Talk:Glest

Vandalism / deletion of external links

next time this happens it escaltes to a sysop. Dutyfree Dutyfree (talk) 06:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Adding of AI section

I think I should mention that it's possible to team up with the computer against other computer players. It's the only thing I know regarding the game AI section, and I can't go into much more detail. Logictheo 01:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Not notable

I personally disagree that this article is not notable. This is because Glest is just about the only Open Source 3D strategy game there is. Cristan 01:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

That in itself doesn't make it notable. I'd never heard of it until this morning, and while I believe it's a fantastic accomplishment and deserves far more community support that it currently has, the fact is that it's currently a half-abandoned project with little community mindshare. I'm going to try and work on evangelising it, see if it can be made notable (rather than trying to argue that it already is). Chris Cunningham 11:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I also notice alot of other pages on the open source list have been given the same message around the same time. Some of which i do not agree with such as this one. Lockgar

Although I do think most of these games are notable maybe before we loose the information they might be merged into some basic articles. Is there a list somewhere of games threatened by being not notable enough for an article of their own? Can they be grouped? Could there be an article like "RTS-Games" with at least a paragraph on each game? This could also be a place to group the games. --T.woelk 16:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

a half-abandoned project with little community mindshare? I don't even know what that means. The forum is active, modders are modding and maps are currently being produced. Dutyfree (talk) 08:16, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion: No

There's no reason to delete this article. There are hundreds of open source games; just because you haven't heard of / don't like this one doesn't mean it should be deleted.

New version available

There is a new version of this game out. How am I supposed to update the info box for this article? If I click "edit this page" I see that the previous author doesn't want me to change the version number there. So I click on the version link in the info box, and I am taken to a non-existing template page at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Glest&action=edit

What is the correct method for updating of this box?

Thanks, Jalanpalmer (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

The way I have found is to manually edit Template:Latest stable software release/GLest (notice the capitalization). I know this is a workaround, but it's the only way I've found so far. EternalRains^Contrib. 16:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Excessively informal tone

In my opinion, the game is notable. However, the current article needs some work. The tone is conversational in parts, it should be academic.

This article reads more like a recommendation review.(14:01, 11 December 2010)

-MaxWinsForever (talk) 07:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Clarification: of specific concern to me is the "critical reception" section. -MaxWinsForever (talk) 07:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Mega-glest

At slashdot the other day http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/08/12/0520229/FOSS-RTS-Game-Glest-Gets-Revival-mdash-Enter-Mega-Glest Mega-glest is refered to as a fork of Glest, here it is just mentioned as a "branch of the engine". I'm not sure about the difference fork/branch, but I think it shoud be written more here about the mega-glest 'game' with a link to it http://sourceforge.net/projects/megaglest/ or http://megaglest.sourceforge.net/ ?