Talk:Deus Ex (video game)/Archive 4

Storyline

Can we include a full storyline in the article?

84.10.103.180 16:58, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm in the process of writing a mission-by-mission overview of the storyline. In its final form, it should read like one continuous piece of prose, as I don't intend to break it apart with section headings or anything along those lines. The first several missions should fit into a paragraph each, but the later missions will more than likely require a longer look.

I have no intention of breaking the storyline into sub-sections. First, as mentioned above and given the shallow nature of my summary, most missions will have somewhere between five and ten sentences describing the major plot points. Breaking it into mission-sections would leave us with twelve paragraph-long subsections, crushing the visual flow of the article and cluttering the ToC at the top of the page. Second, this overview is meant to read as a movie summary, not a guide. Using misison-sections makes the summary look more like a game guide, and turns the focus away from the game's storyline.

In an attempt to avoid spoilers, limit unencyclopedic content, and keep the section remotely intelligble, I will also leave out the majority of non-story-critical events and that depend on player action. For example, I don't think the article should mention that Joseph Manderly will mention friendly casualties in your debriefing if you kill the UNATCO agent sent to detain Leo Gold. The game is littered with -- literally -- hundreds of these events, and our summary would mutate into some kind of quasi-gude, no doubt ending up far too long and far too complicated in the process.

I'll similarly leave out any information about multiple routes leading to the same objective. The average reader doesn't need to know that you can either charge down the stairs or sneak in through an airvent to solve the Battery Park subway hostage situation, and anyone who does can find that information on a walkthrough linked at the bottom of the page. I'm using the same rationale as the previous paragraph: including this would make the summary too long and overcomplicate things.

I should finish most of this summary by the end of the night, but I anticipate all kinds of edits, additions, clarifications, and so on. Before things get out of hand, I'd like the lot of us to come to some kind of agreement on what we should include, what we shouldn't include, and where to draw the line. Let's get some concensus, hm? Consequentially 03:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you've got a fundamentally right-headed plan. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

On a side note, I'm also attempting to work the to-be-merged pages into the plot as I go along. When I get there, I'll start up discussions on each article's talk page so we can figure out what needs to make the move, and what needs to stay out. If you have any preliminary ideas, I'd welcome your input. Consequentially 04:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, pretty much all of the sub-articles with plot summary only should be merged and redirected. Certainly both Gray Death and Ambrosia (Deus Ex), all of the character lists, and any characters that didn't recur in DX:IW (owing to the fact that they need to be split then merged). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I was referring more to the content of the individual pages. Using the UNATCO as an example, I find the description of the types of agents to be superfluous and non-encyclopedic, but the analysis on its role as a military arm of the Majestic-12 conspiracy to be useful in a plot summary. I don't mean to sound crass, but some of that article needs to get lost in the merger. Consequentially 04:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The storyline section is complete! I'd like to get as many eyes on it as possible, so please read through it and add/subtract as necessary. I'll try to keep the tone of the summary consistent, so please don't be offended if I reword your additions -- I'm a bit anal. Consequentially 01:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Deletion Spree

It seems that recently users A Man in Black and Nifboy have gone on a deletion spree through the various Deus Ex pages, with deletion notices now posted on a good swath of them. The only reason they have given for any of their notices is that the offending articles are merely "plot summary", which seems to me quite ridiculous in the majority of cases (see my views on the subject on the Talk: VersaLife page). If you are against this overzealousness, like I am, please voice your comments on any of the affected pages. -- Grandpafootsoldier

I too am getting fed up of "fiction purges" on Wikipedia, which is part of a growing number of problems on Wikipeda (next to increases in vandalism, CCS\CC flaming etc.) Can these two users just drop it, its damaging Wikipedia to the point of utter stupidty. I am also considering propsing either semi-protection to many articles or speaking to Jimbo about the matter in hand. -Dynamo_ace Talk

If the deletionists succeed to remove fiction, I wonder what will they attack next - would it be science-cruft, history-cruft, or something other.

I suggest that we place some articles not yet put on proposed deletion on watchlists. For instance, I just didn't notice how a couple of articles went away. This should be at worst resolved through AfD, not by prodding unwatched articles.

BTW, don't forget that if you oppose proposed deletion of some article, you just need to remove the prod template. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 23:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Nobody is going on a witchhunt for fiction (or for video games, as I've heard it said). Instead, the problem is the plethora of articles that are nothing but recapping fiction. (There are just more Cloud fanboys than War and Peace fanboys.) WP:NOT and WP:FICT and (more recently) WP:WAF make it clear that, while Wikipedia has plot summaries, it has plot summaries to lend context to content about the real world.

The simple test I've been applying is "Is there a single word I can say about this subject without referring directly to the work in which it appears?" If the answer is unequivically no, I consider whether an article that does meet that standard would ever possibly benefit from a merge. If there are shades of gray, I see about whether it would easily be merged, on the principle that unnecessary plot summary can and should be reduced whereever and whenever possible.

Oftentimes, this loses narrow details (such and such robot has such and such calibur firearm), but anyone who wants to find that out will already have a copy of Deus Ex to which they can refer, or has a sufficient level of interest that they should go and buy Deus Ex instead of Wikipedia unnecessarily spoiling all of it for them.

Before ranting about "information being deleted," remember that Wikipedia is consciously not the last resource for anything, but instead the first. These articles, this project, is meant to serve non-fans of the series, and protecting and focusing upon details only of interest to fans like yourselves does a disservice to everyone who is not yourself. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Merging

Some of these articles, probably, actually can be merged.

Pros: Some of these articles are too short. Also, when merged, they'll be less vulnerable to deletionism.

Cons: Excessive length. Not all articles can be merged. This means we'll have to keep both Deus Ex characters, and Minor Deus Ex characters, and JC Denton. Also, only three or four organizations can be merged, introducing inconsistency and inconvenience.

What are your opinions on this?

CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 23:32, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, merging might be a good idea. Besides the obvious reasons of organization, it could also prevent deletionists from getting as worked up in the future. -- Grandpafootsoldier ( Talk)

If you wish to merge Walton Simons, Sam Carter and anybody else with Minor Deus Ex characters, please do so. I'm currently editing the article, going through each biography to add detail and such. I'm sure it can handle a couple more characters. Maybe it will help the deletionists relax a tad. Gamer Junkie 13:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

But in any case not all. Well, though, possibly Sam and Walter would fit. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 19:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Weapons in Deus Ex survived AFD, but the result was Merge. Does anyone want to take up the reigns on this? Inmatarian 17:52, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I am against merging. Deus Ex is a fine long article, and UNATCO is big too. I suggest merging only the smaller articles, not everything. --V. Szabolcs 18:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

UNATCO is bloated with plot summary and truly trivial plot details, and is utterly lacking in real-world context. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to agree with A Man In Black on this one. The UNATCO article is filled with information that can be incorporated in the plot summary section of the main article, or sprinkled throughout the rest of the article. The suggest to merge should not be interpreted as "take this whole article, and copy it into the other," but instead as "take the useful, encyclopedic, and relevant information from this article, and put it into the other where it will augment existing information." Consequentially 00:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Consequentially, you have convinced me. However, I suggest to clean up or improve the UNATCO article first, it could be a great one if done correctly (many other games or movies have separate articles for their fictional organisations). If it will not be successful, then merge it. Or else, what do you think about a small, but compact and useful stub? --V. Szabolcs 11:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I think a merge will probably be best. UNATCO has nothing but plot summary of this article, and this article can, should, and will cover all the important points. As for the unimportant points, why cover the unimportant points in an encyclopedia at all? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

My only issue with a UNATCO stub is that, at best, it would only be duplicating information that can already be found in a more-complete main article. I understand that there are articles about fictional organizations from other media, but the ones that are worth keeping provide information that goes beyond the plot of the media in question. As it stands, the UNATCO article is filled with information that can be adequately listed in other articles. For example:

• The history of the organization can be referenced in a "Setting" section of the main article.
• Characters who work for UNATCO are referenced in the plot summary, and in major and minor character lists.
• All of the information from the "events" section can be incorporated into the plot summary, where it will be listed in context within the storyline.
• The blurb on UNATCO Troopers would be better referenced in an "Enemies in Deus Ex" article, or left as information in the plot summary.
• The information on nano- and mechanically-augmented agents is highly redundant, being addressed by the aforementioned articles on major and minor characters, and within a completed plot summary.

Consequentially 17:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I have completed the VersaLife merger, moving all relevant plot information into the summary. The five sentences on minor employees were left behind, as they didn't serve much purpose more than detailing the Deus Ex universe in a crufty kind of way. If you feel that those sentences could be encyclopedic, I'm open to merging them into the main article. Please, explain yourself here, though, so we can work out an idea before we start reverting pages. Consequentially 05:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

ED-209

Regarding the following entry in the Trivia section: "Some of the robots in the game are very similar to the ED-209 robot from the movie RoboCop". Does anyone agree with this? Compare [1] to [2]. Sure there's a *slight* similarity, but no more than they both resemble any of a dozen Battletech designs. Clayhalliwell 19:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It's a bipedal robot with guns. That's about where the similarity ends, I'd say. Gamer Junkie 19:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• I'm fairly certain their's an interview where Warren Spector mentions it in a throw away remark. I'll have a look for it and get back to ya. - 81.153.253.32 02:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC) Elmo

Midnight Sun

It says the Midnight Sun came with the GOTY edition. However, I got Deus Ex when it first came out and it included The Midnight Sun. Aerothorn 15:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Some cyberpunk associations

Just a generic question.

There's some resemblance between DX and GitS in use of cyberpunk, for instance specifically Thermoptic Camo. When a mention was inserted, someone reverted it, promising to describe the real source. Well, I just would like to know what that source is, so - could he or someone else reply? --CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 17:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I forgot all about finding sources. IIRC, a lot of it is supposed to be inspired by William Gibson's work, just as with System Shock 1 (Warren Spector and Harvey Smith were key people on both games). I'll ask on the Deus Ex TTLG forums about that. For example, one of Gibson's novels involves a person merging with an AI (can't remember which). This is what some searches turned up regarding gibson references: TTLG thread Collection of game text (search for gibson twice). But anyway, just because the thermoptic camo was (possibly) inspired by Ghost in The Shell doesn't mean that therefor everything else is (and before anyone says it, the same applies to Gibson). I mean, hell, one can draw a lot of similarities to the SNES version of Shadowrun (I've only played that version). For example, there is a overriding cyberpunk theme, and the player character (whose name is a supposed reference to a work by Gibson) has a small bomb wired into their head that has to be deactivated, just as JC has the slow-acting kill-switch. But all the above (including what I said) is original research (read the example given on the page) without a source, as then you are saying "It's my opinion that Deus Ex was inspired by Insert Title here", without actually saying "It's my opinion that...". That has no place in an article of any decent quality. Without a source, it'd be fact tagged or removed in a heartbeat in any sort of Good Article/Featured Article nomination process. Featured Articles in particular can't have unverified stuff.--Drat (Talk) 12:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Seems like I just haven't read the proper book (though I've read some other Gibson's novels... Seems like I've missed a lot, so I'll start Neuromancer just today), and probably you are right, since GitS was surely inspired by him as well. As you can see, I don't argue for inserting that trivia, just ask out of my own interest. BTW, actually we have to clean or source a lot before attempting at least a GA nomination. I'm currently busy with other articles, but would appreciate if someone well familiar with corresponding sources would try and reference material.

P.S. Just found something - Active camouflage mentions that "The idea appears in many fictional works, such as the William Gibson novel Neuromancer, where it is referred to as a "polychromatic suit." Also referred to as "thermoptic camouflage" or simply "thermoptics," this technology was popularized by the sci-fi manga (and later anime) Ghost in the Shell. It has also been featured in the 2000 game Deus Ex, ...". Also http://everything2.org/index.pl?node_id=386413&lastnode_id=0 tells similar things about that. Probably it actually has something to do with GitS, though that isn't a suitable reference. -- CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 13:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding original research on this subject... frankly I'd rather have an informative article than a Featured article. Clayhalliwell 04:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

What, so you are saying that a FA can't be informative?!? Clearly you've been reading the the wrong FA's then. We're making an encyclopedia here, not a venue for random fan speculation. Verifiability is one of the three core rules.--Drat (Talk) 13:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we should consider breaking the rules here. He has some point, though. I can name some articles on clearly notable and highly influential subjects that will never become featured, no matter the effort (unless a few low-probability events happen in the outside world), and would become almost dictionary definitions if modified to absolutely comply with policies. I think you guess what these never-to-be-featured articles are? But it isn't, of course, the case for this article, and we don't need to break or circumvent rules to make it interesting. However, unless we really go for FA, I suggest not to be extremely strict about references, as it's a game, after all. --CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 13:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Yet again there's a Warren Spector interview that mentions GitS being a major influence, specifically on the 'merge' ending which was origionally going to be the only possible ending. I'm really trying to find this interview :( i think it might be in an issue of PCgamer(UK) 81.153.253.32 02:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC) Elmo

Movie

The IMDb page for the Deus Ex movie has been deleted, so we should probably find another source to link to for the Movie Adaptation section. As it is none of the Movie Adaptation info is technically verifiable. -- Y|yukichigai 23:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

And until it is, it can't be included in the article. Have you tried archive.org to see if the page is archived?--Crossmr 23:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

This [3] is the best link there is. Archive.org doesn't have one, and thats not much useful as it doesn't show any potential cast or anything.--Crossmr 23:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Yup, checked that already. I did manage to find this with regards to the Willem Dafoe in Deus Ex thing, (among others) but there's no cache of anything like the IMDb page left, as far as I can tell. There is a copy of the interview with Whatsisface and Pruss out there, though.

The only problem now is that we don't have a source for the movie being cancelled. While we know it was cancelled, the only sources I can find mentioning it are random forum postings which aren't sourcable. I'm going to have to remove the speculation at the end though. We can accept the cancellation as an obvious fact, but the speculation about reasons can't go unsourced.--Crossmr 23:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You can source the GCache of the IMDB page. Also, +3 points for using "purported" in a sentance. -- Y|yukichigai 23:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. we've sourced google cache once we might as well source it another time or two. I've always wanted to use purported in a sentence. I can die happy now.--Crossmr 00:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Cover box art

This is mostly for ZFGokuSSJ1. While I appreciate your efforts in improving the cover art image, they are for the most part unnecessary and/or redundant. The image I submitted has some flaws, but that is because I am still working on it. I have already updated the image three times, and I plan on updating it at least once more to resolve a minor alignment issue. In the meantime there is no perceptible difference between your image and mine. I had to resort to overlaying your latest image on mine as a difference layer to find what was changed, and it boils down to some brightness differences along the top of JC's collar, a minor line along the inside of his sunglasses, and for some odd reason a small radiating circle at the top left corner of the D in Deus Ex. Everything else is exactly the same, pixel for pixel, literally.

I'm not saying you shouldn't try to improve an image if you find something you can fix, but at the moment there doesn't appear to be anything more that can really be done to this image, at least constructively. -- Y|yukichigai 21:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, his version is slightly less noisy, has banding problems blurred out, is smaller, but less detailed. It's about the full version; in article it doesn't matter at all. In general, though, I think your version is better, since 85k-140k difference doesn't matter for full size image. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 22:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Yukichigai, I want to thank you for actually taking the time to collect various images and making a great version of the DX box, there's hardly any good scans online! While I do agree there is a little less detail in my edited version, I think mine resembles the box more accurately. You see, I like to archive video games and scans of documents included with PC games, and I try to make them as accurate as possible. I really wish I had the original box so I could scan it myself and try to make it the best resemblance as possible. I won't mess with the image anymore, and I wish you luck! - ZFGokuSSJ1

I'm with Goku on this one. I think the image he submitted is better than the original, due to the fact that it seems less "grainy". I don't really know what you are talking about when you say yours has "more detail"? Anyways, thats my opinion. -t_man700

I tried re-editing it again, and this time I do believe this edit is really quite good. It's more blue, and more accurate to the source material... Less grainy, but it still retains the detail. http://img445.imageshack.us/img445/7130/dxcoverbo3.png Here is a link to the image. -ZFGokuSSJ1 25:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Very nice work. -- Y|yukichigai 22:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the question now is, should we use it as the image for the article? -ZFGokuSSJ1 29:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Looks dandy to me. -- Y|yukichigai 19:32, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Character page setup need to be fixed

Okay, this has bugged me for a long time and I don't at this point see a good solution (especially on the Invisible War side). The Deus Ex character pages on the whole seriously need to have some set system at this time.

We have the Minor Deus Ex characters page; the Deus Ex: Invisible War characters page that has organizations as well as characters, and which is labelled as "Minor Invisible War characters" on the Template: Deus Ex; about a dozen single character pages from both games - all of which, in the case of Invisible War characters, are redundant to the main character page; and to top it off we have some characters, since they appear in both games, making an appearance on up to three different pages (I'm thinking specifically here about Nicolette DuClare/"Her Holiness").

The whole setup is very unproffesional, sloppy, and confusing, but I don't see a really good way to fix it at this point (this is especially true in the case of Nicolette DuClare as any setup in conjunction with her "Her Holiness" alter ego results in major spoilers for the uninformed). I suppose one could just merge all IW single character pages into the main IW character page, but that doesn't seem quite fair given the single Deus Ex pages (though there are admittedly many more Deus Ex NPCs). A good compromise might be the creation of a Major Deus Ex Characters page leaving just the main protagonists from the two games with their own seperate page. Also, on the other hand, one could just axe the IW main page and leave the seperate pages.

If anyone can offer any other suggestions for this problem I would appreciate it, as it really needs consideration. - Grandpafootsoldier

The other thing that needs looking at is the excess detail of some pages, particularly the Minor Deus Ex characters page. I'm not going into the whole "fancruft" debate (at least not here). However, there is a lot of extra stuff in there, particularly that added by Gamer Junkie, which while not badly written, does not seem to be reflected in the games canon (or at least not to that extent).--Drat (Talk) 11:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have so far altered the Template: Deus Ex; removed the redundant "JC Denton" section from the Deus Ex: Invisible War characters page and replaced it with a link to the JC page; and have removed the unnecessary and redundant "Organizations" section from the IW characters page, transferring any useable text to their seperate respective pages (the section didn't belong on that page anyway and made it too long). Whew. Now, I just need to figure out whether all the seperate character pages should be merged into the main IW page or not. -- Grandpafootsoldier 08:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I wish somebody had said something earlier about the article size before I'd scrounged up every little scrap of information available on the Net for each character on the page. I was simply attempting to add depth to each character's background as many of the descriptions were nothing more than a sentence or two (and often poorly written or spelled, at that). I've spent a LOT of time adding to the minor characters article, so if a it's going to be cut down, please tell me now before I start searching for more information and adding detail to the remaining character descriptions. I didn't think that extensive detail was bad, so long as it's relevant to the character. Gamer Junkie 04:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Were not saying anything for certain at this point. It's just quite obvious that the current set up is not optimal as we have multiple redundant pages. We not only have character info on the main IW character page, but on seperate individual pages as well. Also, I haven't deleted anything of what you have written on that page. The JC Denton section's content has been moved to the JC Denton page, and the same goes for the organization sections. -- Grandpafootsoldier 23:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Grandpafootsoldier, I should have mentioned that my reply was in regard to what Drat had written. I suppose we could also remove Kang Zhou and the three governors from the minor Deus Ex characters page. I haven't been able to find ANYTHING on them, and I barely recall them as part of the game. We could also remove Dr. Gary Savage, as I've already moved the entire X-51 group over to the organisation's article. Gamer Junkie 01:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've merged the completely superfluous "Lin-May Chen" and "Billie Adams" articles into the main character page. -- Grandpafootsoldier 00:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The next wave

One of the two "gamecruft deletionists" has started an AfD on Robots in Deus Ex article, with debate on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robots in Deus Ex. While it is not the best and not the one most notable our articles, it's most probably an attempt to set a precedent for deletion of other related articles, so I suggest anyone concerned to comment or vote in the debate. --CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 20:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I have to admit I don't really see the need for that article. It seems rather arbitrary in its scope. Why just the robots of Deus Ex? A broader "Enemies in Deus Ex" page would be more sensible. Clayhalliwell 19:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, probably, or with a different name (not all are enemies). But this just isn't an issue for AfD - we would better discuss it here and just implement. Also, he has some time ago put PROD (proposed deletion) template on all Deus Ex articles, and successfully deleted one, so that's why I think it's undesirable. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 19:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Major Deus Ex characters page?

Alright, here's what I propose. To cut down on the rather large number of Deus Ex pages some more, I think the creation of a "Major Deus Ex characters" page is in order. We could then merge Bob Page, Walton Simons, Gunther Hermann, Anna Navarre, Sam Carter, Morgan Everett, and any other characters into it as need be.

For right now though, given that Tracer Tong and Paul Denton appear in both games, they should probably keep their respective pages. Also, as Chad Dumier and Nicollette DuClair also appear in both games, the creation of seperate pages for them might be worthwhile (this is especially true of DuClair given her "Holiness" alter ego as mentioned before).

Comments? Thoughts? Ramblings? -- Grandpafootsoldier 07:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Create a major characters article. Nicolette and Chad should keep their respective sections in both the minor Deus Ex and Deus Ex: Invisible War pages, as the characters are so completely different. It would also spoil it for those who have not played one or the other. Gamer Junkie 07:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

That is true, but they technically are the same character still, so it is kind of a funky setup to have one half of their articles on one page and one on another. What I was thinking was the same kind of thing done with the JC Denton and Paul Denton pages, i.e. have the article noticeably seperated into "Deus Ex" and "Invisible War" sections so that if some has not played one game or the other they can avoid its respective segment. -- Grandpafootsoldier 07:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Alright, that sounds acceptable. If they are in seperate paragraphs and clearly headlined, it should work fine. Gamer Junkie 14:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, its done. Here is the new Major Deus Ex characters page. It still needs some organizational and cleanup work, but I'm too tired now. Good night. -- Grandpafootsoldier 08:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Peer review?

Is anybody else here interested in running a peer review on this? I'd like to get some feedback to bring this up to FA standard. — Werdna talk criticism 06:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

DXMP

There's a new article on DXMP. I suppose this topic isn't really expansive enough to turn into an article of its own, though I believe it would work as a subsection of the Deus Ex article. Right? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

- Depends on how you think about it...DXMP is in a way a completely another game than Deus Ex and deserves more than just two sentences (I have already edited the Deus Ex article at least two times to add a small introduction of DXMP but some people keep deleting it or editing it back to two sentences that explain really nothing). <<--skyzthelimit, 15:06, 21 September 2006

The issue was not with adding information to the article. The issue was with the fact that only two sentances were relevant information that was presented in a verifiable and NPOV manner, to say nothing of the sudden change in tone brought on by using words like "your" and "you" instead of "the user", etc. Also, it contained numerous misspellings and horrid grammar. ("you're game" instead of "your game", etc.) It was really, really hard to find any actual information in there, and what there was didn't take up much space. That is why most of the added content was being deleted. -- Y|yukichigai 19:48, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

- I used only once word "your's" and that was grammatically correct.

I'd just like to point out that this sentance is perfect evidence of the problem I'm talking about. -- Y|yukichigai 08:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

If the word "you" is not allowed to use I could have changed it to something else or write a completely new sentence (or you could have done this, as being more talented). Now if you seriously claim that it was really, REALLY hard to find any information in the 10 sentences I wrote, perhaps you should look more into the DXMP and write it better yourself. Those 10 sentences describe it simply the best at this moment and you can not write it in a more "packed version". Also as being the professor of English you should have taken care of my utterly horrid grammar and outrageous misspellings instead of deleting everything. Or are you not here to provide Wikipedia readers more information? Even if I had written ten things wrong grammatically it had provided much more information than the blank, white space that was there after your editing. <<--skyzthelimit, 23:31, 21 September 2006

...If you re-read my responce, you'll notice that I also cited issues of verifiability and NPOV, or Neutral Point of View. 8 of those 10 sentances were either written as opinion (non-NPOV) or were obviously non-verifiable. (specifically, you need an external, linkable source available at the time of writing) Removing all of the sentances which did not meet those critera left two sentances, which simply restated information already mentioned in the Overview section. As it was redundant, I deleted it. The second time I decided to hope against hopes that someone could maybe find a link to verify some info, or something to that effect, and left it up to another user. As you can see, again we are left with two sentances which simply restate information already presented in the Overview section. Unless something else verifiable and NPOV is added the section is guaranteed to be deleted. -- Y|yukichigai 08:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

- All information that is mentioned on the DXMP page at the moment should be verifiable enough (it is all mentioned in Planet Deus Ex website which is hosted by Gamespy...if that is not verifiable enough, I wonder what is). The information is also as neutral as something can be. If anyone decideds once again to remove this information completely I suggest him to go remove everything from the pages Counter-Strike and Counter-Strike: Condition Zero for starters. Someone said that my short introduction was a game guide: well go to those sites and come here to say it again. Honestly. And if there are horrible spelling mistakes and miserable grammar please fix it then.<<--skyzthelimit, 08:23, 22 September 2006

You *must* provide sources with your information. I also question the usefulness of a list of maps played on DXMP, and its merit for a general-purpose encyclopedia. Finally, please don't use the argument "somebody else is doing it so it's okay". It doesn't hold any water with me. — Werdna talk criticism 23:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, someone please merge this article soon. -- Grandpafootsoldier 01:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Ways to improve this article

Okay, I have redone this article a bit to hopefully make it more coherant, structured, and organized. It could perhaps still be rearranged a bit more, however, to maximize the effectiveness of the layout. I have also renamed the "Trivia" section "Literary and popular culture references" as that is all that section is composed of at this point.

There are still a couple things which really need to be done for this page as soon as possible. First, and perhaps foremost, is the creation of a plot summary of some kind. It's ridiculous that a game page this size and about a subject this well known does not have one yet. Second, the "DXMP" page either needs to be vastly expanded or (preferably) just merged into the main article. Though I admit I have never player multiplayer Deus Ex, I cannot image that it is such an extensive topic that it warrants its own page. -- Grandpafootsoldier 01:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)