recall there are a few ways of doing it, but only by indirect means - such as a battle. - jptdrake

   Good point. I've updated the article accordingly - --Staz 23:29, 5 December 2005 (UTC)


Made a bunch of changes, mostly to sections on race design. Not all of the LRT were present and the 25k by 2450 rule was explained twice, for example. Since some of my statements regarding common practices in advanced play were highly disputable, I added some references.

Consider adding subsections for each of the fields of research.DaWarMage 20:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Trying to bring in line with guidelines[edit]

I was trying to bring this in line with the CVG guidelines by removing content that is only of use to players of the game. I can't do that if someone else is reverting my changes, so I'm going to stop now and have another go when (if) I get the time to do it properly.

In my opinion, the information expressed in the article is basic information. Stars! is a very complex game, and I can see how the summary-level detail in the article might easily be mistaken for detail. As I see it, part of the problem is the presentation. Because sections are used for each of the Primary Traits, the Contents index is enormous. If the presentation were were changed to a bulleted list or bolded headers for example, the article would appear much cleaner without sacrificing any quality.
After rereading the content policy, I don't see anything specifically violated by this article, so I presume that the directly linked portion is not the only guideline being referenced here. If my suggestions would be sufficient to clean up the article, let me know. I'd be happy to make the edits. Thanks, Dan Slotman 23:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem with the sub-headings being replaced by bullets, so go ahead and tidy it up. Staz 23:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
The PRTs and LRTs are bulleted lists now, but I'm sure further improvements are possible. I don't think the bulleted lists look terrible, but nevertheless they aren't as visually appealing as sections.
I changed the references to use the <ref> tag, but I think I may have screwed that up as the same source is being listed multiple times. Perhaps someone can clarify if this is the desired behavior. I know that the APA stylebook would have a single reference entry that would be cited multiple times in the body of the work, rather than the current 1-to-1 rendering. Dan Slotman 17:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Have added nametags to fix this Gible Fog 21:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Also, currently the article moves from race design on to gameplay. I think it would make more sense for to a reader unfamiliar with Stars! to move from Gameplay to Advanced Gameplay and then close with a discussion of Race Design. Dan Slotman 19:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

PRT, PGR, LRT, and other acronyms[edit]

Is there much value from using the common acronyms for terms? It strikes me that the proper thing to do would be to write-out all the acronyms so that a lay reader will have no trouble deciphering the article. Thanks, Dan Slotman 17:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Mystery Trader[edit]

There is a suggestion to merge the Mystery Trader article in with this one, which I think is a good idea, as long as it is reduced in size during the process. Staz 22:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes merge. The Mystery Trader is hardly notable according to wikipedias notability guidelines. Gible Fog 11:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
I took another look at the MT page, I'm not sure how to merge it in without reducing it to little more than a comment that it appears randomly and give away stuff. PS been looking for references on the web, there's nothing I can find except fan sites, references to the wikipedia article and S!SN...the web simple wasn't around enough in '95 Gible Fog 09:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
My suggestion would be to sit on it. MT isn't nominated for deletion or anything, and I personally found the information useful. I agree that it can't merged without removing almost all its content. Thanks, Dan Slotman 18:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Gameplay clean-up[edit]

I have just given the gameplay section its own article under Gameplay of Stars!, similar to the Gameplay of Starcraft article. Whether or not it actually survives there remains to be seen of course. I've removed the more detail-y parts from this article, but what remains should still probably be summarized better. Once that's done, I'm sure we can get rid of that gamecleanup tag. --ADeveria 16:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I have severly summarized the gameplay of Stars!, largely ignoring what was already there as its all the the Gameplay of Stars! article. and boldly removed the cleanup tag. After a bit of reflection, I have to agree that it does look a lot more like an encyclopedia entry than it did before. Tantalysing without any real detail...oh well. If the Gameplay of Stars! article survives on its own merit, then the MT probably should too. Gible Fog 14:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--Stwalkerbot 16:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Stars!BoxCover.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Stars!BoxCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

External link[edit]

IMO By culling them down to Just SAH and Crisium(and still marked as dead!) User:Thingg (an admin) hugely overdid the link trimming, but the anon IP user may have a point. Gible Fog (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there a reason why the external links are still flagged? 69.108.25.133 (talk) 16:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Empire Interactive now Defunct[edit]

The links are bad because the publisher is now defunct. Empire_Interactive According to the Empire article their IP was sold to "New World IP" who has leased the publishing rights to Zoo Games. Zoo Games does not appear to have published the game at this time. Should this be added to the article? --71.182.250.67 (talk) 00:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me; that's information *I* want to know, as it affects serial availability and the possible re-release of Stars! at some later date. 69.108.25.133 (talk) 16:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Stars! IRC Link[edit]

The Wiki rule you linked to says "generally" and is not a hard rule. The stars! IRC and Autohost are the ONLY sources for Stars! anymore. It's been the official IRC for almost 20 years, and is the single best place to find anything related to Stars!. It was on the wiki for over 10 years and attracted many new people looking for information about the game. Can we please get this allowed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.152.2.158 (talkcontribs) November 19, 2014‎

Tough. I am a big Stars! fan, but IRC channels are pretty bad as ilinks; they tend to come and go. We don't usually link to IRC. Regarding Stars! websites disappearing one after another, I'd suggest creating a Stars! wikia. Wikis are much more permanent than Web 1.0 sites. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
The Stars! IRC has been around longer than Wikipedia itself has, and shows no signs of going anywhere. How is that in any way coming and going? 71.227.177.177 (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey, 90.152.2.158... There are currently two links already in External Links. Perhaps you can have the IRC link added to that Stars! FAQ site instead. Linking to a newly created Starts! wiki would run afoul of WP:ELNO #12. The IRC link runs afoul of WP:ELNO #10 (chat sites). I think your best bet is getting a mention on the existing sites already linked. Good luck! Stesmo (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)