Talk:Star Wars Galaxies
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is not a forum for general discussion of Star Wars Galaxies. Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of the article. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of massively multiplayer online games. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the the assessment scale. | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Star Wars, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. To participate, you can improve this article or visit the project page for more information. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
 Archives |
|---|
Contents |
[edit] Smedley apologizes
In an interview with WarCry, John Smedley says: "With the NGE, I'm sorry about the mistake we made. ... We screwed up and didn't listen to the fans when we should have, and it's not a mistake we're going to make again."[1] Powers T 22:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC) John now that you have apologized, put the game back to what it was when it first came out I guarantee people will come back. Then fire the developers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.109.213.111 (talk) 23:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Major revision
With one edit and absolutely no comments, an anonymous IP completely revised the entire article and introduced jebus knows how many errors and uncited information. I'm not saying the article doesn't need a major revision. It absolutely does. I'm saying let's implement the edits in a non-destructive, intelligent, and collaborative way. There's a lot of good stuff in there and it's very obviously a good faith edit, but the simple fact is that the amount of errors, broken links, uncited new information, and existing cites being completely destroyed (which actually upsets me because it took a long time to find and properly cite all of those sources I added) makes this a disadvantageous edit in my opinion and really pulls a lot of encyclopedic value from the article. This is why I've reverted the edit so all editors can chime in here. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 04:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- Wow. It's difficult to tell quite how extensive the changes were, due to limitations in the Wiki engine's difference generator, but I think changes on that scale should probably be discussed. Now, granted, I didn't do so back in May 2006, but my changes then were less extensive and easier to see in the diff. What I would suggest is informing the IP of the reversion, possibly userfying the IP's version, and encouraging the IP user to offer that version up for discussion here before making the changes. Powers T 18:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NexGen
isnt there a nexgen console version coming soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.46.216 (talk) 04:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lead
The lead needs to be expanded to accurately summarize the article. There is a lot of article, and it is simply not reflected in the lead. - RoyBoy 800 06:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Controversies!?
The player's disappointment in the game is hardly worthy of a title as bold as controversy, a lot of this information is heavily biased and completely unsourced so until someone can come up with reliable sources that prove this information I'm going to remove all unsourced information in the controversy section. This original research might just be what's been holding this article back from "good" or even "featured" article status. 68.219.26.177 (talk) 23:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] lava crystal and developers on TC
Ok here is the thing how can u get a lava crysatl?Also why do only developers(on TC)get to use certain things on the frog?it would be so much fun to be able to use krayt pearls and just get lava crysatls —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.190.45 (talk) 01:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
