Talk:Soda Constructor

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Rewired (demoparty) (0 participants)
Grossology (books) (2 participants)
Studio Yotta (1 participant)
Vicious Engine (3 participants)
Jack Marston (Red Dead) (6 participants)
Joshua Tomar (6 participants)
Juhani (Star Wars) (3 participants)
Starwing Paradox (2 participants)
Pit (Kid Icarus) (13 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

External Links section[edit]

The external links section was getting extremely long and cluttered, so I organized it by topic. Does anybody like it? -Edlin2|Talk 00:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sodaplay Constructor Sites section?[edit]

Why is this getting vandalized so often? People are removing other constructors' sites from the list - I know it is competitive, but cut it out, guys... -Edlin2|Talk 22:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Models made by the soda team" sentence[edit]

I'm thinking of deleting this, as it is a real misfit anywhere in the article...(right now it's in the second paragraph of "history")...if anyone can find a better place for it then move it. Otherwise I'll get rid of it. --Edlin2 03:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

This really needs a NPOV. I'm throwing up the tag. e.g. "This version of the program existed quietly on the soda website, as well as being hosted at another site. At this point, the applet was largely unknown, except to the lucky few who had discovered it already." I'm sorry, that sort of comment has no place in an encylopedia.

I'm fine with the construction how-to, but the Forum how-to? Maybe a, "If you plan on posting any forums, read _____" or something along those lines. Or simply copy over what's been written on Wikipedia and put it on the forums and link there. If no one brings up some good points why it should stay, I'm gonna pull it. Hootyea 22:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hootyea:
You have no idea what's happening in the SodaPlay fourms right now. those "fourm tips" have been put there so sodaplay's "Spam Wars 2" dosen't last longer. I, mister_nothing, will bash them with the delete function once it's overwith. I know I'm not supposed to argue with somoene with more power then me, but those fourm tips really need to stay.

I do agree with your comment on the lucky few thing.

...actually, re-read that. those tips mostly just point out mistakes "newbies" make (using the beta and posting alpha, for instance.) the only thing conflicting with the fourm rules thing is the "read ___ ." (BTW, what you are calling 'alpha' is NOT an alpha version. It is the release version of the sodaplay applet. Think of it this way: what you called alpha is SC v1.0, and beta is SC v2.0b, in other words, the beta for version 2 of SC.)

Introduced NPOV by deleting the "lucky" bit. The sentence now reads "At this point, the applet was largely unknown, except to the few who had discovered it already." It looks fine to me now. --Edlin2 02:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, there was no opposition, so I removed the tag. Edlin2 01:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Forum Tips" too obvious?[edit]

Quote:

Forum Tips

Before posting anything on the forums, read the forum guidelines. You may be unintentionally breaking one of the forum's rules with your post.

I'm sorry, spam wars 2 is over. maybe they would come back with spam wars 3(we can't EVER remove it), but these tips no longer need to be there.

To post a model on the forum, use "http://sodaplay.com/constructor/player.htm?&getmodel=USERNAME+MODELNAME". Replace USERNAME with your username, and MODELNAME with the name of the model you want to post.

er, that's already been made so clear it's been burned into our minds already. Don't say it again. Please.

To post a link to your public models, use "http://sodaplay.com/constructor/player.htm?&getmodel=USERNAME". Replace USERNAME with your username.

again, already known very well. You can replace both with "use preview to check your link", but it still needs to be pulled.

Usernames and modelnames are case sensitive! For example, if you name a model "MODEL" and you post "model", or "Model", or even "MoDeL", it won't work.

common sense bashing. we all have common spelling sense.

A common mistake made by "newbies" is that they use beta, then post a normal constructor link in the forums. If you use beta, when you post your models replace "player" with "beta/applet"

for the 3rd time, WE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THIS.

When you need help, post in the help thread, instead of making a topic called "HELP!!!" or something like that. Some people will say it is spam.

and they will reply saying it's spam. maybe a topic the the community discussion fourm saying to ignore spam(don't click it and be done with it maybe), but that kind of comment is useless. most people ignore this.

If you are posting something that is not directly related to Sodaconstructor or Sodarace, use the community discussion forum.

finally, something close to the suject. I'll pull it still, mostly because you can link it in the other fourms.

Remember that there currently is no "edit post" button on the Sodaplay forums, so be sure to proofread your posts by clicking the "preview" button.

does the saying "sorry for double post" ring a bell?

im_an_alien says Ok, look. These tips were designed for n00bs, not long-time forum members. Belive me, I wrote them. And the thing about posting model links isn't common sense. It's not like everyone KNOWS that sodaconstructor is case sensitive. And M_N, please don't bash the forum tips section with the delete function. They took me quite a while to write.

Image[edit]

May I add a image of the daintywalker on this article. It is currently being used for a user box which is being used by Soda Modeler Wikipedians. I have gotten a tag saying that the image is orphaned and will be deleted in seven days unless it gets a page. Sodaplayer 00:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox[edit]

May I add the userbox for Soda Constuctors on this page. Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions} 01:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should add it to the appropriate section of the userbox gallery instead, so as not to clutter this article. -Edlin2|Talk 00:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Models[edit]

I fixed the link to all the models on article. Some were not capitalized correctly. Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions}^{^_^} 03:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Experts[edit]

Should the experts be categorized by specialty? Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions}^{^_^} 02:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't spam famous creators unless you truly believe that you should belong there.

Any way, should famous creators be organized in a way that it will help new constructors. Like best constructors on top? Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions}^{^_^} 03:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for the categorization by specialty, who are we to decide a constructor's specialty for him? Many constructors are multitalented. And how can we decide who are the "best constructors"? Nahh, we should leave it unsorted, or sorted by date if anything. I also notice that list is getting REALLY long, so don't add to it unless you have a really good reason. -Edlin2|Talk 00:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ive noticed that its famous constructors not experts. Should we make it experts to shorten the list. Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions}^{^_^} 23:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed the hidden comment there. Thanks edlin for writing that. Sodaplayer ^{talk contrib}^{^_^} 00:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added the collapsible table so the page will be shortened and appear to be less spammed. Sodaplayer ^{talk contrib}^{^_^} 01:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good, that looks much better. Edlin2|Talk 17:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

I made a barnstar for sodaplay. Use for common contributers for here. Template:Sodaplay_Barnstar Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions}^{^_^} 03:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Jargon" Section[edit]

I think the term "pandora" should be added to the jargon section but I unfortuently do not really understand what one is. Can someone please include an explanation of a pandora on this section. Makuus 17:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added pandoras to the jargon. Can someone put a better definition. Anyway welcome to Sodaplay Makuus.^_^ Sodaplayer ^{talk contrib}^{^_^} 03:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SodaSound[edit]

Should a section about sodasound be added. I think many would enjoy Kyrius' row your boat and other songs achieved by sodaplay. Sodaplayer ^{talk contrib}^{^_^} 03:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

This Article Needs Attention[edit]

Hello to the more regular editors of this article. Unfortunately, there are a number of problems that I've identified, which need to be changed if this article is to be improved.

Firstly, the External Links section is huge. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not a links repository. The Wikipedia:External Links page has this to say: "Links should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links." They need to be pared down to a minimum, perhaps a link to the official site/forums and maybe one or two notable fansites.

Similarly, the list of famous constructors should probably go too, since it isn't sourced and there do not appear to be any criteria for being on that list (which is already very large).

I also had to remove the tips section, because Wikipedia isn't the place to host that sort of thing. There are other wikis which deal with tips and strategies for games, and they could probably be moved there.

Finally there should really be fewer references to the community surrounding the game, as the article itself is about the applet in question. Whilst the community is probably fairly relevant, they should not comprise the bulk of the article.

I'll be checking back to see if I can help out with some of these - I just wanted the reaction of other frequent editors to see if this seems reasonable. --163.1.165.116 16:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, I see there is now a Sodarace Wiki here. I suggest that much of the fancruft be moved off this page and let the new wiki do the work. --163.1.165.116 12:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, since it's been two months and no-one has mentioned anything, I've been bold and removed a significant stuff which I think is irrelevant. It should be transferred to the Sodarace wiki if it goes anywhere. --84.66.121.188 16:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article is certainly much ... shorter. I'm working on citing sources for the pieces that 84.66.121.188 left intact. I'm up to about 5 good sources, but I couldn't find sources for a lot of the history. --Edlin2|Talk 20:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "cite sources" tag, because most sources are cited now. --Edlin2|Talk 18:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up the external links[edit]

Wodka is no longer there because it has a link to it on sodarace. Also there is a section on the original twelve, including links to the beta models RJRocket53 16:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

development page is gone[edit]

The development page is gone so i replaced the link with the new SCII page. Igluix 22:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. --Edlin2|Talk 20:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page needs to be updated for SCII.[edit]

Although SCII has come out, most of the page still reflects SCII. This needs to be fixed... -Edlin2|Talk 20:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update[edit]

I couldn't find the template, but this article is outdated. SCII came out all ready. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.130.174 (talk) 02:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expert Subject Template[edit]

Do we need the Expert Subject Template on there? We have experts working on it. I went ahead and removed it. RJRocket53 (talk) 17:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]