Talk:Descent: FreeSpace – The Great War/Archive 1

Archive 1

Wing Commander Prophecy

I love Freespace 1 & 2 to this day, but ya gotta admit, Freespace 1's story was almost a direct copy of Wing Commander Prophecy's.

Or of Babylon 5. Some days in the scifi scene you can't throw a brick without hitting an ancient dark enemy. --Kizor 21:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Not exactly unheard of to have the concept of a mysterious, powerful enemy uniting warring sides in mutual defense, is it? In any case, I'm not sure how this is relevant to the article.

Oh, come of it. Prophecy came out November 30, 1997, FS1 came out May 31, 1998. They didn't have time to copy Prophecy. Weebs 10:17, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

FS_Open screenshot

A better version could be inserted here. Current screenshot about the Perseus is pathetic. It makes FreeSpace Open look bad. A screenshot about the hi-poly Hercules with a hi-res planet in the background is gonna be better - 81.182.81.246 14:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Posted a topic on HLP - Weebs (Black Wolf on HLP)

Inferno

Someone put an edit in stating that Inferno was accepted as canon in the FS community. As far as I know this is not true, although someone did claim that on the Avault forums. --Shimei 23:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

If it's not [V], it's not canon. Simple as. - Ferret 17:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

help

how do u cope with multiple dragon fighters? i just cant do it there too fast cant even hit them

plz give advice just stand still and wait for them to pass your ship and hit them with everything you have. how i captured the dragon fighter in one of the missions

GameFAQs Craig Sniffen 18:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Another small correction needed

The games (both FS1 and FS2) are capitalized FreeSpace in the vast majority of Volition's literature, so the page should be capitalized in the same way.

Been there, done that. -- A. Exeunt 02:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Freespace 2 License Agreement

Piece of Trivia: It took us atleast 4 years to notice this. I guess Volition was doing an expiriement in how long it would take for someone to read the EULA Lordkazan 20:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

i like ur attitude Smoke Weed

My oops revert

It was just pointed out to me on my talk page that I reverted quite a lot of edits yesterday. Sorry about that, I was looking for when one oddity was put in, and forgot I was editing an out-of-date version, which I then saved, undoing tons of other things. Thought I should mention it here too. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 08:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

TGA to JPEG

somebody help me out when i take a sc its tga how do u make it jpeg or something common? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smoke Weed (talk • contribs)

Any decent raster graphics editor such as GIMP should be able to do that. Some image viewers such as IrfanView can also convert images. If you don't need an editor, go for a viewer or get a dedicated image converter.

BTW, WP:RD/C is the proper place for these sort of questions. :) --Kjoonlee 03:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Flail SCP video

Tech Demo video avi: http://files.filefront.com/Flail_SCP/;5077061;;/fileinfo.htm youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6VhyMzu12c

This would be nice to have added - it is dated 2006-05-24 on firefront. Lordkazan 18:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Odd citation requirements

A. Exeunt's edit is rather interesting.. removing

It should be noted that the 'Ancient' narrator had a synethsized echo which was also given to the human narrator--presumably the player's character--for the majority of the end-game cutscene.

with reason been 'not citated'? I mean how can you even cite something that happens purely in game? - Wanderer602 18:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:NOR. If that is true, he needs a third-party source to claim it that he can cite to back up the claim. If he has no citation and he's making a substantive claim, then that's original research and is in appropriate for Wikipedia. (I don't even know if it's true -- if true, it's certainly a very minor point.) Xihr 20:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Wanderer. Remember that we do not have any claims from Volition. We need to have verifiable, reliable sources. Because that paragraph has no citations or sources or verifiability, it fails the verification rule of Wikipedia, is considered original research, and has to be removed. However, if you can back that up with something from Volition, go ahead and add that back in, leaving a {{cite}} at the end. -- Altiris Exeunt 05:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for this little flame thing but... Well i can agree in most of the cases with that but with those requirements you ought to remove more than half the text on any gaming related wikipage (probably from other pages as well)... That is all entries related to in game events (cinematics, or other) as those do not tend to have any citations either (or they cite the game itself... for example Halo) and ought to be therefore counted as 'original research', right?.

- Wanderer602 07:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

If you put it that way, you are probably right, and this is something I've also been wandering about. Perhaps it is very obvious in-game knowledge then? Unlike the text I removed, which apparently is a very minor point and possibly is original research, obvious facts, such as the Shivans attacking the Terrans and Vasudans, need not be cited. But, to be frankly speaking, I am in the dark as you are. My general rule is to cite anything that I don't know, otherwise it is original research. Besides, there might be other ways for Volition to record the speakers. It need not be 'a synthesized echo'. Since this information has, as far as I know, not been confirmed by Volition, it is not verifiable. But like I said, if it can be verified, put it back in. -- Altiris Exeunt 09:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and one more thing...most of the text in Halo's plot has citations and the text below:

The story is presented through an instruction manual, scripted events and conversations during the game, and in-game cut scenes.

Therefore, it passes verifiability. I also hope you know the exact meaning of original research, which is:

a term used in Wikipedia to refer to material that has not been published by a reliable source. It includes unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories, or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position — or which, in the words of Wikipedia's co-founder Jimmy Wales, would amount to a "novel narrative or historical interpretation."

-- Altiris Exeunt 09:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

True in some parts but for example in the Halo page most of the plot related citations are direct ripoffs from the in game/cut scene dialogue which has about the same 'worth of verifiability' as the edit i mentioned earlier (clearly audible effect from a cutscene). And (forgot to mention this earlier) there exists one source of game related info for FreeSpace too, so called FreeSpace reference bible available from Volitions old FreeSpace page. - Wanderer602 11:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah...that too...when the GTB Ursa article was still around, I cited that as a source...anyway, I'll leave that 'as is' then, until someone else thinks it is original research. In the meantime, you might want to try citing the FreeSpace Reference Bible like this:

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip|title=Descent FreeSpace: The Great War Reference Bible|publisher=Volition Inc.|accessdate=2006-12-18}}</ref>

If you want to convert that into a reference, also add a new 'Notes and references' section and add something like this:

<div class="references-small"><references/></div>

I hope you know what I mean. -- Altiris Exeunt 12:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

New screenshots to add please

I don't know how to upload screenshots but please add the following screenshots to the source code project section http://www.users.qwest.net/~fobarbrad/images/screen0076.png (this is a recreation of the retail box art) http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/120/untitled43wz.jpg http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8786/untitled513zk.jpg 12.226.237.65 15:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

In order to upload images and files, you will need a Wikipedia account. It's free, so no worries.

I have an account, i'm just not logged in 12.226.237.65 03:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

One more thing, you must provide source information, otherwise your uploads will be deleted. -- A. Exeunt 02:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

k - they're publically released screenshots so nobody really owns them

my pathetic and sad wikipedia layout skills totally failed to make the page work right with thumbnails... so if someone could nicely thumbnail those for me i'd appreciate it! Lordkazan 04:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC) Oh.. and now a farking automated script deleted the images, even though they were 100% fine with freaking copyright issues - fuck wikipedia. Would one of you who knows how to get wiki not to give you an UFIA please add these screenshots - this is bullshit Lordkazan 18:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Calm down and stay civil, please. :) The files were not deleted. --Kjoonlee 19:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

However, you do need to provide copyright info for files you upload, or they will be deleted. --Kjoonlee 19:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I did, they were marked screenshots, original takers (Who posted them on a public board for unlimited consumption) name's and a short description of what they showed. I went to view them and it gave me edit-page links and a bot had attached stuff to my talk page saying they were deleted. 12.226.237.65 20:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that you've put them in and arranged them nicely! Thanks! (now to look at how you did it :D) Lordkazan 20:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

There is an image that has been left unused on Wikipedia since the mass deletion of all the ship articles on FreeSpace. If this image is appropriate, shall we put it in this article too? -- Altiris Exeunt 10:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

link removal

Why was the Freespace Zone external link removed? The company gave permission for the files to be distributed freely as long as no profit or commercial gain of any kind is made from them. I don't see any reason why the link should have been taken down. Please explain why this was done. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Manuelomar2001 (talk • contribs) .

When did that happen? As far as I know, the EULA allows distributions to "friends and acquaintances" only. I'm not acquainted with the owners of that site, for example. --Kjoonlee 23:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll quote the COPYING file of the FS2_Open project:

Volition Copyright (applies to original FreeSpace2 source code
developed and released by Volition):

"Copyright (C) Volition, Inc. 1999.  All rights reserved.

All source code herein is the property of Volition, Inc. You may not
sell or otherwise commercially exploit the source or things you
created based on the source."


Modifications by members of the FreeSpace Source Code Project are
released under whatever terms the individual authors choose, but the
above notice continues to apply to all fs2_open code.

The original data files are not open source, so I think mass distribution of the CDs (to people who aren't your friends or acquaintances) is a violation of the EULA. Open source Doom and Open source Quake are a bit like that too; it's illegal to distribute the data files of Quake. Just because it's allowed to copy the source files doesn't mean you can copy the data files to your non-friends and non-acquaintances. --Kjoonlee 23:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It's even documented at Wikipedia, at Quake#Source code and legacy:

The source code of the Quake and QuakeWorld engines was licensed under the GPL in 1999. The id Software maps, objects, textures, sounds and other creative works remain under their original license. The shareware distribution of Quake is still freely redistributable and usable with the GPLed engine code. One must purchase a copy of Quake in order to get the registered version of the game which includes more single player episodes and the deathmatch maps.

--Kjoonlee 00:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

And of course, redefinition of "friend" or "acquaintance" would be OR. WP:NOR --Kjoonlee 11:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually it wouldn't be WP:NOR - since it is the de facto legal situation - however your revert comment is a violation of WP:CIVIL - do not imply that things which are NOT COMMON SENSE are such, it is an insult to the intelligence of the other editors involved in the situation. the DE FACTO legal situation is that "friend" or "acquaintance" is very broadly defined as the owners of the IP know full well about HOTU and the other links and have not interviened (infact look up about Copyright/Trademark abandonment law) Lordkazan 13:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I still say it goes against common sense. Where are your legal sources if you can cite them? --Kjoonlee 13:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

De facto is useless when it comes to legal matters. What matters is de jure. --Kjoonlee 13:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

If you would bother to read up on trademark abandonment you'd know that it is also de jure - my source is the ACTUAL HISTORY OF THE SITUATION, a history in which I have participated since the release of the game. Lordkazan 14:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced statements do not belong at Wikipedia. --Kjoonlee 14:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not an unscourced statement, the goddamn EULA is the source. You are clearly not familiar with the legal situation, stop pretending that you are. I am INTIMIATELY familiar with the situation as I have written several of the biggest used 3rd party modding tools for the game and I am part of the Source Code Project. Potentially excluding any other SCP members/HLP staff who are wikipedia editors - I am undoubtably the most knowledgable person on this subject on wikipedia! Lordkazan 14:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I think you have to calm down and read WP:CIVIL. --Kjoonlee 14:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

And WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:REF. Do we have a peer-reviewd Wikipedia article on copyright that supports what you say? --Kjoonlee 14:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ahem. Dear Lordkazan, trademark abandonment does not mean the same as product abandonment. I'm trying to stay clear of any ad hominem's here, but it does seem you are not the most knowledgable person regarding product, trademark and copyright law on WikiPedia. Further, you being a member of a fan club doesn't really have any bearing on, well, anything. Calm down and drop it. The FreeSpaceZone website carries links to copyrighted material. FS1 and ST has never been released to the public domain. To reinsert the link would be against the rules of WP. --Tirolion 11:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Darkness Rising

I just came across a CD titled "Conflict: Freespace - Darkness Rising". I couldn't find any info here in the Wiki so I searched the net and found this in a forum post:

"Decent Freespace: Darkness Rising is the one I have. It is a demo for Freespace1, and therefore a precursor to the "Great War" It is a small game on the "Terrian-Vesudan War" and the first Shivan encounter. About 15 missions long."

I'm not sure where to put this in the article. Could a regular editor please put this info where he thinks it fits best? Btw, I've bought my CD used, it has a "Bundled Software" symbol and some german text on it.

Looks like it's a bundle/OEM version, kind of like how "Destination Saturn," "Destination Quartzon," and "Sol Ascent" were short versions for Descent 1, 2, and 3. --Kjoonlee 16:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm editing an external link

This one: Descent: FreeSpace at GameFAQs Contains a medal guide for the game.

I'm changing it to say that it contains a medal guide for Descent: Freespace, the first in the series, mainly because the entire series is combined in this article and it is unclear as to which game this refers, but also because I plan to make medal guides for the other 2 games, ST will be more of a points guide (I posted that link originally, and I made the guide originally, go to my webpage if you'd like proof).

If there are reasonable objections please post them. --P4wn4g3 01:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Sales numbers?

Didn't find any sales numbers in the article. Are any available? The Merciful 17:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Too many external links

The article has too many external links that should be replaced with a single link to DMOZ. SharkD 11:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Ship list

I don't think that a ship list should be on this article, and I also don't think some of these ships should have their own article. Wikipedia is not the place for this, the FS wiki is. bruce89 20:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It is cruft. SharkD 21:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

My Applogies, i started on it without consulting the discussion page, Lesson learned, I have merged the individual pages into one Descent Freespace Terran fighters (terran and fighters to be replaced as necessery for other ships), which i am still working on. though if i might add each Wing Commander ship class has its own page and that is what started me on the idea. the listing is far from compete so as is the norm anyone here has anything to add or change discuss it or for my money go ahead and change it.

Regards user:headdie 14:57 (GMT) 23 July 2007

Keep in mind also that there used to be separate Wikipedia pages for each ship class, both fighter and capital ship, in FreeSpace and FreeSpace 2 (there are dozens and dozens in total). These were all eventually deleted, so adding them again is only going to burn energy before they're deleted again. I agree, the best place for such a thing is the FS wiki, or a game guide. Xihr 20:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, i can understand why there is not enough information to warent individual pages, though i dont understand what the diffrence is between fighters in Wing Commander and Freespace, grouping the ships into one page seems to make good sized pages though, what i will do is continue with the project, if it gets taged for review then i'll start a discussion on it, if that turns up a good reson for deletion then fine.

Regards Headdie 07:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd advocate merging the Wing Commander ones too now that you mention it. bruce89 15:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Status of these games

Reading through the article and linked pages i find it's a bit ambiguous as to what versions are legal to download. Is any previously retail version fine to download? Are there special freeware versions? What about the expansion packs? DarkProdigy 05:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Just for your information, only FreeSpace 2, as far as I'm concerned, is freeware. Descent: FreeSpace, as well as Descent: FreeSpace - Silent Threat are still commercial products. -- Altiris Exeunt 01:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Correction: FS2 is freeware to friends and aquaintances only. --Kjoonlee 05:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, thanks for the reminder. -- Altiris Exeunt 08:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I have heard through a member of the Penny Arcade forums that one of the developers said on a mailing list that they had no problem with people considering the entire internet their friend. Of course, this was completely unofficial. Has anyone here seen that post/know where I could find it? --James 06:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. That's what I thought, but I got a little confused when I saw that some of the linked sites have the other games in the series available for download...DarkProdigy 21:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Then those are probably illegal. As far as IGN and other reliable sites like the Descent Network can tell you, only FreeSpace 2 is freeware to friends and acquaintances. -- Altiris Exeunt 05:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

What were those sites, and are they still there? --Kjoonlee 14:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The FreeSpace Oracle is still up, and they've made a mention of the agreement here. However, I can't seem to find any more reliable sites than that...perhaps googling this may help. -- Altiris Exeunt 09:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Oops, yes, but I meant sites that host FS1/FS2, etc. Are they still linked? --Kjoonlee 16:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

FS1 & FS2 & FS_Open sharing a page?

I remember that a while ago, Freespace 2 had it's own page. When/why was it merged with the Freespace 1 artical? Freespace 2 is certainly notable enough, it is one of the best known space flight simulators in existance, and it kinda continues on from the Descent series which any knowledgable gamer would have heard of. If Freespace 2 was made it's own artical, FS_Open would of course be merged with it, if not given it's own artical. It has long been convention on Wikipedia to give each game in a series it's own page, and for the more popular games, to have a central page which is an overview of the entire series. So why isn't that the case for this game? If I don't get some good answers, I will de-merge both this artical at some point in the near future.Darkcraft 13:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

AFAICT FreeSpace 2 has been a redirect since last July. It probably never had an article of its own. --Kjoonlee 13:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I am pretty sure it once did, and that it was quite an in-depth article in which some of the spaceships even had their own subarticals. Even if I am just getting confused, I think Freespace 2 definately should have it's own article.Darkcraft 02:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok I take it that there are no objections? I will be separating the articals then.Darkcraft 11:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should learn how to spell article before taking on a task of separating the two. Xihr 18:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

What? Was there any point in that other then trying to be offensive? I see in your contribs you have quite a list of correcting typos and such, but seriosly don't post in a talk page if you are just trying to be rude. About the seperating of the article: I will do it (if someone else doesn't) I just need some spare time. Stupid year 11...Darkcraft 11:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow apparently you even made a typo when you typed that last reply out (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ADescent%3A_FreeSpace&diff=106185612&oldid=104373584) SRSLY U SHUD TRY LERNING ENGLISH KEKEKEKE.Darkcraft 11:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you still plan on doing this? Because I agree- FreeSpace 2 and it's associated open source community are a plenty large enough topic to deserve it's own page. Please do get to it! 82.69.37.32 00:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The articles started separated and was later merged. Separating them again isn't very constructive. Xihr 06:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Please separate them! SharkD 22:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Freespace 1 should be separated from Freespace 2.. WinterSpw 23:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Oops forgot all about this, I will separate them right now. Darkcraft 10:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Split!

I have split the Freespace article into Freespace 2 and Descent: FreeSpace. If you disagree, then go ahead and say so. I think I have done a decent (ahaha get it...it was a pun) job of the split, but I had some trouble with the History section of Descent: FreeSpace. I couldn't see a quick and effective way to split it, so I left it all in the Descent: Freespace article. So there are issues with both articles that I will try to correct, but I think that this split was really necessary.Darkcraft 11:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The other problem I had was with the Races section. It would fit into both articles, but I don't want to duplicate the information. For now I will leave it on the Freespace 1 page. I was thinking a possible solution for all of these problems would be to have a Descent Series page, then give Descent 1,2,3, Fs 1,2 their own pages. That way we could centralise all the information shared between the games onto a single page, whilst creating shorter and more specific articles for the individual games. It would require a major reworking of many articles, but I would be happy to do a lot of the work, and the end result might be much better then the way the articles currently work.Darkcraft 11:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Well done, sir. After looking at both articles, I agree that a split was something long overdue. I have also committed a possible solution into the FreeSpace 2 article. -- Altiris Exeunt 12:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Gameplay Description?

This page doesn't describe how this game is played or what it is like, other than being a "space-simulation game" with "wingmen the player can command, an intricate storyline, multiplayer and capital ships over 2 kilometers in length".

After reading this article, I expected to know more about how this game is played. Are you a pilot? Can you visit the surface of planets? Do you control those capital ships or are they all under AI control? I don't need an exhaustive feature list, but I did expect to get enough information to form an impression of what it is like to play the game.

I agree. If the creation of a central Freespace/Descent article goes ahead, as I propsed above, I will try to write something like that into it.Darkcraft 13:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Gamma Draconis

---

Please note that I moved this down here from right at the top of tha page so that it doesn't stay on this page for all eternity, view history to see what I mean.Darkcraft 14:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

---

Could someone have a look at Gamma Draconis please and take appropriate action. It was created by User:60.226.31.100, who created a few articles today by copying and pasting from other websites. The JPS 23:10, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Apparently deleted and replaced with a non-fictional article about the actual star system.Darkcraft 13:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Prequel

I removed the "Descent: FreeSpace — The Great War is the prequel to FreeSpace 2" part. "A prequel is a work that portrays events which include the structure, conventions, and/or characters of a previously completed narrative, but occur at an earlier time." "Prequel" doesn't refer to everything that has a sequel. -Corky842 13:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Good point. My mistake.Darkcraft 06:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

2007 Rewrite

Hi, I am planning to rewrite this article to address the above comments (cruft, game guide-ness, filtering out FS2, etc). As per what I have done in FreeSpace 2, I will write up in the following format in accordance to Wiki standards (references included).

1. Lead - a summary including the various names game is known by
2. Gameplay - space simulator statement, notable gameplay areas
3. Plot and setting - citing the story in an out-of-universe manner
4. Development - how the game come into being, its name, publishers, versions and such
5. Reception - what was the reviewers' opinions of the game, impact on the gaming community
6. References - standard
7. External Links - only Wiki-approved links relevant to Descent: FreeSpace — The Great War

Any comments/suggestions are welcome. Jappalang (talk) 03:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done First draft in place. Please take a look. :-) Jappalang (talk) 02:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Keep it up. I'll follow your lead and, if I only can, poke what seems problematic once you're done.
(I do disagree with the concept of "cruft" - with no clear definition except for excessive detail, "excessive" being left up to the user, it usually resolves to giving a veneer of credibility to removing content because the user wants to remove that content, a rationale that can bring the whole project down. But this issue is only marginally relevant here.) --Kizor (talk) 15:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:VG assessment

Another fantastic article! Great length, brilliant use of a GIF, well-sourced. But... aieee! Image:Freespace1box.jpg doesn't appear to have a fair use rationale. Sort out that issue, and then I think you should press the GAC button (metaphorical: you actually need to press several buttons).

I'm rating this article Low on the importance scale, but if you think this is an incorrect rating, let me know. Una Laguna^Talk 21:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The pinnacle of an obscure genre. I'd say mid myself, but I'm biased and content with low. --Kizor (talk) 21:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I would say the pinnacle is FreeSpace 2. FreeSpace however is the base from which FS2 came from (exploding ships, the engine which FS2's upgraded version is running on, etc). Unfortunate that the FS series tend to flounder in public awareness compared to Star Wars and Wing Commander. Jappalang (talk) 22:17, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for the catching it. Jappalang (talk) 21:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Dodgy title?

The current name of the article uses a hyphen to represent a dash—surely this can't be right. Please look at WP#DASH. Thanks. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 15:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

It would appear that someone recently changed it and then went through and modified all the references to be a hyphen instead of an em-dash. I don't know why this was done, as it does not appear to have been discussed, but you're correct; it should be an em-dash, not a hyphen. Xihr (talk) 18:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I changed it because all external links use hyphen and the article was rewritten to use hyphens, so I thought it was the correct form. Feel free to change it back (although you need admin's help with article's title). --Mika1h (talk) 21:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, it really needs changing. Having a policy-violating article name doesn't set a good precedent for the rest of the article. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 21:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

You seem to know about this dash business, so could you tell what is the correct form? --Mika1h (talk) 21:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

It should be a dash (em-dash), not a hyphen. Xihr (talk) 00:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Just to point this out. WP:DASH#Em dashes as of 22:12, 23 November 2007 states

Spaced en dashes as an alternative to em dashes
Spaced en dashes – such as here – can be used instead of em dashes in all of the ways discussed above. Spaced en dashes are used by several major publishers, to the complete exclusion of em dashes; style manuals more often prefer unspaced em dashes. One style should be used consistently in an article.

I am fine with either style (though to go back to the em dash would mean another edit), but the policy states en dash can be used, and unless I am mistaken, Interplay and Volition use en dash when they use the full title of this game on their sites, e.g. FreeSpace: Features. Jappalang (talk) 22:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

"Can" doesn't mean "must." An em-dash is the proper typographical symbol, so the recent changes broke it. Xihr (talk) 00:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

In the dash article itself, it pointed out there is little consensus on the proper usage of em or en dash, and levels it down to simple consistency of usage. I presume then Wikipedia's policy is "em-dash" ( " — " funny enough is shown as %E2%80%94 in ASCII )throughout? If so, that blockquote I pointed out should be changed, as it is misleading. Reverting the "en-dash" in the article serves little if the article's namespace is still at the "en-dash" version, which is confusing to me. Wiki points out em-dash usage should be without spaces in articles, which is supported by the dash article. Are we going to remove those spaces surrounding the dash in the title now? Are we going to be consistent in the dash usage? Jappalang (talk) 01:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless I'm missing something, hyphens are still being used. Please, unspaced emdash or spaced endash. Thanks. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 09:29, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The current state of the article as of 00:35, 24 November 2007 by Xihr, is the title using <space>en-dash<space> and all article text using <space>em-dash<space>. I fail to spot any hyphens in the "Descent: FreeSpace — The Great War" statements in the article text.Jappalang (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Concensus on em-dash/en-dash

Regarding the discussion above. I have failed to find a definitive policy of Wikipedia insisting on either en-dash or em-dash (this includes <space>dash<space> vs dash). In both the Wiki-article on dash and the Manual of Style, WP:DASH, the consensus for the use of en-dash vs em-dash is to ensure a consistent usage in the article (ref: 1, 2). This is supported by all MOS talk regarding the en-dash vs em-dash usage (ref: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). All in all, I feel it is perhaps for the best (and with regards to the guidelines set) to come to an agreement on the style to be used for this article. This agreement can serve as a note to future editors on what style is used in this article, or to discover what is the policy of dashes, and prevent further dash conflicts here.

As of 00:35, 24 November 2007, the namespace/title of this article uses the <space>en-dash<space>, while all the text in the article is using <space>em-dash<space>. This is inconsistent. I suggest three possible dash schemes for this article.

1. Descent: FreeSpace – The Great War (<space>en-dash<space>)
2. Descent: FreeSpace — The Great War (<space>em-dash<space>)
3. Descent: FreeSpace—The Great War (em-dash)

• Option 1 Support: Volition itself uses this scheme.FreeSpace: Features GameSpot uses it as well [6] Wikipedia policy allows using <space>en-dash<space> in place of <space>em-dash<space> as long as usage is consistent within article. Changing to this style only requires editing the article text to be consistent with current article title. Jappalang (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what's happening; everything's shown up as hyphens on my screen. Apparently, the dashes are being used. Can anyone explain what's going wrong with my display? Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 18:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Ashnard, I understand your concern. Right now if we look at the article on screen and through the edit panel, it seems en-dashes (perhaps hyphens) are used throughout the article text except for the image caption in the Infobox. However if you use the "history" section to compare the current revision to the previous version, you can see the en-dash to em-dash change in the comparison screen. It appears there is perhaps some system issue in how Wiki handles reverts? An edit by copying and pasting the em-dash from the caption statement (or using the ampersand dash semi-colon) will solve the issue, but it is best we reach a concensus before going about any dash-related edit. Jappalang (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

• Option 2 support, as it is the most typographically correct and consistent with Wikipedia style guidelines. That Volition uses hyphens in some of their literature doesn't demonstrate that this is correct, just that whatever copyeditor was involved didn't do a good job. Xihr (talk) 20:22, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

They aren't hyphens, they are en dashes. They look very similar but are not the same thing. --Mika1h (talk) 21:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

No; I know the difference. I've compared the two on a preview screens after I typed in an endash. By the way, how are these being inputted. Are you not typing in an ampersand, and then "ndash;"? Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 21:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Mika1h is responding to Xihr about Volition's page. Jappalang (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policy acknowledges use of <space>en-dash<space> in place of em-dash and allows it on the condition of consistency within the article. Jappalang (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

In light of any clear consensus (only two opinions), I am willing to go with option 2 to close this out. In 24 hours, unless a convincing case in terms of policy is brought out against the use of <space>em-dash<space>, I will convert the article and the links to it to such a format. Jappalang 05:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Pass

The article is well-written, comprehensive, sourced, and uses sparing images to great effect (the animated gif is great). Happy to pass to GA. David Fuchs ^(talk) 22:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality of "Reception"

The Reception section struck me as veiled editorializing. There's the illusion of a strong (or unanimous) consensus on each point, with only a handful of reviews as evidence. All it should do is relay the critics' opinions, as packaged, and leave the generalizing to the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.53.2 (talk) 11:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Should the Expansion to this game, have its own article?

This is one for discussion - I recently wrote out the plot of this expansion, but I wonder if elements, such as what was added, and the layout of the game, should get its own article, with connections to the Freespace series? GUtt01 (talk) 19:47, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Descent: FreeSpace – The Great War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204211315/http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip to http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204211315/http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip to http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204211315/http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip to http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204211315/http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip to http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/downloads/fsrefbible.zip
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080130114227/http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/ to http://www.volition-inc.com/fs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

verbiage

too much "while" and "many" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.32.181.181 (talk) 01:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Descent: FreeSpace – The Great War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061022152823/http://www.gamerswanted.com/PC/318/news/65/ to http://www.gamerswanted.com/PC/318/news/65/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071111141138/http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/editorials/11-20-98.shtml to http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/editorials/11-20-98.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071111140814/http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/editorials/09-13-98.shtml to http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/editorials/09-13-98.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071023043433/http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/fs1/st/ to http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/fs1/st/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071209055744/http://www.hyperion-entertainment.biz:8080/news/news21 to http://www.hyperion-entertainment.biz:8080/news/news21
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.skoar.com/Story.php?StoryTitle=Descent%3A%20Freespace%20-%20The%20Great%20War&StoryId=1075&GroupId=5
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071110062346/http://forceforgood.co.uk/reviewpage.php?selected=29 to http://www.forceforgood.co.uk/reviewpage.php?selected=29
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071111140713/http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/editorials/06-10-98.shtml to http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/editorials/06-10-98.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051226075430/http://www.gamerswanted.com/pc/137/reviews/1/ to http://www.gamerswanted.com/PC/137/reviews/1/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525091310/http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/descentfreespacethegw/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary%3Breview to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/descentfreespacethegw/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary%3Breview
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.skoar.com/Story.php?StoryTitle=Descent%3A%20Freespace%20Silent%20Threat&StoryId=901&GroupId=5

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Descent: FreeSpace – The Great War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307082239/http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/techfs/intel.shtml to http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/techfs/intel.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081123065128/http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/pc/descent_freespace to http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/pc/descent_freespace
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.interactive.org/iaa/finalists_pc.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)