In that case, it would probably work best to go the other way around from what I proposed: focus this article on the original Nexuiz and make mention of the change in developers and license in a dedicated section of the article.Although GOG only has the PC and Mac versions (for now), there is a Linux version. clpo13 ( talk) 01:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC) Reply Edit: Looks like there already is another article. Obviously, notable forks can be spun off into a new page, but I'm not sure about what the best thing to do in the case of a project shifting developers and philosophy while keeping the same name. I'm open to opposing opinions, of course, especially if there's a precedent. All new development is by IllFonic, so I think the article should reflect that as the current state of Nexuiz, with a section on its history clarifying that the project moved from open source and free to (I'm assuming) closed source and commercial. There's already an article on Xonotic, the open-source fork of Nexuiz, but as far as I can tell, Nexuiz Classic (as it's called here) is no longer in development, so any information about it should probably be contained in this article, maybe even in its own section. However, I don't think this warrants splitting into two pages. For instance, the article still references Nexuiz as being free, though the most recent version is not.
Would this warrant a split of the article?ġ09.128.22.191 ( talk) 07:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC) Reply There's definitely a lot of out-of-date and confusing content. It introduces proprietary Nexuiz as the current version and GPL Nexuiz as a thing of the past, yet most of the article is about the latter.īesides, the two projects only share a name they do not have much more in common. The introductive paragraph to this article is really confusing. contribs) 03:39, 16 November 2006 PC Gamer article.heh -Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.91.240 ( talk contribs) 22:00, 9 July 2005 yay open source.Preceding unsigned comment added by Maikmerten ( talk Shouldn't be to hard.- 82.93.3.165 11:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC) Reply Source is included in the normal game download so there's no need for a seperate source download. If you alsowant their source (maps, ai and stuff) you need to get them form the SVN reposity. The gamefiles on the other side ARE already compiled when you download them the normal way. It is open source! - Member 8 July 2005 17:55 (UTC) (for example, one of the download links lead to and nearly all games based on open source technology are open source themselves. Now look, i'm not sure that the game is open source because there's no source code download on the site, but many other open source projects don't have there source code on their sites, and of course there is lots of evidence to support my claim. Other : *Current discussions (XFD's, mergers, etc.):.Be sure to add the articles to any appropriate task forces. articles and remove the " |auto=yes" parameter. Verify : Double check the classification of articles in Category:Automatically assessed Apple Inc.Stubs : Macintosh stubs, Macintosh software stubs, More.articles needing photograph, Category:Apple Inc. Orphans : Orphaned articles in Apple_Inc.
Expand : Xserve, OS X Server, iMac, Force Touch.Copyedit : Wikipedia articles needing copy edit in Apple_Inc.Cleanup : iOS ( iPhone OS 1, iPhone OS 2, iPhone OS 3, iOS 4, iOS 5), iTunes ( iTunes Store, App Store (iOS) ( iOS SDK), iBookstore), iChat, iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iLife, iWork, Pages, Keynote (presentation software).Citing sources : Apple Inc., Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, Apple II series.Assess all C and B class articles against the B-Class checklist. articles and Category:Unknown-importance Apple Inc. Assess : Update the classification of articles in Category:Unassessed Apple Inc.
0 kommentar(er)
