Talk:My Brute

iTouch
I object to linking to iPod Touch as 'iTouch' as this is neither indicated in any of the sources, nor is this what the product is called by either its manufacturer or wikipedia. Furthermore, I am not aware of any wikipedia policy or guideline that states an article has to have a certain meter or "phrase flow". riffic (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


 * "iPhone and iTouch" (both two syllables, and both starting with the same syllable) has better prose flow than "iPhone and iPod Touch". We should strive to make articles read as smoothly as possible, and quality of prose is indeed something that is a big factor in, for instance, featured article candidates. "iTouch" is a commonly-used abbreviation (nearly 10 million Google hits) for the iPod Touch. Additionally, you are wrong that the product is not referred to as such by either its manufacturer or its Wikipedia article. There are over 200,000 hits for "iTouch" on apple.com (see ), and the Wikipedia article mentions that "iTouch" is a commonly-used abbreviation for the product. —Lowellian (reply) 02:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: The current revision of the Wikipedia article on the iPod Touch does not mention "iTouch" because User:Riffic removed the word from the article in this edit: . The article previously did mention the common "iTouch" usage. —Lowellian (reply) 01:37, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * yeah, but where are the reliable sources? riffic (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * See further below, where I provide three sources. —Lowellian (reply) 01:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * not going to start an edit war over this, but I'd like to get a third opinion. riffic (talk) 07:55, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * "phrase flow" by using nicknames is a brand-new argument for me. I've never heard of this argument used when editing Wikipedia. It's like saying we've got to keep Wikipedia to a 6th grade reading level, so that even ESL readers can enjoy Wikipedia. As for the argument that X number of hits for a given nickname come up in Google, Google finding X occurrences of a word just means Google found X number of badly sourced references. Try looking up "dubya george bush" in Google; you'll find 400,000 hits. But, you won't find a "Dubya" in any part of the Wikipedia article about George W. Bush. itouch is just simply a term used to show the user's affection of the device. Otherwise, the MSM as well as many published books use "iPod touch" in its reporting. Groink (talk) 08:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, the mainstream media commonly uses the term "iTouch" (I found these on Talk:IPod Touch):


 * New Zealand Herald
 * The Guardian
 * The New York Times


 * —Lowellian (reply) 01:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * These sources (as mentioned on talk:iPod Touch) do not in any way explicitly mention who uses the term itouch, or why. Hence, they did not back up the claimed fact that was removed from iPod Touch and they do not serve as verifiable references. That is why they were removed. Furthermore there are Manual of Style concerns with using a nickname instead of a product's proper name in your usage in this article (My Brute). riffic (talk) 06:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * All three of those so-called MSM articles are nothing more than blogs. MSM sites host blogs - that's a common thing nowadays. But, a blog is far from being a mainstream news article. Anytime an article is written in the first person, IMO it is a blog. Bloggers do constantly use "itouch" because most of them write like they speak. Blogs are not considered reliable sources, since bloggers are difficult to qualify individually as experts or other authoritative figures in the field.. Groink (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on My Brute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100329042515/http://www.iphonealley.com:80/node/4447 to http://www.iphonealley.com/node/4447

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Is the game dead?
Just got nostalgic and took a look. The site is still there, but the game requires Flash Player, and that doesn't exist anymore. Carlo (talk) 21:06, 6 July 2022 (UTC)