Content deleted Content added
Duke3d |
|||
Line 289:
== Duke3d ==
Hi, you have left a message on the [[Duke Nukem 3D]]'s talk page. I have answered it. Can you please double check and answer it? This will solve the case. Thanks for your great help. [[User:132.203.32.224|132.203.32.224]] 07:57, 19 March 2006 (UTC)\
Hi, you were answered on [[Duke Nukem 3D]]'s talk page. We are waiting for your answer. Of course if this level of information is not verifiable/valid enough, meaning we are falling in verifiability paranoia, then we WILL remove all the content on the duke3d page that has a lower verifiability than that. This basically includes 50 % of all the statements. EG: "Duke Nukem 3D is mainly notable for the often crude humor it introduced into what had previously been a fairly humorless genre," Who said that where is the source of what is claimed? "id Software, had filed a lawsuit against Apogee Games and 3D Realms, " where is the source of this information? "There are also references to the OJ Simpson trial" who said that? That’s personal assumption only! "A notable quality of the game was the immense interactivity and realism of its levels." who said that, where can I have the proof of the so called interactivity? "As well as being highly detailed (for the time), these locations were also filled with objects that the player can interact with. While these rarely had a crucial role in play (the closed-circuit cameras being a tactical exception), they gave Duke Nukem 3D an immersive feel greater than that in its rivals. " who said that? Where is the source for this, who did a proven study,? "Fans may have happy memories of Duke Nukem 3D's network gaming maps" where is the survey for this, how can I verify it? "EDuke became a prominent community focus" who said that? The NY times? I want to see the article please. If you don't show it, I'll delete it. "thanks to the work of Richard Gobeille (TerminX) it has drawn a greater interest to the modding community." where can I see the proof please? Show me even the slighest one. "the game Sin is considered by some a spiritual sequel to Duke Nukem 3D" Oh yeah? Who said that please? Give me the source of that very accurate information etc ... You see it's basically endless. What I mean is that there is a given way to accept or not the proofs and verifiability. The proofs/verifiability I have given are huge already against all those statements above that have NONE. Laws are needed. Too much or strict laws kill the law. Best regards [[User:132.203.32.224|132.203.32.224]] 20:59, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
| |||