Talk:Player (game)
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 7 February 2022. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Player (game) redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find video game sources: "Player" game – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
 | It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Yes, Mike, you wrote this page, but you do not own it. Your game does not belong in such a general article, even if you wrote it mainly as an excuse to link your game. Isomorphic 08:37, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I'm amazed by your audacity.
- Verified facts:
- 1. I wrote this page.
- 2. I linked to Ambition on this page.
- Your conclusion: I wrote this page as an excuse (your words) to link to Ambition, as if I had no other motives.
- Have I linked every page I've written to Ambition? No. Of course not. That would be inappropriate. I've kept well within the bounds of topicality. I could, theoretically, post a link to my game on any page, and then it would get a hell of a lot of hits. I could, theoretically, put " GO HERE! A GREAT CARD GAME!" at the top of September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, knowing that page gets a lot of hits. But I don't, because it would be entirely tasteless, crass, wrong, insulting, and egregious attention-whoring.
- This page is a different story, because the reference is actually useful to the article.
- And no, I didn't write this page as an excuse to link to Ambition. I wrote this page to write the page, and linked to Ambition because I could while staying topical. Mike Church 08:46, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Why does this exist? --Macarion 01:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yah why does this exist? More importantly, however, I am linking sports players to this page as well. Player (game) shoud not just refer to card/board games, but to sports games as well. Can somebody please fix this? --Gregorof 01:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Requested move[edit]
Player (video games) → Player (game) — Article was recently incorrectly moved from Player (game) to Player (gaming), then to Player (video games). Player of a board game may also be called "player", board game topic is covered by the article. Board game is rarely referred to as "gaming" and is not "video game". — Voidvector (talk) 07:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Survey[edit]
- Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''or*'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
Discussion[edit]
- Any additional comments:
Looking at the talk above, this may have been an attempt to disambiguate from a sports "player". However I agree the new name is inappropriate to the article content. Have you discussed this with the editor who renamed the page? It's a shame he didn't leave an explanatory edit summary. --Rogerb67 (talk) 09:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)