Difference between revisions of "User talk:Ambrevar"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Games / Netbook Games)
 
(Sectioning.)
(8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
As for your many other edits - thanks for making the wiki even better. Keep up the good work :-) -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] ([[User talk:Karol|talk]]) 20:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 
As for your many other edits - thanks for making the wiki even better. Keep up the good work :-) -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] ([[User talk:Karol|talk]]) 20:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 +
 +
:Thanks for pointing this out. I did notice the warning, but I did not take it into account because imo WZ2100, Wesnoth, etc. belong to the same category than 0 A.D. for example.
 +
:I can't see the clear relation between "noteworthy with low system requirements" and netbook games? Where do "noteworthy games with high system requirements" fit? And why wouldn't the netbook games article feature simple games?
 +
:In fact I believe the seperate article make things only more complicated.
 +
:Don't you think a merge would be best here?
 +
 +
:[[User:Ambrevar|Ambrevar]] ([[User talk:Ambrevar|talk]]) 08:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 +
 +
::Please discuss this in [[Talk:Netbook Games#Merging]] (it's only a bit out of date, it should refer to [[Common Applications/Games]] instead of [[Games]] now). -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 10:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 +
 +
== ATI ==
 +
While I share your enthusiam, please avoid bias in articles without appropriate referencing.  It almost sounds like a advertisement/opinion.  Wikis ''should'' stick to the facts.  [[User:T1nk3r3r|T1nk3r3r]] ([[User talk:T1nk3r3r|talk]]) 21:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
:I agree we should stick to the truth, but opinion matters. In fact I just told the truth : radeon may perform better at 3D (it does for me). I encourage the use of radeon over catalyst because of the quality of the product, because it's much more Unix. It perfectly fits to the content of this wiki. By the way the "fact" Catalyst was better at 3D has never had appropriate references either. Arch Wiki is not an encyclopedia, it is written by people who believe in Unix, in the KISS philosophy, in the do-it-yourself way of handling thing, and so on. There is necessarily a lot of opinions down there. And sarcasms. See this quote from [[AMD Catalyst]] that appears two times in the article:
 +
 +
::''The Legacy driver does not support Xorg 1.13 for now. Support should be added by AMD in a century or two, but this could be sooner.''
 +
 +
:I discussed also about it with [[User:Unia]] who shares your point, so I decided to remove my changes and to start a [[Talk:ATI#Radeon_vs._Catalyst|discussion]]. --[[User:Ambrevar|Ambrevar]] ([[User talk:Ambrevar|talk]]) 13:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:17, 6 February 2013

Games / Netbook Games

I think you missed the warning that's at the top of Common_Applications/Games/Free, so I undid some of your edits, as Warzone 2100, Battle for Wesnoth and FreeCiv are already listed in Netbook_Games.

As for your many other edits - thanks for making the wiki even better. Keep up the good work :-) -- Karol (talk) 20:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I did notice the warning, but I did not take it into account because imo WZ2100, Wesnoth, etc. belong to the same category than 0 A.D. for example.
I can't see the clear relation between "noteworthy with low system requirements" and netbook games? Where do "noteworthy games with high system requirements" fit? And why wouldn't the netbook games article feature simple games?
In fact I believe the seperate article make things only more complicated.
Don't you think a merge would be best here?
Ambrevar (talk) 08:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Please discuss this in Talk:Netbook Games#Merging (it's only a bit out of date, it should refer to Common Applications/Games instead of Games now). -- Kynikos (talk) 10:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

ATI

While I share your enthusiam, please avoid bias in articles without appropriate referencing. It almost sounds like a advertisement/opinion. Wikis should stick to the facts. T1nk3r3r (talk) 21:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree we should stick to the truth, but opinion matters. In fact I just told the truth : radeon may perform better at 3D (it does for me). I encourage the use of radeon over catalyst because of the quality of the product, because it's much more Unix. It perfectly fits to the content of this wiki. By the way the "fact" Catalyst was better at 3D has never had appropriate references either. Arch Wiki is not an encyclopedia, it is written by people who believe in Unix, in the KISS philosophy, in the do-it-yourself way of handling thing, and so on. There is necessarily a lot of opinions down there. And sarcasms. See this quote from AMD Catalyst that appears two times in the article:
The Legacy driver does not support Xorg 1.13 for now. Support should be added by AMD in a century or two, but this could be sooner.
I discussed also about it with User:Unia who shares your point, so I decided to remove my changes and to start a discussion. --Ambrevar (talk) 13:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)