Talk:Agricola (board game)/Archive 1

Untitled

I've expanded the stub, added references and a picture, and also a humour section chrisboote 05:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Agricola box.jpg

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

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Humour section

DreamGuy has removed the entire Humour section as "nothing more than nonnotable trivia of no encyclopedic purpose or value"

I disagree and propose to reinstate it, as I feel it DOES serve a purpose.

It provides links to both external and other Wikipedia articles, it extends information about the subject matter, and shows how popular culture has influenced the game

Popular culture sections are common in Wikipedia for Films, Books and Computer Game articles (c.f. Fallout and therefore can be seen as appropriate here

I would be happy to have the title of the section changed from 'Humour' to 'Popular Culture' if that is felt to be more encyclopaedic

chrisboote (talk) 11:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Those may be purposes, but they are not encyclopedic purposes. Popular culture sections are common, but that has everything to do with lots of people editing articles without knowing what the rules of this sit for and nothing like an excuse to add more of it to other articles. Please see WP:ENC and WP:NOT.

If you add it back, it'll be removed again... if not by me, then by another more experienced editor. DreamGuy (talk) 14:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Funny or not the humor section contained factual, verifiable information. I checked WP:ENC and WP:NOT and could not find where factual information was not allowed because it was humorous. Can you please be more specific as to which entries violated the guidelines and perhaps why? Maybe the way the information was organized (labeled as humor, trivia, or whatnot) was inappropriate, but is that a valid reason to remove the whole section instead of reorganizing it? Uniquenamessuck (talk) 21:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

"... the first game to dethrone Puerto Rico as the highest-rated game..."

Not only will it be the first, it will almost certainly also be the only game which manages the feat, presuming that Puerto Rico doesn't rise to the number one position again at a later date. I've changed this line to be a bit less vague. Nezuji (talk) 05:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Puerto Rico has since retaken the top spot. Jack Rudd (talk) 22:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, colour me surprised! Nezuji (talk) 04:00, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

xkcd

xkcd referenced Agricola in "Scheduling" on Wed 11 Aug 2010. Since xkcd seems to attract less-than-constructive edits like moths to a lightbulb, watch out. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 12:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)