Poster | Thread |
pavlor
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 11-Apr-2019 14:45:05
| | [ #121 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 10-Jul-2005 Posts: 9189
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @number6
My stance is wait and see. Then, when dust settles, rewrite when necessary. I did the same during edit-war concerning (not)bancruptcy of Hyperion in 2015.
Rewriting big articles takes time, which I devote to other aspects of life (playing video games ), so I rather pursue only minor corrections, updates and reverting vandalism. Sometimes, when an Amiga article is in danger of deletion (like CAMD driver one just few weeks ago), I do proper research for sources with full rewrite.
If you have any info you want to add, feel free to post desired changes here (or on the article talkpage, or - of course - you may edit Wikipedia yourself).
If the list is not too long, I may research for best sources myself. Probably not before this weekend (I have another non-Amiga related article to save right now). |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 11-Apr-2019 15:00:04
| | [ #122 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 10972
From: In the village | | |
|
| @pavlor
I won't argue you change the wording now. But logically if you feel it stands at present as accurate, then it is not only a part of Amiga_Inc wiki, but should also be included in Hyperion wiki as part of their history, simply due to the naming of both parties.
But I do have an upgrade that does meet your criteria for having a legal document backed up by a news article:
Hyperion wiki: Quote:
In 2009, Hyperion changed legal status from business partnership (VOF) to company with limited liability (CVBA).[34] |
The associated legal document has been public knowledge for like ever. heh. http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/tsv_pdf/2009/04/23/09058928.pdf
Whereas the article only indicates this took place at some time prior to writing the article, the legal document gives you the exact date to enter in the timeline, which does use specific dates both before and after that entry.
#6Last edited by number6 on 11-Apr-2019 at 03:01 PM.
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 16-Apr-2019 15:30:15
| | [ #123 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 10972
From: In the village | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
pavlor
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 16-Apr-2019 15:51:53
| | [ #124 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 10-Jul-2005 Posts: 9189
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @number6
Quote:
Any clue as to the reasoning behind eliminating this history? |
Check my post 708 in this thread.
I had returning this information to the Gateway article on my to-do list, but I (apparently...) forgot. Same for your request above. Must find some time on the next weekend (so, if you have any other request, feel free to fire it at me). |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 7-Jul-2019 13:08:16
| | [ #125 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 10972
From: In the village | | |
|
| @pavlor
Just a reminder.
Your entry for Hyperion Entertainment changing from VOF to CVBA still links to the article with vague dating. Please review my prior post. It meets your criteria for requiring both a news story (which you have) and an actual legal document (which I posted). This allows you to post a specific date for this event.
#6 _________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
A1200
 |  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 7-Jul-2019 13:44:27
| | [ #126 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 5-May-2003 Posts: 3028
From: Westhall, UK | | |
|
| @number6
I would hope if this is Hyperion/Colanto revising history to suit their legal claims, no judge would use Wikipedia to make the basis of a decision. _________________ Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1 |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 17-Feb-2021 21:33:14
| | [ #127 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 10972
From: In the village | | |
|
| @pavlor
Just curiosity on my part.
Are there any plans to either add to the existing Amiga Corporation wiki, or create a new one for the new Amiga Corporation?
#6 _________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
DiskDoctor
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 17-Feb-2021 21:35:54
| | [ #128 ] |
|
|
 |
Cult Member  |
Joined: 3-Feb-2009 Posts: 605
From: Rzeszow, Poland | | |
|
| @number6
There are indeed, plans to add Vampire Standalone to the wikipedia. _________________ Vampire V4 Standalone R5 + V4 BootLoader v2.5 running: AmigaOS 1.3 / 3.1 / 3.1.4.1 / 3.9, AmiKit XE, Coffin, ApollOS & AROS |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
pavlor
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 18-Feb-2021 6:55:00
| | [ #129 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 10-Jul-2005 Posts: 9189
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @number6
Well, the main issue here is notability (in Wikipedia sense). Creating an article about some new company requires so many "reliable sources", it is next to impossible to write one about a mere one-man startup. It is much easier in case of old applications (two reviews are enough), but new companies are like a red flag for most regular Wikipedia editors and their articles are deleted without mercy, because sourcing requirement is too high.
I think best course of action right now would be to add a small paragraph about this corporation to other Amiga related articles (eg. Amiga and History of the Amiga; already mentioned in the Amiga, Inc. article). There may be a possible problem when using in-Amiga-bubble sources ("due weight"), but I´m quite sure nobody will care.
Feel free (anybody) to do this (I may correct and format this later). In any case, I will look into it during this weekend (until my memory fails as usual...). |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
pavlor
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 18-Feb-2021 6:59:06
| | [ #130 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 10-Jul-2005 Posts: 9189
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @DiskDoctor
I would really like to look at that article before publication, so we may get rid of common errors ("red flags"). It may end like Natami article otherwise. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: AmigaOne articles on Wikipedia vandalised Posted on 18-Feb-2021 13:18:01
| | [ #131 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 10972
From: In the village | | |
|
| @pavlor
No rush. Finalization of documentation regarding trademark and other aspects will come shortly and I'm sure you would prefer more information in hand before the effort is made.
Different topic: As OP you can change this thread title. Is it worth considering change to something like "Amiga and related articles on Wikipedia"? since the thread has more to do with discussion in general than the specific incidents we discussed prior concerning AmigaOne.
#6 Last edited by number6 on 18-Feb-2021 at 02:02 PM.
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|