Talk:Arcadia 2001: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:21, 24 October 2010

Video games Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

List of Minecraft characters (4 participants)
Carlton Wilborn (4 participants)
Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants)
Red Barrels (3 participants; relisted)
TheoTown (12 participants; relisted)
Old Grandma Hardcore (6 participants; relisted)
Zero Hour (video game) (6 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

sprot? Dare I ask why?

I can't imagine that there exists a community of dedicated Arcadia 2001 vandals large enough to truly interfere with Wiki matters. Of course, I can't imagine that there exists a community of dedicated Arcadia 2001 users large or active enough to really require fresh, newly-registered updates. --Action Jackson IV 09:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...

Why is it semi-locked? just wondering... --72.87.32.148 20:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

public domain abandonware

I removed the statement that the games had been released into the public domain as abandonware. Abandonware isn't a real word and has no legal meaning. As for releasing something into public domain; there needs to be a proper citation to legally prove this to be true.

WP:OR and unreliable reference.

I have made this change and has been "undid" "per WP:OR and unreliable reference." I write under here what I wrote/find, so if more references are found and became common idea and no more a WP:OR, we can reintroduce the paragraph.

You can see that I have found another ref: http://amigan.1emu.net/digarch/2001-faq.htm#overview

What do you think?

   Some time ago everybody thought that Emerson licensed the Arcadia 2001 worldwide,
   that all 30 software compatible console was clone of Arcadia.
   Today 
   ref: http://amigan.1emu.net/digarch/2001-faq.htm#overview         (new ref! not present in my first writing!)
   ref: http://mess.redump.net/sysinfo:arcadia 
   ref: http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?st=2&c=835
   we can say that the manufacturer of the chipset 2650/2637, Philips-Signetics, 
   produced the console and licenced it to other companies over the world with different names, 
   different cartrige dimensions but all of them software compatible. So we can't say that Arcadia 2001 
   is the origin of the family; it's only the most famous of it.  --Arosio Stefano (talk) 21:50, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1)It was written in a completely unencylopedic, personal tone with very broken english. 2) None of those meet Wikipedia's guidelines on WP:RELIABLE. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:34, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]