Talk:Club Penguin/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

References

The reference section is broken, can some one fix it? (I'm not lazy - I just don't know how to fix it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinni3 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorted. Next time use four tildes and insert new topics at the bottom, please. Malpass93 (talk) 10:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

CP wiki needs to be moved and CPIP

It should actualy be removed, but it at least should be moved to external sites. Also, after CP is back up you should add CPIP to the list, http://blog.clubpenguin.com/cpip 74.166.95.229 (talk)! —Preceding comment was added at 21:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Formatting

It looks like some one broke the formatting for the page - since I'm a new member, I can't edit it. Could some one please edit it for me? --Vinni3 (talk) 07:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

I don't know who wrote the page with the bad grammar, but I think I fixed it.

—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 03:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

External Links

I have spotted some links that seems to break the personal sites "rule". I edited the page along time and and it popped up again. I have forgot the link, but I will update this ASAP if I see this again, so the editor will be warned/banned.--Vinni3 (talk) 18:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC) Yes, the stie popped up again: Dunkinrunkin.com --Vinni3 (talk) 09:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This article should be deleted.

This website was just a fad and never deserved an article on a respectable encyclopedia like this. Every website can not have its own article Warfwar3 21:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This has been discussed in detail at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 August 15/Club Penguin and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Club Penguin (third nomination). If you strongly believe it should be deleted, then a fourth AfD would be in order. Personally, I believe it barely meets the inclusion criteria of Wikipedia:Notability (web). -- Satori Son 22:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

And now with the latest coverage by U.S. News and World Report ("Clique on to Penguin: How a virtual world is changing social dynamics in fifth-grade classrooms across the country"), sufficient notability seems firmly established. -- Satori Son 02:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

• I have looked at the article and it has gotten better over time. It has notabilty and just because you do not like the site doesn't mean that Club Penguin doesn't deserve an article. This article, in fact, will make Wikipedia better. Iceberg2229-not loggged in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.42.129.178 (talk) 01:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

CP has millions of players, this shouldn't be closed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.166.95.229 (talk) 21:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

ClubPenguinHQ

I believe that ClubPenguinHQ or ClubPenguinHQ Forums are notable links as they are (one of) the earliest Club Penguin "fan sites," and possibly the largest third party forums. --RancidKraut 20:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Good point there.--Barkjon 16:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm slightly late :P, but this should be added because it's the 2nd largest fan forum after Miniclip --Vinni3 (talk) 13:43, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

CP hq has broken the club penguin TOS many times and should not be allowed on the external links 74.166.95.229 (talk) 21:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Proof of this claim? Vinni3 (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Club Penguin Wiki

I think we should add an external link to the Club Penguin Wiki website. You might want to consider that!!--Barkjon 22:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The "Club Penguin Wiki" is a wiki hosted and subdomained on a free wiki host, and because of this I don't think it's notable. Also, you should have provided a link. --RancidKraut 16:27, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

the wiki [http://editthis.info/cpnn/Main_Page, i my opinon is very poorly written and is not notable. 65.11.85.163 05:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Get rid of it everyone doesnt like it. 74.166.95.229 (talk) 21:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Wrong wiki!-- Barkjon  18:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Screenshots

I've put a few screeshots on here just to improve the page a little. Comment to my talk page if you want to discuss this. Many Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samslipknot (talk • contribs) 17:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Article and Lists

Hey. I just think that this page really needs to be cleaned up. Anything like coin calculations, games, beta testers (thats like listing beta testers for every game), famous peguins, and anything like that should be deleted. No, not moved to a new page, deleted. I think so because these things go into GAmer Wikis. Not trying to be mean or anything, just trying to help. 68.5.28.194 00:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

new mission

there is a new mission, i will give details if needed81.108.233.59 17:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Major Cleaning...

Club Penguin article needs cleaning. Lots of false info, vandalizing,and to much info sounding like a game guide...Pendo4 is here...Look around...hello???...I am here... 21:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You know thats it. I'm going to erase some parts of the articles that look like tips. Wikipedia is for basic information, not in-game stuff.Pendo4 is here...Look around...hello???...I am here... 22:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

If you must do it, then do it with caution, so as not to delete the parts which follow Wikipedia Guidelines.--Kushan I.A.K.J (talk) 16:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

For active editors to this page — please do work to clean it up. Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 22:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Especially the part about non-members not being able to go to new game sites on release day.That's false info.Piepin (talk) 04:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Piepin

we need more images in it to, its just text we need pics of the rooms and stuff--62.30.81.125 (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

False Information?

I am unsure about this, but I do not think that repeat offenses under 'Profane language' is correct. Every ban for profane language lasts 24 hours, regardless of previous bans (concerning profane language). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 5th Scholar (talk • contribs) 02:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC) Incorrect, if you say fox example the F word, it will be a lot longer, also how long ago you were last banned effects it also. 74.166.95.229 (talk) 20:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Possibly copied (copyrighted?) text, without reference

I removed the quoted text below. From the use of the word "we", it seems that this was taken directly from a Club Penguin source, which would first be a copyright violation, and second is promotional. Please find a reference for this and summarize it in a not promotional manner. I will delete this text in one week — giving editors a chance to review, summarize, and reference the information. — ERcheck (talk) 07:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I note that there is a apparently non-copied, summarizing version in the article now. As such, as this may be a copyright issue, I'm deleting the text from the talk page. — ERcheck (talk) 22:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Dr. G?

Somebody I don't know who called G Dr. G? I am part of The Club Penguin Wiki under Dunklebug and know how to edit but i don't know what I did wrong but if somebody sees it explain what I did wrong and please fix it! Candyman 53 (talk) 22:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC) Candyman 53

he's the boss of the agents, and he is a great inventor, he made the pizzatron, and the jet packs 4 jet pack advencure--62.30.81.125 (talk) 20:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

WTF?

What happened to the Areas section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikara (talk • contribs) 20:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC) >_< Is anyone going to awnser me? Rikara (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC) famous real penguins wwe1324 banned lemonstandvl banned vlmsclub banned —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vlvillin (talk • contribs) 01:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't know.

--The Unknown Hitchhiker (talk) 03:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Moderator censorship

{{editprotect}}

A stupid moderator of the game removed a properly sourced statement when the article was being vandalised. Please re-add the following to Club_Penguin#Moderators.

Cheating is a significant problem in Club Penguin, with programs such as Winsock packet editor being used by players to gain additional game coins.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0703080167mar08,0,4256114.story |title=Cheating a real problem in Club Penguin's virtual world |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Benderoff |first=Eric |date=[[2007-03-08]] |publisher=Chicago Tribune}}</ref>

--Megapenguin (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The page is semi-protected, so this request (if valid) should be acted on by an editor of this article, who is more likely to be able to judge its validity. {{Editprotected}} should be used only on fully-protected pages. Happy‑melon 11:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I added it. I tweaked the wording to attribute it to the newspaper and remark that it's a 2007 new, so the cheating could have been curtailed since then. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Book Room Library

Shouldn't someone mention something about the book room library - especially with the new projects coming soon... --Coin945 (talk) 10:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Club Penguin Player Card.png

Image:Club Penguin Player Card.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

 Done; rationale had been removed. ♠TomasBat 17:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Name Change

New horizen interactive changed their name.Ther now called Club Penguin Inc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.209.72 (talk) 18:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

== Is Knowledge13 the wikipedia admin or owner? == Yes did they just make up the name knowledge13 or is it a real person or something?

I don't know but every examples uses knowledge13 --Tw3435 (talk) 14:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Knoeledge13 is a blogger, that quit, I googled it and found a blogger with a penguin called knowledge13, I looked in an older post and they mentioned wikipedia. They quit CP a long time ago though. 74.166.95.229 (talk) 21:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Fix the external links

External links has been spamed, this should be fixed, I can't fix this because I'm not a member so fix it quickly! 74.166.95.229 (talk) 20:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC) I —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.102.120 (talk) 13:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Betas Section

Does anybody have a problem with me deleting the section Club_Penguin#Betas? I would like to delete it because it offers no intelligible encyclopedic content and is unreferenced. If no one sees any issue with me deleting it, I will delete this section. Luksuh 03:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a good idea, but instead of deleting it, merge it into the part about the penguin or somethin' like that. -- Barkjon  18:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I just replaced that section with a sentence or two about how betas tested CP before it went live.

Feel free to delete it still, however. Repleh (talk) 20:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, the new version explains a lot more about the subject and is more understandable by somebody unfamiliar with Club Penguin. It still needs a little bit of rewriting and sourcing, but it's a lot better than it was before. Luksuh 16:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Simple English Version

There is now a Simple English version to the Club Penguin page. It has a link to the English version but there is no link from the English to the Simple English one. Can someone add the link?--Coin945 (talk) 13:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

Shouldn't we be getting around to archiving this talk page? It's been over one year and 50 conversations since the last archiving, and navigating this talk page is getting difficult. Does anyone agree that we should archive this talk page? Luksuh 16:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. Vinni3 (talk) 11:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done - Alison ^❤ 07:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Re-structure?

Currently, the page feels like things have been added all over the place. I think we should "group" the sections.Vinni3 (talk) 05:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

yer we need a few more images, its all text!--62.30.81.125 (talk) 16:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment

After reading the article, i think it is still Start class.. This is because:

• Many Parts of the article are not referenced at all
• There is alot of WP:JARGON, for example the word Puffle is used alot before the section telling the reader what it is
• Cut down on the amount of gameplay info, like what all the different types of Puffles do..
• The article stucture is messed up, for example the Chapter called Membership is filled up with things that don't belong there.

Remember that everything a user who doesnt want to play the game would find unnescessary(sp?) should be removed.

What you should do is restucture the articler and make sure it doesn't look like a gameguide (aka WP:NOT). Then read it through and check if you as non ClubP player would understand it and find it worth to read.. Yzmo ^talk 19:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I'll get to work on it.-- Barkjon  23:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get to work. Vinni3 (talk) 06:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Beta Section

Isn't Experimental Penguins the same as Penguin Chat? Vinni3 (talk) 06:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

GAN unsuccessful

Since this is a high traffic talk page, with more frequent archives, the GA review has been archived to Talk:Club Penguin/GA1. It can be accessed via the {{ArticleHistory}} template at the top of the page. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hacking? It's cheating

Wouldn't the term "hacking" be technically incorrect, it would rather be "cheating" because the cheats/"hacks" are not retrieved via brute force, they are easily decompiled.

hack1

• verb 1 cut with rough or heavy blows. 2 kick wildly or roughly. 3 use a computer to gain unauthorized access to data. 4 (hack it) informal manage; cope. 5 (hack off) informal annoy.

• noun 1 a rough cut or blow. 2 a tool for rough striking or cutting.

— DERIVATIVES hacker noun.

— ORIGIN Old English.

cheat

• verb 1 act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. 2 deprive of something by deceitful or unfair means. 3 avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill: she cheated death in a spectacular crash.

• noun 1 a person who cheats. 2 an act of cheating.

— ORIGIN shortening of ESCHEAT.

"• verb 1 act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage." - So called "hacks" are used to gain an advantage in this game, so therefore it is a cheat. "use a computer to gain unauthorized access to data." - The files needed to "make" cheats are very easy to get hold of, and are visible to the public, so it would not be unauthorized. Just my 2p --Vinni3 (talk) 20:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

• Good point. :) I've changed it to "cheating" instead. - Bilby (talk) 23:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Player Card picture

I think I could upload a better version of the Player Card picture, which will have better blanking out of the name, and coins. The name was left there because the uploader might have wanted to gain popularity on the game. --Vinni3 (talk) 19:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll do it.-- Barkjon  03:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No offence, but it looks kinda naff. --Vinni3 (talk) 13:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Logo + more

Do we really want the logo? We haven't really got a picture of the gameplay. Also, has NHI renamed itself? --Vinni3 (talk) 15:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll add it back, but if any one wants to get rid of it, tell me why on my talk page.--Vinni3 (talk) 08:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Judging by some of the featured articles in the Video Games project, general policy seems to be for box art in the infobox. As there is no box art, I don't see a major issue with either the logo or a screenshot. If we go with a logo, then I'd put the screenshot into the body of the article, as it is, as you say, useful. :) As to the NHI issue - looks like they have changed their name. :) I guess we need an reliable source so the history section can be updated. - Bilby (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

So we'll leave the logo, but where would the screenshot go?--Vinni3 (talk) 08:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the player card down, as the only place it seemed to be mentioned was in the Items section. Given that there's room for a picture of the game play in History or any of the other earlier sections. As an aside, I think the content is mostly looking good, now - main things we need to worry about are writing a new lead section and adding references to the in-game sections. Once that's out of the way, and we muck around with wording until we're happy, GA shouldn't be a problem. :) - Bilby (talk) 13:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Re protected?

Do you think we should ask to have the page to be re protected? There's already someone adding useless crap. --Vinni3 (talk) 15:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I've had the page re protected for 6 months. Should be enough time for us to get to GA. --Vinni3 (talk) 07:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Seems like a good move. :) - Bilby (talk) 07:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheating section

Last night, I was wondering: Why isn't there a cheating section, explaining the cheating "culture" around Club Penguin? Seems stupid not to include it. --Vinni3 (talk) 08:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I mentioned cheating briefly in "Reception and criticism", but if you think it deserves more weight I noticed that there were quite a few good references around, so you shouldn't have any problem added some real details. I didn't say much on the topic, as while there were three or four articles covering it, I wasn't sure how much weight to give the issue. - Bilby (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Now I think about it, cheating in its pure form is dying out, even though there have been major breakthroughs. It might even vanish in the next 6 months.--Vinni3 (talk) 06:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I sure hope so! That darn CP Trainer. And that darn Sanity Penguin. -- Barkjon  21:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Preparing for GA

I've started trimming some bits - not many, but I think it is almost at GA standard, so if I really can't find a reference anywhere for something, and if that comment doesn't really add much to the article, then I think it will go better of we take it out and add it back in when a reference is found. Mostly, though, I'm adding the last few references - the only section that now really needs help is Items. Once that's out of the way, then I guess we really only need to worry about the lede, and suspect that it should be ready for another shot at GA. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilby (talk • contribs)

Looking heaps better, no harm in trying another GA nomination, I'd say. giggy _(:O) 09:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone has put a lot of work into it. We'll see how things go, then. - Bilby (talk) 10:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm crossing my fingers! --Vinni3 (talk) 06:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Club Penguin/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. Any comments are welcome. LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 22:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   The section about Child safety seems more like an advertisment even though all of them have proper citations. From that section:
   The system uses a number of different approaches in order to maintain a high level of security. The key approaches include:
   To me, "high level" is POV. Fixed

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Semi-protection is for ip vandalism

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   On hold until criterion #4 is fixed. Passed, as #4 has been fixed.

LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 23:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for that. I've reworded the child safety section so that it isn't a POV as it was - you were definitely correct about the wording. :) I considered moving some of the criticism into Child safety, (to join the "Orwellian dystopia" reference which was already there), but I thought that it may be better left in the "Reception and criticism" section. I'm happy to move it in there if you think it will provide more balance, though. - Bilby (talk) 03:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review! It's much appreciated. :) - Bilby (talk) 01:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
• Ditto. Thanks!--Vinni3 (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Game - Thin Ice and Astro Barrier

During the April Fool's Party 2008, the games Thin Ice and Astro Barrier were shut down and a new game called Thiniceastrobarrier was released until the party ended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.16.21 (talk) 00:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

After GA (and another archival)

I was thinking, after GA, do you think we should expand Penguin Chat and the NHI pages? It would closely tie in with Club Penguin. PS. Do you also think we should archive the talk again? It's still quite long. --Vinni3 (talk) 17:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm still wondering if we can get this to Featured status or not - I'm not sure at the moment either way. However, both articles could be expanded, although there isn't a huge amount of material on either, at least that I've seen while looking for Club Penguin stuff. - Bilby (talk) 09:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I see your point. Let's get this to featured, and then work on the parts.--Vinni3 (talk) 14:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)