Wikipedia!

[erix123]

Something that's been bothering me lately is: Why is there no Wikipedia article for Flash Flash Revolution? Anybody who is knowledgeable about FFR can create one can't they?

[syzergy]

It has been done many many times but im not sure what happens to them.

[l u l l a b y]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flash Flash Revolution
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December 15

Basically, FFR isn't notable enough.

[Nightfirecat]

Even though other related articles are more notable, with fewer people going to them, or the websites they're about.

[Ephraim Desole]

Originally Posted by Deltopia

Normally I'm all in favor of deleting things as non-notable, but at this one I hesitate. It's been active for at least four years now (I think; seems like I've been playing it at least that long) and has a million logins (not users, but whatever). 1400 people are currently playing. (I am just throwing out stats that I see on the site right now.) It does not meet the cited notability threshholds, but perhaps we should consider ignoring all rules?

That's pretty much all you need to read.

[MinaciousGrace]

lmfao wikipedia has rules about notability what the **** that's retarded

[Commandersa1]

Chardish +1

Ashibaka -1

[NFD]

This Ashibaka guy seems like a dick.

[Cyanite]

Originally Posted by MinaciousGrace

lmfao wikipedia has rules about notability what the **** that's retarded

Wikipedia requires that most of the article is built on 3rd party sources rather than directly from what the article is about. The FFR article depended mostly on information directly from FFR, which made it appear non-notable.

[Ephraim Desole]

Originally Posted by NFD

This Ashibaka guy seems like a dick.

Cite sources.

[MinaciousGrace]

well I guess that makes it slightly less retarded but still >__o

[DarkProdigy]

Originally Posted by NFD

This Ashibaka guy seems like a dick.

[NFD]

Originally Posted by Ephraim Desole

Cite sources.

See above. That's us.

[Goldenwind]

I started on FFR, and have much of my beginnings to thank for it.
But now where I play is in the arcade. My friends, also arcade-goers, highly dislike FFR, because of zerged charts (High quantity, low quality), poor score systems, and mediocre sync. For higher-end players, these things make Stepmania vastly superior.

FFR will forever be known as "DDR on keyboard", even to the most basic of novices. I personally don't believe it's big enough to deserve its own page, in the grand scheme of things.

Edit: And FFR has less players than the 1.6mil the front page shows. Many of those are mutliple accounts belonging to one person, or the more common situation, someone who joined and quit, or barely plays at all.

The actual number of players would be significantly lower, I'd think.

[Squeek]

Basically, there was a butthurt guy we banned from the site who constantly started motions to get our wikipedia page removed. Somehow he was always successful.

It doesn't really matter anyway.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by l u l l a b y

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flash Flash Revolution
Wikipediaeletion review/Log/2006 December 15

Basically, FFR isn't notable enough.

It's a little more complicated than that, that's just the supposed reason.

The real thing is that a certain admin over there is permabanned here and he is butthurt, so he is strictly enforcing rules that shouldn't be and bending others to his whim.

Originally Posted by Cyanite

Wikipedia requires that most of the article is built on 3rd party sources rather than directly from what the article is about. The FFR article depended mostly on information directly from FFR, which made it appear non-notable.

Actually, the article was written almost entirely by Moogy in the first place. Any information in it was immediately apparent. For example, to say "FFR is a flash-based rhythm game". Duh. There are some things which were questionable for an encyclopedic article, and those things easily were justified to remove, but an ENTIRE DELETE of the thing wasn't morally justified. They wanted outside sources proving notability and when they were put forward, the thing was deleted anyway due to lack of notability. ****ing ****s.

Originally Posted by Goldenwind

FFR will forever be known as "DDR on keyboard", even to the most basic of novices. I personally don't believe it's big enough to deserve its own page, in the grand scheme of things.

If things like FFR do not deserve articles, then other things such as Stepmania do not either. Aside from derivative works (i.e., ITG), I'd say that FFR is probably more notable than Stepmania. At the very least I can say that more people in the general population will have an idea what FFR is than what SM is.

But that said, Wikipedia is a warground between those who believe information should be inclusive and others who believe it should be exclusive. No matter how valid a piece of information is, there will always be some douchebag out there arguing that the information doesn't deserve to be recorded. It may be clear that I'm the type who thinks information should be inclusive, but I think that's just a load of ****.

[devonin]

I think the "outside source" aspect of the notability problem is that they want us to be linking to -not FFR- as where we are sourcing some/most of our info from.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by devonin

I think the "outside source" aspect of the notability problem is that they want us to be linking to -not FFR- as where we are sourcing some/most of our info from.

If that were the case, the article would require REVISION to address the problems, not get wholly deleted even as the people were trying to address and discuss the supposed problem.

Devonin, if you don't buy the butthurt admin story, talk to Chardish or LD. They might not use the word "butthurt" to describe him, but they'll tell you the very same thing: it's deleted more because of an admin with an axe to grind than due to lack of notability.

[mhss1992]

This notability thing is retarded. It exists, people actually spend hours trying to achieve something in it, I think that should be enough to make an article about it.
Also, I don't think it should be necessary to use information from 3rd party sources, since 3rd party sources also get information directly from the site somehow... Why can't wikipedia become the "first" 3rd party source?

[Ice wolf]

Let's get together a bunch of people who have been at FFR forever to write a bunch of history and facts about FFR and put it on some notable site so we can have a Wikipedia article.