Jump to content

Talk:Derek Smart: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)
 
(39 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{oldafdfull| date = 26 July 2010 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Derek Smart }}

{{talk header}}
{{talk header}}
{{reqp}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1=
{{oldafdfull|date= 21 November 2006 |result= '''Keep''' |votepage= Derek Smart
{{WPBiography|living=yes|class=Start|priority=Low|needs-infobox=yes|listas=Smart, Derek|a&e-work-group=yes}}
| date2 = 26 July 2010 (UTC) | result2 = '''Keep''' | page2 = Derek Smart (2nd nomination) }}
{{WikiProject Video games|class=Start|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=Start|listas=Smart, Derek|
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=Low|needs-infobox=yes|a&e-work-group=yes}}
{{WikiProject Video games|class=Start|importance=Mid|Indie=yes}}
{{WikiProject United States}}
}}
}}


{{oldafdfull|date= 2006-11-21 |result= '''Keep''' |votepage= Derek Smart }}


{{archive box|
{{archive box|
Line 16: Line 17:
: [[/Archive5|Archive 5: November - December 2006]]
: [[/Archive5|Archive 5: November - December 2006]]
: [[/Archive6|Archive 6: January 2006 - June 2007]]
: [[/Archive6|Archive 6: January 2006 - June 2007]]
: [[/Archive7|Archive 7: July 2007 - December 2011]]
}}
}}



==Untitled==
==Untitled==
Line 30: Line 31:
*''Article cleanup'': This article is urgently referred to the Wikipedia editing community at large for cleanup, evaluation of sources, and adherence to NPOV.
*''Article cleanup'': This article is urgently referred to the Wikipedia editing community at large for cleanup, evaluation of sources, and adherence to NPOV.
*''BLP policy compliance'': Any user may fully apply the principles and practices of [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]] to [[Derek Smart]]. This may include deletion of the article and its history as well as its talk pages and archives and the project pages and talk pages of this Arbitration proceeding. (Please consult with the Arbitration Committee Clerks before editing or deleting any arbitration pages). [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 00:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
*''BLP policy compliance'': Any user may fully apply the principles and practices of [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons]] to [[Derek Smart]]. This may include deletion of the article and its history as well as its talk pages and archives and the project pages and talk pages of this Arbitration proceeding. (Please consult with the Arbitration Committee Clerks before editing or deleting any arbitration pages). [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 00:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
== Interesting Conflict ==

I look at Bill's talk page and his contributions to Wikipedia demonstrate (in my opinion) a clear and convincing pattern of editing which (almost) ''all'' relates, in one way or another, to Derek Smart. He nearly boasts about having disproven his PhD claim right near to the top of his talk page, and all but a handful of his non-Derek edits have been related to the subject of [[Diploma Mills]]. In ''my'' opinion, this is indeed a ''textbook'' case of conflict of interest, given my conclusion that Bill does, indeed, have some kind of something against Derek, whether he'll admit it or not.

:: You're preaching to the choir because everyone (at least those with a pulse) already knows that Bill has an agenda that goes back almost a decade. [[User:68.153.194.5|68.153.194.5]]

::: I believe that '''Bill Huffman is absolutely biased against Derek Smart''', I have accessed Bill Huffmans' personal website in relation to Derek Smart, as well as seeing his extensive contributions to Derek Smart's wikipedia article. Though others have stated this previously, I must say that I find this rather disturbing. '''Bill Huffmans' long running feud with Derek Smart has lasted over ten years now''', given the nature of his '''consistantly hostile relationship with Derek Smart''', I can only conclude that it is simply unhealthy for him to be still thus involved with Derek Smart.
:::Bill Huffmans' interest in Derek Smart frankly '''borders on an obsession'''. I shall be watching Derek Smarts' article with considerable interest, as I assume other neutral parties are, because it's simply unrealistic to assume that someone who harbours his level of animosity to Derek Smart could possibly be trusted to edit and contribute to his biography in a non-biased way. [[Special:Contributions/81.129.147.220|81.129.147.220]] ([[User talk:81.129.147.220|talk]]) 19:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

::::The purpose of this talk page is to discuss improvments to the [[Derek Smart]] article. It is not to discuss tangential topics. As to your exact accusation, you're really mistaken. I don't have any personal animosity towards Mr. Smart. If what you are alledgeing is that I've put biased information into the article then you are mistaken again and it can easily be proven by looking in the history of the article and noting that I've never edited the article. Thank you for your apparent concern in the integrity of Wikipedia but please try to keep your discussion on topic for this talk page. Your entry above does not appear to be a proper topic for this page, at least not to me. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 20:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

:::::Their is a '''logical inconsistancy with your statement''' in that you claim that my comment is off topic. However if you had not read the preceeding comments then you could not have read mine, though if you had read the preceeding comments then you would have noted that my comment is in response to theirs. I have not stated anything here that is heresay, each point that I have made can be factually verified and it is not my wish to become involved in a debate upon this subject with an alleged internet stalker. [[Special:Contributions/81.157.245.149|81.157.245.149]] ([[User talk:81.157.245.149|talk]]) 11:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

::::::I'll try harder to follow Wikipedia [[WP:DFTT|guidelines]]. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 16:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, I can't deny that Bill's contributions (which is exactly what they are) have (apparently) been limited rigorously to this talk page -- and those comments themselves are just ''sparkling'' fine examples of how (I believe) Wikipedia should be done.

So the conflict (should he, or shouldn't he edit here?) is really ''mine'', and not Bill's. But I have written all this to make this point: I feel there is a clear and present danger of this page turning into an extension of what is apparently a 10+ year conversation between Derek and Bill. Given Bill's excellent behavior, however, I'm willing to AGF that he'll not allow that to happen to the detriment of the 'pedia. Right, Bill? I knew you'd agree. ;)

And having said all that, I'll make the point I originally came here to make, before I started reading the latest round of battle here: isn't the above-mentioned flame war one of the things Derek is ''most'' notable for? If I'm not wrong, it's considered one of the largest and / or well-publicized of the 90's... And, shouldn't that be discussed, say, in the article rather than only here? [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 11:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

:Hi Eaglizard, I was curious about your assertion about my
:<blockquote>editing which (almost) ''all'' relates, in one way or another, to Derek Smart
</blockquote>
:So I counted about 750 total edits on my part. Out of that there were about 250 edits that were related to Derek, according to my eyeball count. I do admit that one third is higher than I expected though. However, that is still not "almost ''all''" and even further from (almost) ''all'' (at least that's my interpretation of a paranthetical almost :-) ). [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 20:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

:: Hi Bill. ;) I see I wasn't quite clear -- to me the diploma mill related edits were lumped in as 'Derek-related', because that's the most cynical view. I realize it might be the opposite; that your interest in Derek stems from his violation of something you consider quite important (ie, his allegedly fake phd). Essentially, I'm just trying to display one person's take on your edit history; it may not represent how others would see it, but I think my opinion wouldn't be controversial (that your edit history could be seen to be largely about Derek, in one way or another). Ofc, I may be hallucinating, too. Doesn't matter, as I said, given your actual input - which I find interesting primarily b/c it shows that the Wikipedia process is fundamentally sound when ppl follow it, imho. [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 08:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

::: I definitely agree that the Wikipedia process is fundamentally sound. I too find it instructive how the process was essentially broken on this article for so long and how quickly the quality of the article stabilized when the Wikipedia processes could be enforced after the ArbCom ruling. There is still room for improvement to this article, IMHO, but this is admittedly an article of only margainal notability and therefore doesn't really garner the level of interest that more important articles would. Another example of an article where the Wikipedia process has been derailed is [[California Miramar University]]. It too demonstrates (at least to me) that the Wikipedia process is fundamentally sound when it can be applied. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 20:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

:There is a ten year history of Derek flame war follies but the Usenet flame war mostly disappeared after 2002. Perhaps we could agree on "(almost) disappeared"? :-) So I would say that the flame war follies really lasted only about 5 years on Usenet. Derek had some flame war activities prior to Usenet and after Usenet. As long as he continues to participate in online forums some remanent of the flame war follies will continue. I think this has again been demonstrated by his participation in this article. I was not a participant in the non-Usenet flame war with the exception of only a few of incidents. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 20:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

::Yet you have spent an undeniably vast amount of time analysing and catalogueing this 'flame war' that you speak of. To the point of publishing it in it's entirety, accepting and posting derogative comments from third parties and publishing their insulting images. Furthermore, Derek Smart (in your 'top ten Derek Smart posts' that you have selected amongst clearly many thousands and published in your website) had stated that you directly threatened him with violence and the Federal Bureau of Investigation were alegedly involved. I do not hence believe you can in all honesty down play your involvement in this. [[Special:Contributions/81.129.147.220|81.129.147.220]] ([[User talk:81.129.147.220|talk]]) 19:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

:::If you're arguing that I should be mentioned in the article then I must disagree. I was really only one of many that were amused by Mr. Smart's antics on Usenet. Mr. Smart's many irrational and unsupported accusations made on Usenet are unfortunately not considered a [[wp:reliable_source]] and therefore cannot be made part of the article. I really don't believe that I'm personally mentioned in any reliable source involving Mr. Smart and so fortunately I personally must be left out of this article. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 20:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

::::Please re-read this topic. It is in relation to a potential conflict of interest, no where does the above comment advise that Bill Huffman should be added to this article for the simple reason that it is not related to the biography of Derek Smart and Bill Huffman is primarily known for his ten year antagonisms directed at Derek Smart. However if a reputable source were to document Bill Huffmans' involvement in this then I would think it would be appropriate for this to be mentioned. Though as it stands this topic is in relation to a conflict of interest, please be aware of the nature of a discussion before posting. [[Special:Contributions/86.161.221.40|86.161.221.40]] ([[User talk:86.161.221.40|talk]]) 13:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

::I can't imagine why it would be that if a reliable source were to mention his stalking efforts and beef with Derek Smart that woudl qualify as making it a legit entry. The only way that I can see that being the case is if it is clearly stated that he is a lifelong stalker of a gaming celebrity. Going back to 1996 from Usenet and then on this Wiki (check the archives!) he has demonstrated a clear pattern of stalking, harrassment and imo libel. To see an example, look at the pages of other famous people (e.g. JFK, actresses etc) who had stalkers, assassinators etc. They were clearly stated as such and for historical purposes. Linking to a potentially libelous (I cannot vouch for the legality of anything on Huffman's website neither can anyone or a court for that matter since he could '''clearly have doctored them''' for his own purposes since they are hosted on his site and not sourced) site put up by a stalker (for all intent and purposes) is not within Wiki BLP guidelines.

::Bill Huffman hangs around this Wiki page in the same way he did on Usenet when Derek Smart was there and in the same way that he used to follow him around the Net and on boards that Smart posted on. Boards where Huffman in fact got banned from. For example [http://www.portalofevil.com/single.php?poeurlid=25810]. So he no longer has an outlet for his activities so he tries to influence the editing of this Wiki page through hypocritical commentary on this talk page.

::And with all this, I don't see any of the regulars here even in the list bit concerned about this pattern.
[[Special:Contributions/68.232.167.135|68.232.167.135]] ([[User talk:68.232.167.135|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 13:32, 24 October 2009 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I appreciate your compliment regarding the characterization of my Wikipedia edits in general.

:I agree that there are plenty of good sources that can be and should be used to better cover the flame war follies, especially during the period that you mention. In my view it should probably be about one short paragraph long in the controversy section. I think there should also be some serious consideration as to how the academic credential controversy might be mentioned but, I would make that a second priority.

:Editor's interest in this article seems to have wanned. There are a number of possible explanations.
:*Derek's exit has made it less interesting.
:*Derek's legal threats
:*Derek's threats to involve Jimbo and get admins busted
:*People feel that the article is fine and have just moved on to more interesting projects.

:The good news in this story though is that you seem like you might be interested in improving the article. If so, I will be happy to assist. What would you like me to do? Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 20:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

:: I suggest the latter. The arbcom case brought a group of new editors to the page. Going through consensus, and discussion, rather than reverting each other got a notable improvement in the article quality in a relatively short period of time. Now things it needs like a freely available photo are beyond the means of many editors. The upcoming projects probably needs a polish. I'll look for any new info on those over the next day or two.[[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] 11:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

:: I prefer to avoid editing articles when they're undergoing a "certain phase" (I don't want to mention that this phase often reminds me of a bacterial infection, but I did it anyways lol). As for what I would like you to do Bill, honestly, I would ''like'' you to do exactly what you've been doing here -- only do it on lots and lots of ''other'' pages. Do what I do: just browse around the 'pedia, reading subjects of interest, correcting tiny typos or crappy writing whenever possible. Check out my contribs if you want to see the sort of diverse page range against which I've compared yours :). As far as this article goes, do whatever you like shall be the whole of the policy... <grin> [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] 08:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

== Current/Future Projects ==

Im making and keeping notes in this section as of now. I'll put a full redraft in a seperate section [[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] 13:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Universal Combat Collectors edition Q3/2007 a package of all the BC and UC series including updates to make them vista compatible [http://www.3000ad.com/products/UCCE_PRODUCT_INFO.PDF]. Went Gold 7/16/2007. Not yet listed on Amazon.

Galactic Command - Echo Squad, Release planned Q3 2007 [http://www.3000ad.com/products/galcomES.shtml]through Gametap subscription [http://www.gametap.com/home/play/gameDetails/129999950]. Went gold 3/19/2007 (note - isnt gold to release usually quicker than this ?) Episodic release discussed 02/06/2007 [http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3156994]. Four monthly episodes of 16 mission long campaigns.

Galatic Command - Talon Elite, Release planned Q1 2008, MSRP $29.95 [http://www.3000ad.com/products/galcomTE.shtml]

Galactic Command — Excalibur. IGN mentions this as a episodic release [http://xbox360.ign.com/objects/883/883479.html]

Hostile Intent - Planetfall (No updates found as yet)

KnightBlade - Line Of Defense. (No updates found as yet)

Per [http://www.allgame.com/cg/agg.dll?p=agg&sql=3:3717] Universal Combat:Hostile Intent (PC) and KnightBlade:Final Flight (XBox) Cancelled.

Hi Catwhoorg, the fourth choice is also my favorite but I feel that the first three could play a small part. Regarding the going gold 3/19/2007 comment, historically the Smart releases have usually had trouble getting out the door due to quality issues but, there are other possibilities for delaying a release. Do you (or anyone else) have an oinion on the idea of adding a few more sentences on the Usenet flame wars? If someone thinks that it might be applicable, I'm willing to put together a draft. Thanks for the update! [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 15:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

::There you go again making unfounded statements about him. Don't you ever quit? Where is the evidence that ''the Smart releases have usually had trouble getting out the door due to quality issues''? You need to once again be reminded that this page is subject to [[WP:BLP]] and the talk pages are part of that guideline. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:68.153.194.5|68.153.194.5]] ([[User talk:68.153.194.5|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/68.153.194.5|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:::I think you could safely categorise the majority of video game releases as being delayed due to quality issues in some sense or other. I'm not saying this negates any [[WP:BLP]] concerns but it's important to keep the above statement in perspective. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|Sheffield&nbsp;Steel]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|talkers]]</sup><sub>[[Special:contributions/SheffieldSteel|stalkers]]</sub> 19:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

:::Hi 68.153.194.5, thank you for your comment and interest in Wikipedia. I would like to request that you sign all posts to talk pages with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). I also suggest that you get a Wikipedia logon account. My statement was really a general comment on the whole software industry and I was considering schedule constraints under the general "quality issue" category. I also suggest that you review the [[WP:AGF]] policy. While reviewing the [[WP:AGF]] policy I believe that it is also relevant to consider the fact that not all statements on talk pages need be backed up by what would be considered to be a Wikipedia [[WP:RS|reliable source]] this is even if the article is a [[WP:BLP]]. Although I suspect if I wanted to I could easily find reliable sources saying that software projects are frequently late because of quality issues. Thanks again, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 22:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

:Apparently the release of Echo Squad is not up to Smart. It is up to the licensees, in this case Turner. I searched Smart's news forum and found a [http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000186;p=1#000020 release statement] about this game. Looks like Turner are holding off on releasing the game for their anniversary. I went to GameTap and apparently another property which they licensed, Sam & Max Season 2 opens at the same time, though that one, unlike Season One, is no longer an exclusive.

:For UCCE, here is [http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=000185;p=2#000045 Smart's statement on his news forum]. From that thread, you won't see it on Amazon if Take2 only have the retail rights with 3000AD, Inc retaining the digital distribution. But I'm not sure if Amazon and other retailers moving boxes qualifies as digital distribution. Probably not, since the latter implies downloading the product.

:I didn't find anything on Smart's website on KnightBlade and Hostile Intent. They're either canceled or too far off to be listed? But it looks like [http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=forum;f=50 Bravo Team is the next one] after Talon Elite.

:[[User:68.153.194.5|68.153.194.5]]

:I tried updating the "Current projects" section back in December, and I found it frustrating due to the lack of hard information. I would get a press release with a title, description and sometimes a pic, along with a release date within some quarter or year. Then I would check a few gaming sites, and sometimes find the game had a page with only the same press release. I'd edit the Wiki page...and then I would never hear about the game again. Then a few months later, Smart would have another new game in the same fashion. I figured they probably retitled the game to make it sound more attractive, but there was never any mention of a connection, or the plot would sound too different. So, after a while, I threw up my hands and gave up.

:So, after a few months off of Wiki, I see this issue has been brought up again. I'd like to propose a set of guidelines for Smart's upcoming releases:

:1) Put up the game only if it's still presently on Smart's website, and there's at least one corroborating piece of evidence - not just a link to the press release on a gaming site such as Gamespot. Right now, Smart only has three upcoming games listed on his website: UCCE, GC:Echo Squad and GC:Talon Elite. All three of these games have associated evidence, as Catwhoorg has provided above. There's a "GC: Bravo Team" development forum on Smart's site, so maybe that should be included as well, if there's another article about it. There's no Planetfall, Knightblade, or Online RPG mentioned, and I can't find anything about any of those games that's less than a year old anyway. Same probably goes for Excalibur, as I don't see it listed on Smart's front page, and the article Catwhoorg points to - really just a two sentence description - is over a year old.

:2) Since release dates slip all the time - I won't go any further, as I don't want our "anon" poster getting all huffy - the date on Wiki should be able to withstand delays. So:
:- If the game's due in six months or less, post the most recent and accurate date you can find.
:- If it's 6-18 months away, post nothing more accurate than a quarter.
:- If it's 18+ months away, post nothing more accurate than the year.

:3) Update accordingly. Perhaps if a game falls from the ranks of the upcoming releases, a "Cancelled/Shelved Games" list should be created. This would help gamers who were looking up Smart on Wiki to find out what happened to Game X that he can't find any info about. Perhaps we could do that already with Planetfall, Knightblade and the online RPG.

:Well, let me know what you think. [[User:Cardinal2|Cardinal2]] 21:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

::Reasonable, pragmatic, and most excellent suggestions, I agree! Thank you, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 01:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

== Should the semi-protect tag be placed in the article? ==

Should something like the following be added to the beginning of the article?
*<nowiki>{{pp-semi-protected|reason=of an [[WP:ArbCom|Arbitration Committee]] ruling}}</nowiki>

Then it would look like this.
Thanks, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 22:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

:It's a pretty ugly thing to add to an article. If we could get by with just a notice in the Talk page, I think that would be better. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|Sheffield&nbsp;Steel]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|talkers]]</sup><sub>[[Special:contributions/SheffieldSteel|stalkers]]</sub> 23:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

::Since I don't believe that the talk page is semi-protected, I would vote against adding it here. I appreciate your point about the ugly factor though. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 23:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

:There definitely needs to be some indication that this article is semi-protected since this ''is'' the "Encyclopedia that anyone can edit". I've placed the small semi-protection icon on the article as I believe that it's the bare minimum that should be there. --[[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] 00:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

::Ohhh, it's sooo cute. :-) Thanks and have fun, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 07:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess the bot removal of the semi-protect template settles the question about adding the template to this talk page. :-D Have fun, Bill

== great article ==

I just read a great article. Not only is the graphic delightful but for some reason (?) I kept thinking about the history of this article as I read it. Which made it all the more delightful. [[Wikipedia:Tendentious_editing]] Have fun, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] 04:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

:I have to say, this whole article is absolutely brilliant. I have no knowledge of Derek Smart, Bill Huffman, the UseNet flame wars or of any of the games released and mentioned. I came across the name Derek Smart whilst perusing Gamespot one day. While the article is good, and helped flesh out the basics of the man himself, the talk page and discussions contained are just wonderful. To see such controversy and vitriol expended over one person almost makes it worthwhile having wasted about 4 hours reading it.
:I can understand the dogged pursuit of this man and his followers, the fun in reading the posts made by anonymous IPs, and users evidenced as likely to be Smart himself, is nearly priceless. But better than this is to see rational people dragged into a flame war on a page dedicated to truthful neutrality.
:So much of what we see online is basic information presentation, whereas this has been a full human drama, with all the cowardly attacks, blatant egotism, and refusal to accept that we see in everyday life. It is Days of Our Lives writ HTTP.
:So congratulations to everyone involved for providing serious entertainment, but also at the end of it, providing a well written and well researched article. This is what I admire about wiki the most, people of differing view points coming together to battle until nothing but decent fact remains. And by god, this was an entertaining battle :) [[Special:Contributions/121.73.78.41|121.73.78.41]] ([[User talk:121.73.78.41|talk]]) 16:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

== reversion of anon material ==

I removed the "However, in many cases this has not worked in his favour, being the subject of further criticism." From after the online controversy

"Derek Smart has become known in the gaming community for making aggressive — and lengthy — online replies to criticism of his work, leading to heated and protracted discussions on Usenet and game forums.[2] In an interview which was featured on the cover page of Computer Gaming World, Smart said of his online persona: "Sometimes when I get online, and it's quiet, and I see something that attracts my attention, I'll post just to piss these guys off. That's why I do it. Because I'm in a good mood that day, I go in there and I start trouble."[48]"

Reasons:
1) weasel words. 'Many cases' is vague and uninformative
2) its an unscourced claim in a biographical piece.

Any disagreement with my actions ? [[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] 12:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

:In the absence of any source saying it has not worked in his favour, I think that was the correct action. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|Sheffield&nbsp;Steel]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:contributions/SheffieldSteel|stalk]]</sub> 12:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

== Gametap deal cancellation ==

There's a source for the cancellation of the Gametap deal, [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/81476-GameTap-Drops-Galactic-Command-Echo-Squad the Escapist.] If Mr. Anon disagrees that the deal was canceled, could he provide a source refuting the one presently in the article? - [[User:Ehheh|Ehheh]] ([[User talk:Ehheh|talk]]) 16:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

: I dunno. From reading the [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17391 original Gamasutra article] (which is what Escapist links to) it appears as if the headline was made up by Gamasutra as nowhere in the article did the VP from GameTap say '''anything''' about it being canceled. I followed the link that the anon poster on Gamasutra pointed to and Derek's explanation seems pretty straightforward and in public view. From what I can gather, Turner had the license, they opted not to release the game for the reasons stated. Seems pretty straightforward to me and I don't see how that can be construed as the title being canceled. Especially when you consider that he apparently has a new version coming out. Companies cancel projects, licenses etc all the time. In this case it appears as if the licensor is 3000AD and the licensee is Turner. e.g. if EA had the license to a WB game/property and then decided that they didn't want to utilize it, how is that a cancelation?

: And where is there an official statement from GameTap saying that it was canceled? Neither Gamasutra nor Escapist nor some guy's blog are reliable sources for this information. GameTap canceled another game, Uru and made a public statement via their PR dept. No such statement was ever made about Derek's game. Which leads me to believe that since GameTap had Uru for a year and didn't renew it, while never releasing Derek's game, the former was in fact canceled (as stated by them). Thats the difference here and I'm not sure why editors here would rather just post what they feel like without excercising due diligence and sticking to Wiki guidelines.

: I think that people are using the term cancelation in a derogatory and curiously inaccurate fashion and as some sort of jab against him.

: I also found [http://www.3000ad.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=50011739 another link] on Smart's forum here he had original posted about the license expiring. That post and the GameTap guy's post on their forum pre-date the Gamasutra article.

: I was going to correct the article but I'm out of town atm and don't have access to my Wiki credentials on my laptop. Can someone make the correction please, as it seems like anon editors can no longer do that. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.240.236.53|66.240.236.53]] ([[User talk:66.240.236.53|talk]]) 13:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:: The claim that Gamasutra is not a reliable source, while entertaining, doesn't seem to be true. They could, of course, be ''wrong''. The remedy for that is to find another reliable source that disagrees with them. [[User:Nandesuka|Nandesuka]] ([[User talk:Nandesuka|talk]]) 14:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

::: I wasn't making a claim that Gamasutra was not a reliable source. My point was that you can't take the word of a reporting site to be factual when the person they are interviewing '''never''' said what they printed. See the difference? Where in that text did the Sanchez fellow say anything about the title being '''canceled'''? As you pointed out, the media can be wrong and they have been wrong on a regular basis. Even the NYT get stories wrong all the time. In the case of Gamasutra, they have quite a number of stories which needed updating. Here is [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17694 one such recent example] I came across while searching for an example for this post. They reported it incorrectly, then added an update later. Obviously someone complained about it. So what I'm saying is that unless Gamasutra saw the contract, was clearly told that the contract was canceled, they can't be regarded as a reliable source '''in this case'''. Do you see any other sites reporting this? All the sites are linking to that same story.

:::Derek Smart is really big news in gaming and if this was in fact true or if there was something going on, Turner would have said something, all the sites would have written about it etc. From all accounts and by what Sanchez (who [http://www.3000ad.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=50011739&view=findpost&p=158653 according to Smart], signed the title) said, Derek finished his contract, the game etc. He even said good things about the game etc. So why else would you cancel a title that, according to Derek, and given the costs of game development, cost a lot of money? AFAIK it cost them a lot of money since it was an exclusive to their service. Derek even mentions the word '''multi-million''' in his blog. Turner just chose not to exercise their license (which they paid for [http://www.3000ad.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=46000002&view=findpost&p=162691 according to Derek's blog] due to (again, according to Sanchez) their own internal reasons and nothing to do with Derek.

::: This is a WP:BLP article and you guys are not upholding that. Instead a notable detractor sets up shop in Smart's Wiki article and you all act like its ok. I'm just saying. [[Special:Contributions/66.240.236.53|66.240.236.53]] ([[User talk:66.240.236.53|talk]]) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|comment]] was added at 12:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::::Mr. Anon, if I understand your position properly, you're saying that the game was not canceled by Gametap but that Gametap decided not to release the game and subsequently the contract expired? Would it be proper, in your view, to say that Gametap canceled their planned release of the game? Or Gametap canceled the deal? If that would still not be proper in your view could you please suggest some wording that you feel might be acceptable? Thanks, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 14:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

:::::What is important to note is that the Anons writing style is identical to that of the self styled supreme cmdr, Derek Smart himself. The bottom line is that the deal was cancelled, Gametap realised that as usual Smart had tried to palm off a substandard game to them and that the best thing to do would be to wash their hands of the matter, rather than spending further money trying to market a unsellaable game. Sanchez (gametaps president)should be nominated for a diplomatic posting as he layed it down very mildly when he said that Smarts product "would not go down well with our audience"! So the deal was cancelled and no amount of word twisting from Smart should be allowed to change this.[[User:Kerr avon|Kerr avon]] ([[User talk:Kerr avon|talk]]) 19:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

::::::It appears to me that the current wording of the Gametap cancelation of the release in the article, what the reliable source says, and what our Anon friend says are all consistent and in agreement. Therefore, our Anon friend needs to be more explicit and specific about what needs to actually be changed in the article, at least in his own view. I can't resist adding that our Anon friend can't be Mr. Smart because Mr. Smart has been banned from editting Wikipedia and to say he was anyone other than who he says he is might not be [[wp:agf|assuming good faith]].[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:3000ad&action=history][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Steel359&page=User%3ABlindMoose][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Dsmart-3000ad][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Newyorkbrad&page=User%3ASupreme+Cmdr][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:70.147.30.254&action=history] [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 02:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC) [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 19:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

== Request from IP ==

Reposted from [[User Talk:SheffieldSteel]]... (note that this has since been edited by [[User:Ho Lee Cow]] <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 16:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC))
{{top|bgcolor="#FFFFE0"}}
Hi, in your recent [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Smart&diff=198776175&oldid=198135635 edit], you removed the Echo Squad product which this company developed for [[GameTap]] because it wasn't 'published'. I'm not sure if it makes any difference as to whether or not it was published, but they did in fact publish the [http://www.3000ad.com/site/gces2/ Second Edition] of the title this past March 7th. Please correct this at your earliest convenience.

Also, removing a title which was developed because it wasn't published is like trying to re-write history or not listing a movie, book or other artistic works because they were un-released or canceled. That does not take away from the fact that the works were in fact created. Perhaps the heading of the section should be changed from 'Published Games' to 'Developed Games'? [[Special:Contributions/207.218.231.211|207.218.231.211]] ([[User talk:207.218.231.211|talk]]) 14:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
:Thank you for the information. I have added this new title to the list at [[Derek_Smart#Published_games]]. I must say that it certainly does make a difference, when compiling a list of published games, whether or not a title has been published. I'm sure you would not want the Derek Smart article to contain inaccuracies, although [[WP:BLP]] applies regardless of anyone's wishes on the subject. As for the suggestion of changing the table to list developed games rather than published titles: I'm not sure that such information would be well suited to a table. The "Game Development" section does already go into considerable detail about unpublished works and I think that that is the best place to treat such matters. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|Sheffield&nbsp;Steel]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:contributions/SheffieldSteel|stalk]]</sub> 17:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
:: btw that game is actually developed and published by 3000AD (like their previous games), not Gamers Gate. They, like Direct2Drive, Digital River etc are just online portals where [http://www.3000ad.com/site/sales_gces/ you can buy the game]. Those distributors also sell all 3000AD games.

::Also, I agree that changing the name of the section won't make much difference.

::: I think it does. So I have made it more general. Just because a game was not released to the public does not mean it wasn't developed. So I have added it to his list of games developed. You can even see commentary and the dev logs from his blog [http://www.3000ad.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=50011739 over here] and [http://www.3000ad.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=32000186 over here]. Actual [http://www.3000ad.com/downloads/gc/gces_dev_vcf.html direct link].[[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])

::As of March 18th, there is also a new game called [http://www.3000ad.com/site/gckb/ Galactic Command Knightblade] not in the current projects section. This according to his [http://www.3000ad.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=50026148 dev blog] and the press release is what Bravo Team was morphed into. So perhaps the current projects section needs to be updated accordingly.

::: I have made the change.[[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])

Also, someone added an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Smart&diff=198135635&oldid=196727286 incorrect quote] in the [[Derek_Smart#Current_projects]]. Thats not what he said. If read post #7 in the second link (which is not even valid in a [[WP:BLP]] article since it is a forum post), this is what he said:

::'''In fact, here's my pledge to you: If you're a space sim fan, can't wait for the demo and you buy the game (Gamers Gate already has it online, Direct2Drive follows later today I think) but think its crap, I'm tits up and talking trash, I'll personally refund your money. And you still get to keep the game (i.e. I won't invalidate your DRM license on the server).'''

He was talking to one single person, that being Hump, the guy he was responding to. The MTV blog (is that link even allowed under [[WP:BLP]]?) also recorded it incorrectly.

[[Special:Contributions/75.125.163.152|75.125.163.152]] ([[User talk:75.125.163.152|talk]]) 00:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
{{bottom}}
Does anyone want to make these edits? One can only speculate as to why the IP does not want to do so themself. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|Sheffield&nbsp;Steel]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:contributions/SheffieldSteel|stalk]]</sub> 18:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

:The MTV link is pretty clear that it's a general offer (and has a follow up quote from Smart confirming it) so I don't see any basis take it out as a factual error. I'll also note that the article is semiprotected, so the IP can't do it himself. - [[User:Ehheh|Ehheh]] ([[User talk:Ehheh|talk]]) 19:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Actually you are wrong. The MTV blog got that quote from a Blues News forum post by Smart. Forum posts AFAIK are not allowed in Wiki. Also note that it was not a general statement at all. He was speaking [http://bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=85844&id=428729&boardid=1&view=threads to one person only]: Hump. The MTV blog is just doing what the media usually goes in cases like this: sensationalizing his comment and taking it completely out of context. The language in his comment was very clear and anyone who reads it will immediately see what I mean. But since people are more focused on taking the Wiki entry sideways, common sense need not apply. Thats just wrong IMO. [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])
::Oh. My duh. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|Sheffield&nbsp;Steel]]</font><sup>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:contributions/SheffieldSteel|stalk]]</sub> 20:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
That's absolutely a general comment, not towards one person. "If you are a space sim fan, and you buy this and hate it, I'll refund your money". That's not directed towards anyone, that's towards all space sim fans. [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 18:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
::: Sorry, but I'm a school teacher and that is not a general comment. Please read it again and in the context. Even the MTV blog interview clarifies this. But I guess you didn't read that either? [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])

== Edit war ==

This [[WP:BLP|biography of a living person]] has been the subject of controversy and edit warring in the past. It is doubly important, then, for the content of the article to be properly sourced and for editors to discuss, and obtain consensus for, changes. In the interests of preventing a revert war, I'm opening a discussion about the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Smart&diff=206883213&oldid=206044722 change] made by [[User:Ho Lee Cow]]. These changes essentially match the requests made by an IP editor on my Talk page (see preceding section) which begs the question: is Ho Lee Cow the same editor?

Several changes were made; I suggest that to make the discussion simpler, they might be considered separately.
*Removal of text: ''On March 19, 2007, 3000AD announced Galactic Command&nbsp;— Bravo Team, an episodic [[First_person_shooter|first-person shooter]] title.<ref name = Turner>{{cite web | url=http://www.3000ad.com/site/news/ |title = Turner licenses 3000AD titles for GameTap|accessdate = 2005-08-05}}</ref> The title is currently scheduled for release in 2009.''
:I can't see any justification of this removal of sourced material. It certainly doesn't seem to be controversial and the source backs up the article text. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 17:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:: That product does not appear anywhere on the website any longer. So the source is invalid. As you stated below, Wiki is not a resume and only should contain sourced material. All products announced and developed by this company are listed [http://www.3000ad.com on their site].[[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])
:::Your exhortations seem to be singularly inconsistent in this area: on the one hand, we should credit 3000AD with developing one game, which has not been published, but on the other hand, we should not mention another game that was announced, because it has since then been... ''de-announced''? Unfortunately for your argument, the title '''is''' still mentioned on 3000AD's news page, in an entry dated 3/19/07. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 20:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

*Renaming of section "Published games" to "Developed and/or published games"
:I don't think it's normal for articles to list every project someone has worked on, even games that have been cancelled. Wikipedia isn't a resumé. (Even if it were, employers in the games industry tend to ask not "what games have you worked on" but "how many shipped titles?") <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 17:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:: You're wrong. This is a [[WP:BLP]] article. Your comment means that if an actor worked on a film, that wasn't released in the theatre or at all, then he gets no credit for the work. Thats wrong and you know it. In the game industry games are announced and canceled all the time. In this case, the game was developed exclusively for GameTap, finished and according to one source, was never released on the service. How exactly do you reconcile that to mean that its inclusion is akin to a resume? By its very nature, [[WP:BLP]] is in fact not only a resume of sorts, but is protected by clear guidelines which I have read before making the change.[[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])
::Likely a sockpuppet. He's a brand new editor, SPA, familiar with our most esoteric policies, removing sourced material, something that has been a historical problem on this article, even to the extent of ArbCom remedies. If he causes trouble, he'll be blocked. (Note both the ban on Smart and his surrogates from editing the article page, indefinitely, as well as the 1 year arbcom ban on Derek Smart, resetting on each violation, currently not set to expire until 2/23/09) [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 18:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Assume good faith please. I was the one who posted on SheffieldSteel's talk because I didn't want to get involved in this crap by doing any edits. When he didn't take action, I took upon myself to register and make the chances myself. Just because I happened to have read everything that has gone on here and I'm trying to abide by the hostility that you gatekeepers tend to extend with a heavy hand means that I'm a sockpuppet? Really? To me, this is just another fine example of why keeping Wiki clean is full time job because most of you editors have developed this God complex whereby adhering to the rules is above you and any outsider who isn't part of your club, gets this sort of treatment. If this keeps up, I will file a formal complaint and open an rfc on this article. Just like others have done in the past. This behavior by you guys is uncalled for and shouldn't be allowed to stand. Now, my edits are being reverted because I didn't wait for consensus? When in fact none of the past edits were reached by any such consensus? Why did you need a consensus to update a page that is clearly inaccurate and which is [[WP:BLP]] protected? [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])

: I also wanted to add that the Second Edition game is published by 3000AD, not Gamers Gate. I did check and source that out before I made the change. Gamers Gate are just one of several sites that sell 3000AD games as you can see [http://www.3000ad.com/site/sales_gces/ here]. Also, there is no cited source which shows Gamers Gate (a portal that sells downloadable games) is the publisher. They are just sales portals like Amazon, Yahoo, Direct2Drive etc where 3000AD games are sold. That change was already reverted without anyone even checking it. The previously cited source was an announcement about the game's availability on the service. See another source [http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/galacticcommandechosquadse here]. UPDATE: I found other sources for this as well. [http://www.3000ad.com/site/reviews_gces/ here], [http://www.gamersgate.com/index.php?page=product&what=view&sku=DD-GCES here] and [http://www.direct2drive.com/5862/product/Buy-Galactic-Command-Echo-Squad-SE-Download here] [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]])

:Ho Lee Cow, by your editing style, you're clearly a surrogate of Derek Smart, and thus under the arbitration remedy, disallowed from editing the article itself. [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 00:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
::: Whatever dude. I am just not going to bother traveling this road with you. As I said before most of you think that you are above the Wiki rules. In this case you are ignoring the Wiki standard of assuming good faith just because you can. Using the surrogate argument with zero proof or evidence is just a way of intimidating myself and other editors who subsequently are banned from editing. I don't see how I could be regarded as a surrogate when all I've done is make meaningful corrections to the article after asking someone (on their talk page) to make them. He didn't. Now when I go and do it, all of a sudden I'm a surrogate? The two of you in particular have a habit (as per the numerous complaints on your talk pages) of this pattern of behavior in the removal of pages, blanking edits, ignoring the pleas of other editors, making baseless accusations etc. Eventually like the other disgraced Wiki editors one day a light will shine on your Wiki activities. Then it will all come to an end and your little world will crumble. [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]]) 19:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
::I would like to note that the Derek Smart surrogate is correct that Echo Squad is published by 3000ad rather than Gamersgate as falsely stated in the [[Derek Smart]] article. Here's a link to Gamersgate that states this. [http://www.gamersgate.com/index.php?page=product&what=view&sku=DD-GCES] (note: I'm not going to edit the article myself.) Thanks, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 00:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:::That's my bad. I cited metacritic; they're obviously more reliable for some things than others. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 00:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:: You cited Metacritic huh? Then why didn't you change it when I [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SheffieldSteel#Derek_Smart_WP:BLP_page pointed it out on your talk page]? Why would you go against the [[WP:BLP]] guidelines and rely on a third party site instead of the developer's site? The answer is that you didn't want to change it because you felt that it was going to bother someone. Thats another intimidating and predatory Wiki tactic. [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]]) 19:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
that's what the point of the remedy is for: discussion on the talk page, and then others will implement it. [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 00:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:This is why I brought the discussion here, rather than making changes myself:- so that other editors could discuss the issues and reach a consensus. Unfortunately that has not happened - which is not to say that it can't, or shouldn't. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 19:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ho Lee Cow, it appears to me that you asked for two things. One of those items was changing the publisher to 3000ad. That one has been done. I assume that the only problem currently outstanding in the article is the meaning of the refund statement made by Derek Smart. The current article content is fully supported by a reliable source. If you feel that the reliable source was incorrect, (which I think is reasonable that you would know this since I agree that you are Derek Smart surrogate) then you need to get the reliable source to correct their statement. On the other hand, if I did allow myself to edit the article, I would probably delete that refund statement based on the Derek Smart surrogate's request. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 20:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:The statement about refunding should stand. Smart is a public and responsible person. As a responsible person anything says, any forum posts he makes under his name should be accountable to him. He clearly stated that he would refund gamers if they are not satisifed with his product. The statement was given wide media coverage. If he did not mean such a statement, then he should have corrected it then and there, not sending his surrogates to correct it now. Smart has a habit of making controversial statements and basking in their glory, but when the truth dawns on him about the seriousness of his statement( I can already see disapoointed purchases scrambling for there refund back, and him looking on in horror!) all he can do is to get a surrogate to try to distort facts.[[User:Kerr avon|Kerr avon]] ([[User talk:Kerr avon|talk]]) 01:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
::The statement is a offer of a general refund. That may or may not be worth including, but based on his past it might actually be worth it. [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 03:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Based on his past track record of critically panned games, and vigorous self defence of the questionable quality of his games by himself, the statement of a general refund should stand. The fact that the statement gathered a massive amount of publicity shows the importance of the statement, and hence its noteworthiness to be included in this article.[[User:Kerr avon|Kerr avon]] ([[User talk:Kerr avon|talk]]) 06:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Some very strong arguments, IMHO, the strongest argument being that if the quote was misinterpreted the proper time to correct it was when it was very first misinterpreted, not now. In any case, it means that Ho Lee Cow needs to get the reliable sources to correct thier statement and then the Wikipedia article can be corrected. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is <b>verifiability, not truth</b>—whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether we think it is true." [[WP:V]] [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 16:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
::::: Though this characterization is not meant to imply anything, I find myself noting that the talk pages of this article are often interesting! I'd like to present my view of the articles in question for consideration. Though the statement by Derek Smart may seem universal "In fact, here's my pledge to you:" that very correspondence did begin personally with the opening "hump,". That said, the contention for me is not in the original statement, but in the press verification, wherein by e-mail to the press, the head of 3000AD responded: “I’m quite certain that there may be other takers. Who knows. But regardless, people know who they’re dealing with, so its not like they’re going to try and pull a fast one. After all, this is Derek Smart we’re talking about :D,”. That seemed to be a statement of confidence that 3000AD can handle the possibility of other takers and was not ruling it out. It would seem then that this e-mail opened the door for other takers even if it wasn't intended to do so. Though I do not mean to imply that Derek Smart can lack finesse in regard to dealing with people, I can see where he could have made an implication to the press that could have been unintentional. However I also offer that if that is so, it must be corrected on a higher level than this wikipedia page, as we can only refer to what's been cited. I would offer that our best course of action is to be wary of a retraction or amendment to the article, and report any if they come. [[Special:Contributions/24.250.4.53|24.250.4.53]] ([[User talk:24.250.4.53|talk]]) 21:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

:I noticed a biased revision by one of the other contentious editors of this Wiki went unchecked for several weeks. I was waiting to see if anyone would have caught that. While I'm sure that you folks did and opted to leave it as-is, I have reverted it because it has no basis in the article. This is what I've been talking about previously in which you folks who think you own and/or have some sort of carte blanche editing rights will just do as you please while blatantly ignoring guideliness. This club you folks have got going in this Wiki is not helping and its only serving to highlight the problems and biases with Wiki editing and which is echoed in various other Wiki pages and commented on in various blogs and media articles. Any editor worth his salt would have noticed that the edit by [[Kerr Avon]], like his previous edits (do a compare and see) is inappropriate and violates NPOV, not to mention all the weazle word implications. [[User:Ho Lee Cow|Ho Lee Cow]] ([[User talk:Ho Lee Cow|talk]]) 13:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

::Ho Lee Cow, being a Derek Smart surrogate you should not have editted the article. Please refrain from future violations of the Arbitration Committee's rulings. Regarding your slanted opinion of Kerr Avon's edits. Here's the sections from the review Kerr Avon's edit referenced.

<blockquote>
::Interface: It was hard to judge this criterion without having to take blood pressure medication. It’s unconscionable today, in the 21st century, to develop any action-orientated video game for the PC that doesn’t have configurable controls. In this title, it’s impossible to change the keybindings for anything. Adding insult to injury, some of the keyboard commands aren’t intuitive. For example, in most titles, the ESC key defaults to bringing up the game menu or a save/exit game function. Not in Galactic Command. In this title, the ESC key is used to issue commands in the tactical interface. Even worse, when using the mouse to fly, the mouse buttons aren’t configurable, either, so you’re stuck with a left mouse button that fires guns (good) a mouse wheel that selects missile type (good) and a right mouse button that switches you out of mouse flying mode and back to keyboard flying mode (bad, since I would want to fire missiles with it). Considering that the number of controls is so great that there are a number of commands requiring the use of ALT and CTRL, it’s no small issue that the keyboard controls aren’t configurable in any way. At least joysticks and gamepads are configurable, but that’s no substitute for hunting and pecking at the keyboard for the other commands.

::There is a further problem that might affect some systems. Portions of the HUD are projected on the cockpit glass. It’s translucent so that you can see through it and not miss out on important details like enemy spacecraft attacking you. The problem is that when you’re flying toward large, bright objects, such as suns or planets, the data tends to get washed out by the brightness, making it difficult to read important information regarding shield strength. It’s possible to adjust the graphics settings to compensate to some extent, but I found it impossible to correct the problem completely.
</blockquote>

<Blockquote>
::Overall: There’s a good game lurking inside of Galactic Command: Echo Squad. Problems with the interface and the steep learning curve conspire to make this title less accessible to a large number of gamers, but if you can get past those problems, then you’ll experience a revitalization of the space combat genre.[http://www.avault.com/?p=2172&page=3]
</blockquote>

::I also think that it is important to note that the overall rating was only 2 out of 5 stars as mentioned in Kerr Avon's edit. Here's the other part of Kerr Avon's summary, "Reviews of the released game were critical of the nonstandard user interface which is not customisable and the steep learning curve." Therefore, Kerr Avon's summary was accurate in my opinion. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 16:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

:::I've rewritten that sentence, taking into account other reviews and trying of course to remain neutral. I've also moved it from the 'in progress' section, since it's been published. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 18:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

::::Good job on rewriting that sentence and moving the sentence. I suggest that the final sentence of the Current projects section, i.e. "Smart has commented that he’d refund gamers who purchased “Galactic Command” ahead of its release and weren’t satisfied with his product." be moved to the new Galatic Command section. Thanks, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 22:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

== Arbitration Enforcement: Ho Lee Cow article banned ==

Under the provisions of remedy 7 of the arbitration case, Ho Lee Cow is banned from editing this article (he may continue to edit the talk page) as a surrogate of Derek Smart. Furthermore, he has been blocked for one week for disruptive editing (removing sourced content to push a POV) on the article after being warned not to. [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 18:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

== USENET all over again ==
{{hat}}

Well, well, this fight still going on? I say, interesting indeed! It is like the good ole' USENET days, only then we had two sides that battled more for their personal amusement than for actual belief in any cause. Here, the sarcasm and eye-twinkling have given way to cheap suits of self-assumed importance and lofty but hollow ideals. (Though I give you, Bill, you play the game well, and I suspect you do derive a certain amount of sardonic amusement from it, eh? *tips hat*) This article is an excellent specimen of the death of Wikipedia as a reliable and tenable project. As a social scientist it has given me much fodder for thought, though. Well, goodbye Wikipedia, it was a great idea but a horrible execution. '''Mikademus''' <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/130.243.247.165|130.243.247.165]] ([[User talk:130.243.247.165|talk]]) 21:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:User Sheffield just deleted this entry from the talk page. This of course is utterly against wikipolocy -in fact, some of the flames here were against (apparently) Mr. Smart deleting from this page- so I reverted. Talk pages are talk pages, not the article. You don't delete things people say on the talk pages. '''Mikademus''' <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/130.243.247.165|130.243.247.165]] ([[User talk:130.243.247.165|talk]]) 12:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::I removed the above post per [[WP:TALK]]:- ''Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). '''Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal'''''. I feel that the situation is quite clear, but I am not going to get into an edit war about it. At this point I would welcome input from any other editor. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 13:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

:::A possible reading between the lines as to what Mikademus was saying is that perhaps a sentence should be added to the "Online Controversy" section mentioning something more about the Usenet flame war. (I do admit though that I'm probably pulling more from my own opinion than really interpretting Mikademus's comment properly.) A sentence that gives the reader a better feel for the length, the entertainment, or number of posts involved. I'll be happy to do a little research and come up with a proposed sentence if anyone is interested? (Since I won't edit the article myself.) Thanks, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 14:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

::::No, you're right and are reading things that I do support from between the lines. There are many things that deserve to be in this article, but I've given up on Wikipedia. It was a magnificent attempt and a spectacular failure. The science-related pages are still worthwhile because the cadre editing them are trained scientists that already agree on principles of publishing and they have a well-defined and near-objective topic, but the more mainstream areas of WP (99%?) suffer from feuding, tribalism and personal opinions, all wielding concepts such as "NPOV", "OR", "relevance", "reliable" etc ad infinitum as their weapons. Often they probably do not know they are destroying WP. So this is USENET again, only less reflecting and ironic.'''Mikademus''' <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/130.243.247.165|130.243.247.165]] ([[User talk:130.243.247.165|talk]]) 15:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::::It seems from the above that you really do not want to discuss improving this article, so much as what you believe is wrong with Wikipedia. Perhaps you should instead post at the [[Wikipedia:Village pump]]? <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 15:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

:::::Mikademus, I agree that this article has extra challenges associated with it, specifically a lack of [[wp:verifiable|verifiable]] [[wp:reliable sources|reliable sources]], [[wp:BLP]] concerns, and a [[wp:tendentious editors|tendentious editor]]. In my mind this could be looked at as adding to the fun in improving the article. For example, I think the article does a fine job of describing the Freespace incident. In my view the Freespace incident is really not much more than a footnote in the complete Flame War Follies. Perhaps you could be enticed into making some of the improvements that you're thinking of? I would be more than happy to help. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 18:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

[[WP:DFTT|Remember not to feed the trolls]][[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:DC|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 19:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
{{hab}}

== Give credit where credit is... uhmmm... due? ==

Hi, this is my very first contribution to Wikipedia. There is a 'Derek Smart' in credits of a video game "Serious Sam: First Encounter", under 'special thanks'; start the credits by quitting.
greendestiny [[Special:Contributions/94.250.18.104|94.250.18.104]] ([[User talk:94.250.18.104|talk]]) 11:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks for finding this information. While I'm sure it's true, indeed I seem to remember it myself, receiving "special thanks" in video game credits may or may not mean a lot, and it cannot safely be interpreted to mean anything in particular. This is one of the reasons why Wikipedia prefers secondary sources (such as reviews and news articles) to primary sources (such as game credits) - a secondary source provides much-needed ''interpretation'' of the material in the primary source. More info about primary, secondary and tertiary sources is at [[WP:PSTS]]. <font color="006622">[[User:SheffieldSteel|S<small>HEFFIELD</small>S<small>TEEL</small>]]</font><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:SheffieldSteel|TALK]]</b></small></sup> 14:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

== Wording suggestion ==

Under the "Upcoming" header in the main site, there is as of the time of this posting, the phrase:

"On 2008-11-6, 3000AD today announced a new game, All Aspect Warfare". Removing the word 'today' from this entry would seem ideal. [[Special:Contributions/24.250.4.53|24.250.4.53]] ([[User talk:24.250.4.53|talk]]) 02:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Figured I'd post again, under the 'FreeSpace licensing' header, the line "In a recent All Games Radio interview, Smart stated..." It might be better worded as "In an interview", "In a 2007 interview" or "In an October 2007 interview...". All would be factually correct, but for the sake of precision I would choose the last of those options. Either way, with 'recent' being a relative term, it might be best to remove it from an article.

Also, as to citations, beneath that same header, there is this statement:
"The rumors of Smart's involvement started when he posed the question, "Would you buy Freespace 3 if I made it?" on the Adrenaline Vault forums. In the next paragraph, though, Smart clarified his supposition stating that he was only "seriously considering" licensing the FreeSpace engine."

While this might assuredly be true, I observe two potential problems. Firstly the way in which he was quoted has us reading the phrase 'only seriously' which seems to be a contradictory statement. This could be merely important to revise, in my uninitiated experienced opinion. Secondly, the quote is not from the citation given. In fact, there is an extremely slightly significant difference between the quoted phrase and the provided citation, which notes Derek Smart as saying "I have FULL intentions of getting this license." (for sake of note, emphasis was not added by me). Therefore the citation might need some revision, or at least clarification. Perhaps by stating something to the effect that that Derek Smart was once quoted as having had full intentions to get the license for the FreeSpace franchise, but that ultimately he ended up pursuing the Galactic Command franchise. [[Special:Contributions/24.250.4.53|24.250.4.53]] ([[User talk:24.250.4.53|talk]]) 15:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

== Article on Derek Smart ==

Here's an article on Derek Smart that might have some content that could be used to enhance the article. If nothing else it could provide another reference for some content already in the article. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/op-ed/862-The-End-of-the-Industry-Will-Be-Televised The End of the Industry Will Be Televised] Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 01:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

:I'm not sure that a hardcore detractor of this Smart fellow should even be allowed to edit the article nor offer suggestions for what should and shouldn't be included in the Wiki. There are stringent rules in WP:BLP which prohibit the entering of material such as the one you are suggesting. Apart from the fact that it bears no relevance to his biography, it is an opinion piece by a gaming 'tabloid'. Please refer to this excerpt from WP:BLP '''Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm".''' <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:66.240.236.53|66.240.236.53]] ([[User talk:66.240.236.53|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/66.240.236.53|contribs]]) 13:43, 2 March 2008</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


Hmm, I remember a while ago that the infamous coke machine incident couldn't be included for lack of a source. It this GameSpy article sufficient to mention it as, if nothing else, part of the myth surrounding the Derek Smart character? [http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/june03/dumbestmoments/readers/index2.shtml] [[User:Miqademus|Miqademus]] ([[User talk:Miqademus|talk]]) 18:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

: The original publication that first inaccurately reported the issue, retracted it. Both are linked to in the Wiki and thus do not fall within the WP:BLP guidelines. Wiki is not a tabloid.<small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:66.240.236.53|66.240.236.53]] ([[User talk:66.240.236.53|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/66.240.236.53|contribs]]) 13:43, 2 March 2008</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

In my opinion that would be a reasonable source to use as a way to add the tidbit to the article. If it was included I would suggest that it be mentioned directly in the article that Derek denies that the incident occured. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 20:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

: No it is not a reasonable source and there is no basis for its entry. We might as well stick a camera outside his home and when he stumbles and stubs his toe, come and post an entry about it here.<small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:66.240.236.53|66.240.236.53]] ([[User talk:66.240.236.53|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/66.240.236.53|contribs]]) 13:43, 2 March 2008</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

I have to add that inappropriate suggestions and edits like this are the primary reason that Wiki is under such attack and assault. This Smart page I see has once again been protected for the same reasons as always. There are those who want to taint it and turn it into a tabloid. Then there are those who want to keep it flatering while ignoring NPOV guidelines.<small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:66.240.236.53|66.240.236.53]] ([[User talk:66.240.236.53|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/66.240.236.53|contribs]]) 13:43, 2 March 2008</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

---

The chronology of the debate in this section is seriously messed up, and the confusion is further added to by the numerous anonymous edits breaking up comments and linearity. Also, they seem obviously tendentious. Anyway, a biography can --and should-- certainly discuss not only hard, material facts about a person, but also that which surrounds a person. Ever read a cold, statistical biography? You want your such a biography written about you? Derek Smart's antagonism is his very --and entire-- fame. And, true or not, the coke machine incident is one of the most famous legends about him. The incident's materially truth is not relevant, and the legend's existence is factually undeniable. It is an archetypal example something biographically highly interesting. The only possible BLP problem with documenting it would be as positing as empirical truth without significant sources backing it up. Documenting it as part of the Derek Smart legend is not only justified but required. [[User:Miqademus|Miqademus]] ([[User talk:Miqademus|talk]]) 22:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Anon please remember to sign your entries. It is very confusing what you said as opposed to what others said when you ignore the guideline regarding signatures. You also still continue to make entries to the talk page without putting in the dates so that the conversation can be followed. You also continue to place your entries in the middle of old conversations instead of the bottom. Please read [[Wikipedia:Signatures]]. thank you, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 00:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

:Miqademus, I definitely agree with you. Anon, I do not edit the article itself in order to avoid any appearance of even the possibility of a conflict of interest. The ruling by the Arbitration Committee was that there was no problem with my contributions here on this talk page. I will never edit the Derek Smart article itself nor any other article associated with Mr. Smart like his game articles, for example. My contributions to Wikipedia are publically available and so you may verify that yourself, if you wish. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 00:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikibumped this discussion by moving it to the bottom. Anyway, are there any other sources for material to add to a "Legends surrounding the character of Derek Smart" section? [[User:Miqademus|Miqademus]] ([[User talk:Miqademus|talk]]) 12:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

:Beating up a coke machine (denied by Mr. Smart) is a very famous story. Perhaps the most famous bit of lore about Mr. Smart is beating up the coke machine and it should be added to the article (IMHO) with the obligatory statement that Mr. Smart denies the story. Here's some sources for the coke machine story. [http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/june03/dumbestmoments/readers/index2.shtml] [http://www.joystiq.com/2008/02/14/gametap-severs-ties-with-derek-smarts-galactic-command/][http://www.corpnews.com/news/fullnews.cgi?newsid1090168090,86399,][http://fatmatrix.com/gametap-severs-ties-with-derek-smarts-galactic-command.html][http://www.capsu.org/bc3k/2.html] There is more that could be added but IMHO the current greatest bit of lore missing is the Coke Machine incident. Which should be fairly simple to remedy. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 06:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Some mention of the extent and timespan of The Great Flamewar (the Usenet flamewar) should probably also be mentioned, since it was perhaps the longest running and most encompassing one known. Do we have any sources for this? [[User:Miqademus|Miqademus]] ([[User talk:Miqademus|talk]]) 14:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree - first I ever heard of Derek Smart or Battlecruiser was because of my interest in other strategic type games back on the usenet in 97 or so. The flamewar that ranged there - and followed Derek wherever he went to other forums - was and is probably remembered by an entire generation of gamers as being the longest running flamewar in history. The only one that I can recall that even came close was on one of the alt.metapsyche (or something like that) groups that was between the groups creator and a very dedicated bunch of 'detractors' who didn't like his thought policing (that flamewar lasted maybe 4 years, but had less than thirty major contributors. Where it really differed from Smart's flamewar was that real-life confrontations took place off of usenet, and restraining orders were issued, IIRC. There was only one 'legal' incident in the BCK wars, when LouisJM got Derek to send him a copy of the game gratis, and then they ran into each other at a local parking lot. Derek then made claims that Bill Huffman had 'sent' LouisJM to stalk Derek, which was extremely unlikely, as evidenced from posts and emails that were later revealed, and from the complete lack of police response besides Derek filling out a report).

There are, I believe, several sources that refer to Derek as a 'usenet' personality. I think this needs to be included, if someone can dig this up. Certainly it can be argued that he has more 'fame' in the gaming community from usenet and his vocal forum battles (and from his frequent disputes with publishers) than he ever got from his games, which, while ambitious in scope, never made much of a splash in the industry and usually ended up in bargain bins or sold as 'value' titles.[[User:Jadopt1999|Jadopt1999]] ([[User talk:Jadopt1999|talk]]) 14:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Jadopt

Found this - http://www.dmoz.org/Games/Video_Games/Action/Space_Combat/Battlecruiser_Series/desc.html
Do you folks think this is sufficient to cite the controversial flame war? The page has a total 'semi-complete' feel to it - it's akin to putting an article up on someone like Gary Hart, but leaving out the controversy surrounding him and Donna Rice. Derek's 'fame' stems mostly from his notoriety as an 'internet personality.' <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jadopt1999|Jadopt1999]] ([[User talk:Jadopt1999|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jadopt1999|contribs]]) 15:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Information ==

Hi guys, just doing the cruise through, this page is a bit of a shambles. I had a quick flick through the talk page archives and see you have had plenty of troubles already with edit wars/puppets etc. BUT! This page is pretty underdeveloped. Perhaps adding in some information that is not critical or contentious? Such as -

Birthday / Place of birth / Single or Married / City of residence / Picture / Education Background / Timeline of published games / Developers & Publishers worked with etc.

Seems like a lot of this information has been on the article in the past but has been removed during various wars. Arguably he is not a heavy hitter in the industry (as compared to a John Carmack or Sid Meier), but with several titles released, its worth having a little bit of biographical information.

I am not a confident editor, so I will leave it to those more proficient than I. Cheers for all your hard work, and an interesting talk page read :) [[Special:Contributions/203.211.71.18|203.211.71.18]] ([[User talk:203.211.71.18|talk]]) 00:54, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

== Ph.D ==

Per the very long discussion, most recently in archive 6, I removed the Ph.D after his name.(so a partialy revert of the prior editor)

Two reasons:
1) it is unreferenced via a reliable source in a Biography of a lving person
2) it doesn't belong in the header. With a reliable source it could be added later in the article. Most people on wikipedia with Ph.Ds do not have that title added after thier name in the article lead
[[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] ([[User talk:Catwhoorg|talk]]) 12:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

==AWARDS==

On the 3000AD homepage http://www.3000ad.com/ there is a claim "3000AD are the developers of such award-winning titles as the Battlecruiser, Universal Combat and Galactic Command series" Surely as they have won awards these should be mentioned in this article - so what awards did they win? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/122.107.65.67|122.107.65.67]] ([[User talk:122.107.65.67|talk]]) 04:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I think that info would be considered unduly self-serving as self published information. Mr. Smart, in general, could be considered to be unduly self-serving and so one must be extra careful to make sure that such claims by him have other sources before they can be included in the article. These titles only had generally mediocre reviews. I can't think of '''any''' real awards that these titles actually won. There was only the obviously bogus TRON award given to the horribly incomplete first release of BC3000ad. This was a very silly award by an unknown organization, ACAS, that appeared to be a thin facade for Derek Smart himself. It appeared out of nowhere, gave a game that no one could play because of bugs (and no description of key commands) an "academy award" for advanced AI (IIRC), and then in a few months disappeared with it's website being given to BC3000ad as an additional gift. This additional gift was announced only after it was noticed by someone that they had the same IP address, IIRC.[http://www.werewolves.org/~follies/archives/1History/1Pre1997/ACAS.txt][http://www.werewolves.org/~follies/archives/1History/1Pre1997/ACAS2.txt][http://www.werewolves.org/~follies/archives/1History/1Pre1997/ACAS3.txt][http://www.werewolves.org/~follies/archives/1History/1Pre1997/ACASmoreEvidenceOfBS.txt] Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 15:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


== Expanded Lede ==
The expanded lede "and is as well known for his online presence as he is for the games that he makes." uses [http://listing-index.ebay.com/games/Derek_Smart.html Ebay] as a citation, which I do not believe is a reliable source. Unless I'm missing something, that citation should be removed. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 20:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== POV? ==

Firstly, let me just say I've never heard of this person before reading this article. However, my immediate impression on reading it is that it possibly does not conform to [[WP:NPOV]] policy. This person is presumably most notable as a computer game designer; however, by far the most detailed part of the article is the 'controversy' section (which is always a bad sign). This article includes claims such as 'Smart is renowned for lengthy and aggressive online responses to perceived criticism and is as well known for his online presence as he is for the games that he makes.', with sources such as an eBay biography and a comedy article (The Daily Victim). These sources simply aren't good enough to justify the negative tone. Perhaps better sources can be found; alternatively, this article should be rewritten to reduce the amount of 'controversy'. [[User:Robofish|Robofish]] ([[User talk:Robofish|talk]]) 01:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

:I checked the article, and your exact reading may be slightly off, or I could be misconstruing your statement. If you're saying that exact sentence you quoted is sourced by E-bay and The Daily Victim, I believe it is sourced by E-bay and Computer Gaming World. Though it should be said that, as we are all slaves to reliable sources, the [http://listing-index.ebay.com/games/Derek_Smart.html E-bay] citation should be removed to my view, source checking makes me question whether it is editor POV, or the view of reliable sources, that lends its weight to the wording of the article. For the editors consideration, I offer [http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/16103 this citation] which is entitled "Why I love Derek Smart". As I read it, the title is not ironic or satirical. However, it says this in the body of the article: "He does not shy away from controversy; indeed, he usually either invites it or spawns it."

:Whether Gamers with Jobs is a superior source to The Daily Victim, I'm not trying to weigh in on. But, if The Daily Victim alone is not an ideal source, this might provide stronger backing to the wording of the article. That's all I had time to check in on, however, I too would welcome a removal of the E-bay citation. Computer Gaming World I have no particular qualms with, but if I could boldly remove E-bay as a citation, I would. Therefore I invite a wikipedian with an account to do so if they are so inclined. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 17:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, based on things I have read at various gaming sites over the past few years, I would say this individual has more notoriety as an 'online personality' than he does as a game designer. I think his 'contributions' to the gaming world are overshadowed by his 'contributions' to online flamewars. The article has gone through a lot of revisions, and this one seems to be the most 'stable' so far. [[User:Jadopt1999|Jadopt1999]] ([[User talk:Jadopt1999|talk]]) 17:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)jadopt aug 25 2009
:I agree completely; if Derek didn't have a <s>big</s>''huge'' mouth on him, nobody would ever have noticed his near-vaporous gaming company. He has essentially released one game (with version updates). His fame rests solely on his own rather extensive efforts at self-aggrandisement and their <s>sometimes</s> often comical results. Imho. [[User:Eaglizard|Eaglizard]] ([[User talk:Eaglizard|talk]]) 21:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
::True, the reason he has been able to release the same game so many times is that it is in fact so little known that it's not really known that it essentially is the same game, just with updated graphics and some new features added on. The game is a ho-hum so what, never making any splash (except being a notable huge mistake in the first release). Almost all notability is the conflict that seems to follow Mr. Smart where ever he goes. Even here on Wikipedia! [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Derek_Smart#Log_of_blocks_and_bans] [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 23:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
:::Given your history with him, you are in no position to make any sort of commentary about this person, are you? What exactly is the basis of your commentary above? None. How is someone releasing games in a series different from what any other game company (e.g. EA, Ubisoft etc) does and continues to do? Everything you continue to post here is exactly the same thing you used to post on Usenet and on message boards. It is irrelevant if he releases the same game a million times, that has noting to do with anything apart from the fact that he has released fourteen games over a twenty year period. Games which obviously people are buying and playing thus keeping him in business - a business where so many have come and gone since his first game. [[Special:Contributions/68.232.167.135|68.232.167.135]] ([[User talk:68.232.167.135|talk]])
Let the truth be told. Not everything on wiki is... [[Special:Contributions/81.152.108.101|81.152.108.101]] ([[User talk:81.152.108.101|talk]]) 00:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

== Another source? ==

[http://news.bigdownload.com/2008/08/26/independent-minds-of-critics-and-developers/ A bigdownload.com article] also appears to identify game developers with "fragile, albeit large, egos and can't stand anyone not loving their baby." as having "Derek Smart Syndrome", which uses [http://www.werewolves.org/~follies/ this site] as a link. Though the site it sends you to in the article, flamewar follies, has broken links, regardless the bigdownload.com piece seems to strengthen the case of Derek Smart's notability as a vitriolic game developer. Thus making a point for the neutrality of reporting Derek Smart as such. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 04:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
:: No it doesn't. If that were the case, why don't you go over to the Wiki pages for the other people mentioned and edit them? Opinion pieces do not fall within the Wiki BLP guidelines.[[Special:Contributions/68.232.167.135|68.232.167.135]] ([[User talk:68.232.167.135|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 13:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Semiprotection review ==
* 17:05, 23 February 2008 Swatjester protected Derek Smart ‎ (Semi-protection: Vandalism, sustained vandalism by Derek Smart and his surrogates, per ArbCom. .undefined [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

The arbitration case in question was [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Derek Smart]] and the notice is still at the top of this talk page.

As over 18 months have now passed, and it's two-and-a-half years since the arbitration case, I'd like to review to see if this semiprotection is still necessary. As well as welcoming the opinions of regular editors I have contacted [[User talk:Swatjester|Swatjester]], the protecting admin. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] 07:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

::Unlike recent semiprotection reviews, I think this is a case where it is better not to unprotect. Smart has shown himself in the past to violate the arbcom rulings, skirt around through proxies and surrogates, and generally screw with this page and its related entities (such as the pages for his games). [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]][[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:DC|<small><sup>Son of the Defender</sup></small>]] 15:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

::I agree with Swatjester. History of this and related pages, I believe, have proven that a very deteremined [[Wikipedia:Tendentious editing|tendentious editor]] can hamper the Wikipedia editting process to the point of making it ineffective. An important part of the Wikipedia editting process is semiprotection which protects Wikipedia from these kind of abuses that are part of the editting history of this article. If the semiprotection were removed, I believe that the same [[Wikipedia:Tendentious editing|tendentious editor]] is still waiting in the wings and eventually could (likely would) revisit those same abuses on the editting process. Regards, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 15:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

::I, too, agree with maintaining semi-protection. Let's be honest, what are the odds of an IP editor coming in here with information to edit into the article anyway? Don't misunderstand the jovial jab, though! I do completely agree with semi-protection, and though I've been visiting the page for a while because the subject material can be considered interesting, I also know that I'm more than capable of weighing in here on the talk page without causing damage to an arbitration committee remedy. Therefore, I am quite content to do so. I feel that with an article subject such as this, involving a significantly less well known but still notable person, the stability and integrity of the article should be protected over ease of editing. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 23:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

:: I think the semi-protection should remain for now. Isn't there some change coming down the pipe about biographies and 'approving' changes. Getting this page under that system would allow the semi-protection to be lifted. [[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] ([[User talk:Catwhoorg|talk]]) 13:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

::: I agree. Apart from the fact that the page is in fact poorly (as someone already pointed out, the online controversy is more prominent than anything else on the page) written, it should remain protected.

::: btw, the link to his website is broken. It should be 3000ad.com. Also, he has released fourteen games to date - and that too needs to be corrected. There is a list over here [http://www.3000ad.com/games/]. And he recently announced his new game, an MMO over here [http://galactic-command.com]

::: Also, there are many industry articles on Derek Smart which could be made a part of the page. But nobody wants to bother with those because they are busy looking for negative material, all of which fail NPOV. Here are some recent ones. [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/18/all-aspects-the-derek-smart-aaw-interview/], [http://www.armchairempire.com/Interviews/derek-smart.htm], [http://www.tremblinghand.net/2009/01/derek-smart-is-ok.html], [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=12256] [[Special:Contributions/68.232.167.135|68.232.167.135]] ([[User talk:68.232.167.135|talk]])

== Update needed in article ==

I think that the following news item is worthy of note in the article. That is that Derek Smart has been put in charge of Quest Online the company building [[Alganon]].

*http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/272349
*http://www.massively.com/2010/03/10/david-allen-leaves-alganon/
*http://qol.com/companyAbout.php

I also find it interesting that the QOL profile for Derek makes the unsupportable assertion that Derek has a Ph.D.. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 17:14, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

:I learnt about this over the weekend. A simple change to the lead would be something like:

:Derek K. Smart is the president and lead developer of 3000AD, Inc., a video game developer based in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. In addition he is president of Quest Online involved in the MMO [[Alganon]].[1] He is an independent video game designer and software developer, and the creator of the Battlecruiser 3000AD and Universal Combat video game series. A self-described "eccentric and vocal personality",[2] Smart is renowned for lengthy and aggressive online responses to perceived criticism and is as well known for his online presence as he is for the games that he makes.[3]

:With [1] being the QOL reference above, and [2][3] being the existing two references in the paragraph. Alganon would be wikilinked. (which incidentally is a page that needs some tlc if anyone has time)
:How does that look to people ?
:[[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] ([[User talk:Catwhoorg|talk]]) 12:41, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::It looks perfect to me. Thank you, [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 15:08, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:::Looks good from here [[User:Jackyo123|Jackyo123]] ([[User talk:Jackyo123|talk]]) 17:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)jackyo123

== Strong disagreement with a recent edit ==

I would revert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Smart&action=historysubmit&diff=350434863&oldid=350228987] this edit if I could. I say this because I feel such controversial wording in the body of the article is not necessary. I would recommend a less combative focus in regard to quoting this source. For instance, the quoted claim that the Derek Smart flame wars were the most well documented sport on the internet, while entertaining reading, can only be attributed to the opinion of the columnist and not to other sources. As such, quoting it verbatim might be considered irresponsible. A better quote from that source if it is reliable (let it be known I didn't check) might be "Over time, his reputation as an online defender of his games and unabashed pistol-whipper of his enemies overshadows the games themselves."

This is my proposed new edit, I removed reference to "The Great Flame War" as there was no reference that it came to be known by that title, I'd have no objection to re-entering it upon proper sourcing:

The long-standing exchange between Derek Smart and others on usenet became noted in publication. Gaming Magazine Columnist Julian Murdoch once wrote[http://www.cgonline.com/computer-games-magazine/article/the_people_vs_derek_smart/]"Over time, his reputation as an online defender of his games and unabashed pistol-whipper of his enemies overshadows the games themselves."

I believe this may be a better starting point towards finding an ideal integration of this source into the page. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 08:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


== Recognition date error ==
:I think that I agree with our anon friend. Anyway, here's my specific suggestion. First the current text is:
**The 'Great Flamewar', as it came to be known, was written about in both print and on various gaming forums: "...the Derek Smart flame wars become one of the most highly documented sports on the Internet. Smart, naked and unclothed, playing nobody but himself, enters into heated battles with mostly anonymous detractors. Bizarre accusations and urban legends about Smart’s online and offline behavior are updated daily. He beat up a Coke machine. He called the police on stalkers. He had the phone company tracing phone calls. He faked his Ph.D. He forged e-mails to make himself look like the victim."<-ref->{{cite web|url=http://www.cgonline.com/computer-games-magazine/article/the_people_vs_derek_smart/<-/ref->


"Smart has worked with various publishers over the years, including industry powerhouse Take 2 Interactive, which released his first game Battlecruiser 3000AD in 2006 and which was listed in their SEC filing when they went public in 1997." I'm pretty sure the 2006 should actually by 1996. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.101.55.160|83.101.55.160]] ([[User talk:83.101.55.160|talk]]) 23:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:to this
**The long lasting Derek Smart flame war was written about in Computer Games Magazine by Julian Murdoch, "Over time, his reputation as an online defender of his games and unabashed pistol-whipper of his enemies overshadows the games themselves."<-ref name=cgm->[http://www.cgonline.com/computer-games-magazine/article/the_people_vs_derek_smart/ The People vs. Derek Smart], by Julian Murdoch, [[Computer Games Magazine]], issue #196<-/ref-> The Computer Games Magazine article went on to describe the flame war in more detail, "...the Derek Smart flame wars become one of the most highly documented sports on the Internet. Smart, naked and unclothed, playing nobody but himself, enters into heated battles with mostly anonymous detractors. Bizarre accusations and urban legends about Smart’s online and offline behavior are updated daily. He beat up a Coke machine. He called the police on stalkers. He had the phone company tracing phone calls. He faked his Ph.D. He forged e-mails to make himself look like the victim."<-ref name=cgm/->
:[[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 05:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


:Fixed [[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] ([[User talk:Catwhoorg|talk]]) 18:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
::Hmm, I invite you to consider this instead, directly following "...went on to describe the the flame war in more detail",


== New section ==
::"Bizarre accusations and urban legends about Smart’s online and offline behavior are updated daily. He beat up a Coke machine. He called the police on stalkers. He had the phone company tracing phone calls. He faked his Ph.D. He forged e-mails to make himself look like the victim."
*{{tlx|Edit fully-protected|Talk:Derek Smart/Archive1}}
The person who blanked the page is not active. I'm not sure which of [[wmf:Staff and contractors|the many Wikimedia Foundation employees]] are responsible for inquires regarding this "official office act" but it should be updated. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:The free ad database|The free ad database]] ([[User talk:The free ad database|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/The free ad database|contribs]]) 03:43, 17 January 2016</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:Using a brand new account to generate wikidrama is a very poor idea. In the extremely unlikely event that you are a good-faith user who miraculously noticed the history of a talk page archive, I suggest that you forget about it and work on contributing to other articles. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 04:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
::{{reply to|Johnuniq}} It says it's [[WP:OFFICELIST|"Currently under scrutiny"]]. Now I see [[User:Mdennis (WMF)]] is listed as a contact above, so could you please fix the template so it can be put back in the queue? <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:The free ad database|The free ad database]] ([[User talk:The free ad database|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/The free ad database|contribs]]) 16:33, 17 January 2016</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:::You don't seem to be getting the message. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and contributors who assist build content are welcome. People who use the site for drama or poking someone will be indefinitely blocked. There is no conceivable explanation why a brand new account with a dozen minor edits would be interested in an archive of a talk page that has not changed in over two years except if they were trying to inflame a settled dispute. That's not going to happen. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 21:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
::::Why was it blanked in the first place? [[Special:Contributions/2606:A000:6959:9C00:E414:E5BF:595B:76E8|2606:A000:6959:9C00:E414:E5BF:595B:76E8]] ([[User talk:2606:A000:6959:9C00:E414:E5BF:595B:76E8|talk]]) 10:42, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
::It cuts out the first two sentences of your final quote, however I feel that the more sensational comments can be avoided while still offering an informative quote. I realize of course that he wasn't actually accusing Derek Smart of nudity or that flame warring was a legitimate sport, but considering the nature of the article, being a bit more reserved with the quotes we use would, in my opinion, be preferable. I'd also like to remove the 'Derek Smart' qualifier from the flame war in the first sentence if it can't be sourced. My contention isn't that he wasn't in the flame war, or that he wasn't a central figure of it. My concern is only that reliable sources call it "The Derek Smart Flame War" or some wording that would imply he was indeed central to the experience. Otherwise, simply mentioning that it was a protracted, heated exchange (I use that term only because 'flame war' doesn't sound like it's common usage enough to be understood by everyone, but I'm not suggesting my wording for the article simply because I cannot say if 'flame war' is actually more easily understood than I'm assuming) should be enough for it to be clearly understood. Comments? [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 08:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
:::Funny, I independently came to a similar conclusion, and picked out the same "his reputation..." quote. However I don't think the details of the flames/rumours/whatever should be included. Isn't there more info about the games themselves?? [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] <sup>[[user talk:rd232|talk]]</sup> 13:21, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


I have just added archive links to {{plural:2|one external link|2 external links}} on [[Derek Smart]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=700444234 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
:::This is an article about Derek Smart. There are other Wikipedia articles about Derek Smart's games. I think that a few more sentences on the flame war would add significantly to the article. There are various reliable sources for the flame war. This does seem like a good source though. As the article points out, much of Derek Smart's fame and notability is due to the flame war. Heck the flame still seems to be going on wherever Derek Smart posts. For example, see [http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27688/Quest_Online_Fires_President_Hires_Derek_Smart.php]. A sentence or two on the flame war seems notable and proper. The proposal by 72.192.46.9 seems reasonable to me. Regarding the concern that flame war might not be understand, I suggest that a wiki-link to [[flame war]] could be put in the article. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 06:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060427084503/http://www.igda.org:80/miami/meetings/2002-06.php to http://www.igda.org/miami/meetings/2002-06.php
::::Personally, I find the new quote far superior. Rrgarding the wiki-link to flame war, I agree with that suggestion if the term ever does make it into the body of the article. Another thought I had was the odd attribution in a certain sentence. "A case history about the troubles and problems Mr. Smart encountered during the development of his flagship game, BattleCruiser 3000AD, commented that..." I feel, rather than attributing the comment to a case history, saying "A case history written by Nicholas Fang..." may be better. While we may have a few eyes on the article, I would also like to offer this:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071102103139/http://www.allgames.com:80/radio.asp?show=agi to http://www.allgames.com/radio.asp?show=agi&ep=405
::::"On February 20th[when?] it was announced that Smart's 3000AD company has entered a partnership with GamersGate, covering the digital distribution of the Universal Combat series as well as upcoming releases planned by 3000AD, Inc." I would personally add "2008" after February 20th, I would also replace 'as well as upcoming releases...' with 'as well as other releases...', as it is less dependant on a particular time frame. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 08:36, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.
== NPOV Review ==


{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}
And finally, since there is some activity here, I invite that it may be time to review the NPOV tag on the article. It's been here a long time without discussion so it might be a good moment to encourage talk. With the removal of the external link which (and this is not a dig at you Bill Huffman as I consider you to have acted as a great asset to the improvement of this article) seems to violate [[WP:ELBLP]] I find that the article seems to be neutrally weighted based on sources that seem to be available. I know interviews have been offered in the semiprotection review, but those were offered without a suggestion for integrating them into the article and I'm not sure how they can be useful for anything other than stating that he's done interviews or perhaps that he has point of views as expressed in those interviews. They don't seem to contradict reliable sourcing which more often than not tends to note him as a controversial figure. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 08:36, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier;">cyberbot II</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green;">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 15:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
== New Development Regarding Alganon/QuestOnline Position ==
:OK I checked them as correct, and the download link for the mp3 interview works. [[User:Johnuniq|Johnuniq]] ([[User talk:Johnuniq|talk]]) 10:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2016 ==
Over the past month, Mr. Smart has been extremely active in the online gaming forums. He has expressed some very critical opinions of his predecessor at Quest Online, David Allen, e.g., http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27688/Quest_Online_Fires_President_Hires_Derek_Smart.php. Even going so far as publicly accusing David Allen of criminal activity and saying that David Allen will never get a job again in the industry.


{{edit semi-protected|Derek Smart|answered=y}}
There's a response to Derek's accusations here http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/04/prweb3848924.htm . David Allen has apparently filed a lawsuit. The complaint is linked to on David Allen's website, http://www.requnix.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Complaint-3.25.10.pdf From the complaint it would appear that it would take a unanimous vote to remove David Allen from Quest Online, including David Allen's own vote. Since that would seem unlikely it would seem that David Allen was removed illegally from the company. Derek Smart appears to be the primary focus for much of the complaint, Derek is accused of overstepping his contractural duties, illegally taking over the company, violating his non-disclosure agreement, Derek is accused of defamation, and the complaint requests punitive damages against Mr. Smart be granted to David Allen.


I suggest that some of this information would improve the article if it was included. One caution I would make here is that the court complaint would probably be considered a primary source and as such its use should follow the [[wp:PRIMARY]] policy. Perhaps there's some secondary sources available on the topic? [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 21:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


Make the first line two sentences, please! :( There is no punctuation before "he"
: trying to keep it fair to all parties, how about adding "though this is the subject of ongoing litigation" after the 2nd sentance.


[[Special:Contributions/206.213.170.10|206.213.170.10]] ([[User talk:206.213.170.10|talk]]) 19:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
: Something like:
:{{Done}} thanks for pointing that out - [[User:Arjayay|Arjayay]] ([[User talk:Arjayay|talk]]) 21:09, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
: Derek K. Smart is the president and lead developer of 3000AD, Inc., a video game developer based in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. In addition he is president of Quest Online involved in the MMO Alganon,[1] though this is the subject of ongoing litigation[2].


== IGDA Chapter ==
:I'd suggest that the [2] be the actual complaint (stamped as recieved by the court) rather than the PR release from Allen, as that is self-published, and arguably unreliable. I think that the use of a primary source of a court document, is reasonable and valid of proof of an ongoing litigation case. It will of course be incumbent on the us, the editors of the article, to keep abrest of the case, and should it be dismissed immediately remove the comment.
:[[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] ([[User talk:Catwhoorg|talk]]) 13:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


This page claims Smart is a board member of the Miami chapter of the IGDA, the IGDA website no longer lists this chapter<ref>https://www.igda.org/?page=chaptersprofessional</ref>, the only chapter in Miami appears to be the University chapter with no mention of Smart<ref>http://igda-um.org/about-igda-um/</ref> as it's an Academic chapter. Page is locked, but this statement should be removed ideally as it's factually incorrect. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/82.6.53.99|82.6.53.99]] ([[User talk:82.6.53.99#top|talk]]) 14:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::That seems very reasonable to me. As I understand it, there is almost always a counter suit filed in these sort of civil cases and we haven't seen what that looks like, yet. I think that it is probably wise to wait for some secondary sources before trying to get into any detail. I also agree with watching for the case to be dropped and immediately removing the text in that situation. [[User:Bill Huffman|Bill Huffman]] ([[User talk:Bill Huffman|talk]]) 17:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
:I've removed the claim, per the information you've given it seems clear that this is no longer an existing position. Maybe it can be reworded to note that it was a former commitment, but I'm not sure how notable it is. [[User:Kuru|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; color:#cd853f; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Kuru</span>]] [[User talk:Kuru|<span style="color:#f5deb3">''(talk)''</span>]] 15:36, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


As he is a lifetime member<ref>https://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2015/03/igda-lifetime-member-addresses-igda-corruption-allegations/</ref> of the IGDA and was a board member of the IGDA, I reverted and made the relevant change there. [[User:Wildcard999|Wildcard999]] ([[User talk:Wildcard999|talk]]) 19:25, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
:::Indeed, odds are that someone will pick this up somewhere and make comment on it. I feel that moment would be the best to integrate that into the article. [[Special:Contributions/72.192.46.9|72.192.46.9]] ([[User talk:72.192.46.9|talk]]) 17:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


{{reflist-talk}}
:::: All parties that Allen sued filed a [http://www.qol.com/companyPress.php#060410 joint counter-suit against Allen] in late May. Quest has the [http://www.qol.com/downloads/Answer_and_Counterclaim_of_QOL.pdf full complaint] up on their announcements page via PRWeb and Smart posted about it on his [http://www.dereksmart.org/2010/06/a-pattern-of-conduct/ blog] along with [http://www.dereksmart.org/2010/04/dave_allen_saga/ this]. So if you are going to list the suit that Allen filed against Smart and co, then the counter-suit should also be listed I think.
::::: And Huffman, you really have no business trying to direct or influence what gets posted on Smart's page since you are a noted detractor and as such you would like to continue posting skewed stuff like this. Smart also posted on his blog (or was it his forum?) that the attorneys had emails between you and Allen and which they intend to show them in discovery. Since all emails are open season in lawsuits my guess is that before long the world is going to see what exactly you and Allen have been passing between each other. Anyway, the lawsuit against Allen has more teeth than what Allen filed against everyone else so either way this is probably going to get settled before it gets to court. Apart from that since Allen has a history of failed ventures and there is widespread stuff on the net attacking his credibility, I would like to see how he expects a defamation suit to stand up against Smart. Especially since Allen, like Smart, is a public figure. Not to mention that the truth is almost always a valid defense against libel and defamation. [[User:Wildcard999|Wildcard999]] ([[User talk:Wildcard999|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 20:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


==List of Games==
:::::: Added reference to counter suit. The phrase 'though this is the subject of ongoing litigation' is neutral in toneand I left it unchanged. [[User:Catwhoorg|Catwhoorg]] ([[User talk:Catwhoorg|talk]]) 13:11, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Aren't these nearly all different versions and patches of just four or five games? 02:01, 16 March 2019 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/103.42.214.93|103.42.214.93]] ([[User talk:103.42.214.93#top|talk]]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== My current changes ==


i am also of the belief the list needs a cull to RELEASED games only. it is rather chunky and alot of these games listed seem to have never made it beyond design stage. if we credit for designs that were never used then we set a strong precedence for infinite titles on living names. [[Special:Contributions/203.221.253.181|203.221.253.181]] ([[User talk:203.221.253.181|talk]]) 11:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
I think all the changes I just made are perfectly reasonable as they much better reflect and explain his notability. If you disagree feel free to discuss them here.[[User:Wikiposter0123|Wikiposter0123]] ([[User talk:Wikiposter0123|talk]]) 20:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Smart&action=historysubmit&diff=375585043&oldid=375489961] I reverted you, because you added negative information sourced to a site ([[Gamespy]]) whose reliability is debatable and is a single source. Also, you added a link to a personal attack website operated by someone who apparently has a serious, ongoing grudge or personal feud with Smart. [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 22:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
:: Your contention that information from Gamespy is debatable seems to be based on zero evidence so I'll ask that you drop that point or else back it up with some evidence. As for the link I think it well documents the feud that has been going on with Derek Smart and is little different from any other fan website dedicated to discussing a strange internet phenomenon. I could concede that the link is inappropriate for Wikipedia even though it is an informative site for information on Derek and the feuds, but I will not concede the information from Gamespy isn't necessary to the article considering Derek is primarily known for his crazy antics and not for his game developing skills(which this article has made the focus).[[User:Wikiposter0123|Wikiposter0123]] ([[User talk:Wikiposter0123|talk]]) 23:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
:::Wikipedia's policy on [[WP:BLP|biographies of living people]] (BLP) is very clear on the standards that are required to add negative information to a BLP. Also, I just noticed and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Smart&action=historysubmit&diff=375635923&oldid=375632605 removed] more information which was taken from sketchy sources. Anyway, we do not link BLP's to somebody's personal off-wiki attack site. That is a definite no-no. [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 23:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
::::Yeah I just read it and no where does it even hint that negative information needs more than one RS's to back it up. Do you see it saying so elsewhere?[[User:Wikiposter0123|Wikiposter0123]] ([[User talk:Wikiposter0123|talk]]) 04:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:47, 25 February 2024


Untitled

[edit]

Notice of Arbitration Committee Decision

This article was the subject of a recent Arbitration Committee case and decision. The complete text of the decision can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Derek Smart.

The Arbitration Committee imposed the following remedies:

  • Limitation on reverts by single-purpose accounts: For a period of six months, ending September 2, 2007, no single-purpose account may revert any edit made to the Derek Smart article. Any single-purpose account which performs such a revert may be kindly informed of this restriction and given the opportunity either to lay out their concerns on the article's discussion page or to e-mail the volunteers who deal with requests from article subjects. Any editor so informed who continues to revert the article may be blocked at the discretion of any administrator. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Derek Smart#Log of blocks and bans.
    • Editors are encouraged to use judgment and discretion in enforcement of this remedy, rather than implementing it in a mechanical fashion. The Committee would prefer that Wikipedians who have already had significant involvement in the development of the article leave enforcement of this remedy to their peers.
    • Although the decision mentions certain editors identified as single-purpose accounts, identification of which accounts are SPAs at a given time is often a matter of administrator discretion.
  • Article cleanup: This article is urgently referred to the Wikipedia editing community at large for cleanup, evaluation of sources, and adherence to NPOV.
  • BLP policy compliance: Any user may fully apply the principles and practices of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons to Derek Smart. This may include deletion of the article and its history as well as its talk pages and archives and the project pages and talk pages of this Arbitration proceeding. (Please consult with the Arbitration Committee Clerks before editing or deleting any arbitration pages). Newyorkbrad 00:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition date error

[edit]

"Smart has worked with various publishers over the years, including industry powerhouse Take 2 Interactive, which released his first game Battlecruiser 3000AD in 2006 and which was listed in their SEC filing when they went public in 1997." I'm pretty sure the 2006 should actually by 1996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.101.55.160 (talk) 23:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Catwhoorg (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New section

[edit]

The person who blanked the page is not active. I'm not sure which of the many Wikimedia Foundation employees are responsible for inquires regarding this "official office act" but it should be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The free ad database (talk • contribs) 03:43, 17 January 2016

Using a brand new account to generate wikidrama is a very poor idea. In the extremely unlikely event that you are a good-faith user who miraculously noticed the history of a talk page archive, I suggest that you forget about it and work on contributing to other articles. Johnuniq (talk) 04:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnuniq: It says it's "Currently under scrutiny". Now I see User:Mdennis (WMF) is listed as a contact above, so could you please fix the template so it can be put back in the queue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by The free ad database (talk • contribs) 16:33, 17 January 2016
You don't seem to be getting the message. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and contributors who assist build content are welcome. People who use the site for drama or poking someone will be indefinitely blocked. There is no conceivable explanation why a brand new account with a dozen minor edits would be interested in an archive of a talk page that has not changed in over two years except if they were trying to inflame a settled dispute. That's not going to happen. Johnuniq (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why was it blanked in the first place? 2606:A000:6959:9C00:E414:E5BF:595B:76E8 (talk) 10:42, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Derek Smart. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK I checked them as correct, and the download link for the mp3 interview works. Johnuniq (talk) 10:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2016

[edit]


Make the first line two sentences, please! :( There is no punctuation before "he"

206.213.170.10 (talk) 19:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 21:09, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IGDA Chapter

[edit]

This page claims Smart is a board member of the Miami chapter of the IGDA, the IGDA website no longer lists this chapter[1], the only chapter in Miami appears to be the University chapter with no mention of Smart[2] as it's an Academic chapter. Page is locked, but this statement should be removed ideally as it's factually incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.53.99 (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the claim, per the information you've given it seems clear that this is no longer an existing position. Maybe it can be reworded to note that it was a former commitment, but I'm not sure how notable it is. Kuru (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As he is a lifetime member[3] of the IGDA and was a board member of the IGDA, I reverted and made the relevant change there. Wildcard999 (talk) 19:25, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.igda.org/?page=chaptersprofessional
  2. ^ http://igda-um.org/about-igda-um/
  3. ^ https://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2015/03/igda-lifetime-member-addresses-igda-corruption-allegations/

List of Games

[edit]

Aren't these nearly all different versions and patches of just four or five games? 02:01, 16 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.42.214.93 (talk)


i am also of the belief the list needs a cull to RELEASED games only. it is rather chunky and alot of these games listed seem to have never made it beyond design stage. if we credit for designs that were never used then we set a strong precedence for infinite titles on living names. 203.221.253.181 (talk) 11:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Derek_Smart&oldid=1210292344"