![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Just a note that the article is a little out of date, the 5th bank was added in the 9.1 VU, as mentioned in the VU 9.1 content list. I don't have the link on me at the moment :( 58.170.129.214 ( talk) 06:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Why does this article needs to be cleaned up to conform to a higher standard of quality ? -- 85.186.135.114 04:04, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
(note: Please sign your comments with "--~~~~" (without the quotes). Thanks.)
(use progressing colons ":" if you want to indent your message to make threads easier to read.)
I tried to add in 1 small thing but it got deleted. The article states that you can withdraw money from MindArk at any time but this is not true. You can only withdraw money if you have over 1000 peds in your account, which is 100 dollars. User:iforgotmyhandlecauseeverytimeieditsomethingyouguysjustdeleteit(UTC)
What ?? They claim to have users from 220 countries ? The thing is that only 195 countries EXIST on the world so how are they having users from 220 countries ?
Wow. The buyer could make a killing by converting virtual profits from this into real money. But couldn't the devolpers just use inflation of goods and resources to make the purchase worthless? -- 66.177.33.232 ( Talk), 22:40, 8 January 2005 (UTC)
New all time high sell : 1.000.000 PEDs for the new space resort. Collect site news, forum threads and slashdot article...
That means a powerful economical expansion and room for more players.
http://www.project-entropia.com/news/Index.ajp
The ASTEROID SPACE RESORT was today, 24th of October 2005, bought by avatar "Jon NEVERDIE Jacobs" for a sum of 1,000,000 PED (100,000 US Dollar)!
The public auction offering the Space Resort started Friday 21st of October at a staring price of 1 PED, and with a buyout price of 1,000,000 PED. The response to the news of the Space Resort was immediate – just during the weekend eight parties approached MindArk expressing serious interest in purchasing it. Just three days after the launch, the buyout price was met by Jon NEVERDIE Jacobs, before the competition.
I've cleaned this article up now, it seems mostly satisfactory but if a player could go over it and make sure it's up to date... -- Kevin 20:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Looks nice. Thanks. I'll remove the cleanup needed tag. -- Usbserial 15:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
'On 12 April 2005, actor/director "Jon NEVERDIE Jacobs" (aka: DJ Hound Dog, John London) erected a virtual memorial within the Project Entropia game for his wife, Tina Leiu (aka: Island Girl, Gamer Chick) who died from complications due to the flu. This memorial resides on an island within the virtual game environment and is regularly visited by game characters played by people from all around the world.'
Can someone clarify which parts of the above paragraph belong to the real world, and which belong to the "game world" of PE?
I can't fathom whether this John Neverdie Jacobs is a game character, and/or an actor/director in real life, and/or if his (real/fictional?) wife died in the game... gah, my head hurts! 217.155.20.163 00:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Jon is a DJ/actor is real life. Tina was a singer/actress. Tina's death was real. The island and memorial are in-game. I do not know if both Jon and Tina are stage names (which is common in the industry). you can obtain some information on him at http://www.realityport.com
One more thing... the very first paragraph states that there are no "levels" within PE. This is not true. The game actually has an extensive and complex skill system. These skills have direct effect on your chance of success with in-game activities. an analogy would be to say that your avatar "learns" to be better. in my opinion, this negates the gambling/casino comparisions - for example, if I know to play one hand of roulette is the same as all other hands of roulette. -- 216.9.243.111 19:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I added a newsbit (below, indented) and it was removed by (apparently) a first-time user. Is this not something that should be noted, as it _was_ in the BBC International Web-feed yesterday?
Please let me know what y'all think. Bo-Lingua
I was adding some clarifications to address others' concerns in the 'Cost to Play' section, when I realized I really want to rewrite about 75% of this article. Which deed I'll boldy do, tonite or tomorrow prolly. Which reminds me.. I haven't played PE since my HD crashed a month ago.. I bet my soc thinks I'm dead or something.. ps - Oh ugh, I thought that stuff sounded familiar; a lot of the more recent changes are lifted straight from MA's website. Surprise surprise. To whom it may apply: (ie, Marco, Jan, Jon, etc), please note that Wikipedia is a very, very, very, very smart community (present authorship excluded), and you simply aren't going to get away with injecting your expensive marketing jargon - like the annoying repetitions of "Real Cash Economy (RCE)". It's a "real cash economy" -- quotes included. And it's a game, regardless of what your legal dept. tries to tell you (and us) - a game with players. Get over it, ok? I do hope you won't become vandals by the terms of Wikipedia. I promise I'll be gentle -- I'm a sympathetic soul, after all. But this is not an ad forum, it's an encyclopedia. :) Eaglizard 04:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
This is merely paranoid and irrelevant ranting by a user keen to put a negative slant on the article. The article should remain neutral, balanced and free from bias. - JR
Added a quick sentence detailing the commision charged for the currency exchanges. Also removed any Real Cash Economy (RCE) entries and replaced them with "real cash economy" as per the post above 86.142.52.116 12:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Great someone reverted my edit stating that it was vandalism! :-( I might say that the alterations are not only mentioned here (see above post) but also are substanciated and mentioned again further in the article 84.9.77.64 18:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, you are contradicting with yourself, maybe a new rewrite is in order, following on some of the other MMORPG articles and some official (scarse usually) information, along with heaps of inside information from the community that enjoys Entropia Universe in all aspects, and not just press trolls or dissapointed peeps. Thank you! -- 62.231.117.235 14:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Entropia Directory is a wiki based site set up to support player based business's in the Entropia Universe, and attempt to create a Complete Directory of everthing EU. We would love to get some more players with wiki knowledge into our webteam, drop by from time to time, its a massive task but we are progressing nicely!
We also do an article on the latest from each VU as the news comes to hand. VU sneak Preview We will also make sure our Snr Editors keep things up to date here. -- EntropiaDirectory.com 06:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I added the link to MA's corporate site www.mindark.com to the Official Links.
Was that really necessary? -- 62.231.117.235 16:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
It's annoying that I always find my additions to this page reverted or near reverted by an anonymous user claiming to be 'undoing vadalism / bad rap / something". It seems that any remotely negative information on this article gets targetted. It smells to me that they are either someone who works for MindArk or who has a vested interest in the game? Who are they and why do they keep doing it? AvanniaRayzor 10:53, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Pardon me for being so paranoid; but I guess that's just the way I am :-S I was looking more on the fact that the article had positive and negative things said about the game; it's just that a lot of negative additions (all in the history and whatnot) were editted out again by an annonymous user. I use wikipedia a lot more than I contribe to it (save for maybe a spelling error or two) so it seemed strange that they weren't using an account. My agenda is identical to your own :-) that is creating a decent article (without any promo lingo and with as fair a view as possible) :-) AvanniaRayzor 20:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I second User:62.231.117.235's advice (and recommend him to take it himself...) Please everybody create an account and log in to discuss on this page. This applies especially to "JR", editing from 88.105.73.18 and related dynamic IPs. Each of these IPs has it's own talkpage. "RP", not being an account, does not have a talkpage. It's consequently pure luck if JR happens to catch sight of a message left on one of the IPs' pages, and this makes communication difficult/impossible. Although luckily, JR, since you have in fact edited from 88.105.73.18 since I left a warning against deleting comments on its page, I do believe you have seen that warning. Please abide by it. Besides being binding site policy, it's merely elementary courtesy towards other editors to leave their comments alone. (P.S: BoLingua, you mean "POV", not "NPOV"--NPOV, neutral point of view, is good.) Bishonen | talk 11:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC).
Shall I edit that back in? AvanniaRayzor 23:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the comment on "commission" in the lead paragraph as the commission is taken by one's own individual bank and not by MindArk as implied, this type of detail also does not belong in the openning summary. I have also added the recent news of a high profile participant earning $100k USD in the last 8 months through Entropia Universe. I wonder how many of the "conspiracy theorists" posting here have any real actual experience of Entropia Universe or its community, and I'm still bemused by the fierce agenda to maintain irrelevant and unnecessary negative comments and statistics in this article.
Why are some users insisting on selecting a minority of negative statistics from the 7 page PDF file produced by the Bridge Group ( http://www.shell.linux.se/dsk2293/other/Sv.pdf) to include in the article whilst ignoring all the other information and statistics contained within the article, which on the whole are positive?
Most of the dynamic IPs appearing in the edits are within the range of a major European ISP (used by literally millions of Europeans in the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Sweden) and it's wrong to assume that all these edits made by the same user (perhaps 3 or 4 different users).
Entropia Universe is also NOT a "MMORPG" nor a "game" by the very definition of its creators and user community. - 24 August 2006 - 88.105.72.254 (JR - RoHuGu)
I propose we remove the entire player resource section. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide, and it's clearly being used to advertize individual stores and forums and so on. -- SCZenz 23:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
However, shortly following the end of the auction, famed avatar and owner of popular community website EntropiaForum.com, "Flerin Neomaven Flerinson" purchased the newly acquired Twin Peaks Shopping Mall from Onkel RobRoy Bob for an undisclosed sum.
Where can I find this piece of information: owner of popular community website EntropiaForum.com, "Flerin Neomaven Flerinson" ?
-- 62.231.117.235 16:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Argh, wikipedia sucks me right back in, the very first time I look at an article. I love hate it. Anyways, I saw a comment on my user page in re: this 'un, and wound up editing it despite my firm intention not to. The first section I just clarified that certain things are only the claims of MA, and not actual fact (we need a cite to the Guinness Book itself, for instance, otherwise its' just MA's claim that they're in there -- see the cite). It was the last section, the 'headlines' sorta thing, that got my attention: still way too much fluff in there, so I linted it up some. Essentially, I don't think we need any fictional descriptions of the fictional land-masses, or the unremarkable (and unsurprising) statements by Jacobs that he wants to make money, etc. On the other hand, his statements about making money with the 'egg' are interesting, since its not exactly obvious that he will. The surprisingly high dollar amounts are inherently interesting. And so on. I think it reads much tighter now. I also think some MA corporate shill other editor is highly likely to come along and disagree, which is why I bothered to explain what I think should be perfectly obvious edits. I did leave in more than I actually wanted to, on the principle that EU is pretty cool, and people should get that impression from this article. It shouldn't be allowed to become a cheap marketing tool for MindArk, however. Hence, the afore-alluded-to 'fine line' Have fun with it!
Eaglizard
05:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Entropia Universe is described as a "virtual universe" rather than a MMORPG, and yet it has far more in common with World of Warcraft than with Second Life and its ilk.
Entropia and WoW share a vast number of common features such as killable/lootable monsters (which roam around a varied landscape and "spawn" in specific areas), PvP combat, weapons, armor, magic, potions, character skills, trades/crafts, a fantasy setting, and a backstory/plot. As far as I can tell, Second Life does not feature any of these elements (or, indeed, any "game" elements whatsoever). Entropia also gives the player far less opportunity to "shape" his/her character's appearance, and the appearance of the surrounding world, than does Second Life.
The Entropia product is so obviously a MMORPG that I have to wonder if MindArk are compelled to deny this for legal reasons. It strikes me that describing Entropia as a "game" could fall foul of anti-gambling laws in some jurisdictions. 217.34.39.123 11:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
( T| C| M) 13:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Entropia is still restricted to a screen resolution of 1024x768? I remember this being a problem when I tried out Entropia a couple of years back - it's a bit of a pain for TFT monitor users, as it wasn't possible to run the game at the monitor's native resolution. 217.155.20.163 09:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Not anymore, there are tons of new resolutions and even windowed mode now. Just download the client installer, install, start downloading the game, abort, and check the Client Loader options ;) --
89.137.70.184
15:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Is there any published information on whether those buying banking licenses and land for very large sums of money sign (real world) contracts with MindArk? It would seem surprising to me if anyone is really willing to spend $100k without a proper contract which will ensure their rights are protected and can't be taken away at any time as per the EULA Nil Einne 10:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop simply readding this site to the external links. First explain here why you think that site is suitable. If concensus is reached, it can be added. In my eyes it violates WP:EL. It offers no information by itself but only provides links. This includes mainly forums and societies which are not suitable for inclusion into Wikipedia. Other links don't seem to provide any relevant information to the article and what is contributed by other links. -- Fogeltje 09:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
When i read the WP:EL (yes i have read it) i don't see that it says a link to an external link list is bad. Any good encyclopedia provides further resources for people who want to know more about the subject. In the "Links to be considered" section it states that "Long lists of links are not appropriate: Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links. If you find a long list of links in an article, you can tag the "External links" section with the linkfarm template." This is of course necessary because otherwise the links in the article and then the article itself would become bloated. But it doesn't say that links are a bad thing. Links are one of the major benefits of a web encyclopedia. And concerning Entropia Universe one would be hard pressed to find any useful external link that isn't a fan page, wiki, forum, blog etc. Perhaps you see that another user just deleted all other links to non-official sites giving the same reason you did for deleting the link to EU-Links. I don't think a consensus could easily be reached on which external links are relevant. Keep in mind the rules also state that "Where editors have not reached consensus on an appropriate list of links, a link to a well chosen web directory category could be used until such consensus can be reached". So a directory is nothing forbidden or evil according to the rules. When i recently started playing EU i found the EU Links page useful because i could easily find a lot of information on the linked sites. Surely you can have just the link to the official site but i didn't think wikipedia had an "all external links are evil" policy.
Please stop this edit war. Do NOT delete anything but discuss it here before taking action. -- Fogeltje 20:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
The content submitted by Unregistered Wikipedia User 79.74.21.186 has absolutely nothing to do with EntropiaUniverse, which is the topic of this article.
Comments such as:
"a notorious cybersquatter and administrator of numerous pornography based domain names based in Connecticut, USA who had previously been found guilty by WIPO on numerous accounts of “bad faith domain registration and use"
have no relationship to Entropia Universe, and are clear examples of a vicious and off-topic personal attack.
Also this comment:
"having previously registered several relevant internet domain names prior to the original announcement of the mall sales"
is patently false. It is totally inaccurate to state that domain names related to the malls were registered before the auction of the malls. The Shopping Malls were announced on Dec. 12, 2006:
http://account.entropiauniverse.com/pe/en/rich/5078.html?newspage=26
However the domain entropiashopping.com was not registered until Dec.24th 2006:
http://whois.domaintools.com/entropiashopping.com
It seems the Unregistered Wikipedia User 79.74.21.186 is confused in his accusations, probably thinking of the registration of banking-related Entropia domain names, an accusation that was very clearly and soundly refuted by neomaven in the following responses made on an independent community website (RCEUniverse.com, formerly e-pec.info) where this conspiracy theory was first hatched:
http://rceuniverse.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=5249&view=findpost&p=16812
http://rceuniverse.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=5249&view=findpost&p=16815
In fact, many of the contributors to that discussion agreed that the explanation provided by neomaven refuted the accusation of "inside information" and the administrators of that community website even went so far as to state:
"The topic of the thread was that "Warants had advance notice of the Bank Liscense Sale"
It has been hashed and the conclusion is that neomaven purchased many domains with various names and had no advance notice of any sale."
http://rceuniverse.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=5249&view=findpost&p=18234
In light of the above inaccuracies, rumors and disingenuous character attacks posted by Unregistered Wikipedia User 79.74.21.186, I request that the following section be edited out completely:
"having previously registered several relevant internet domain names prior to the original announcement of the mall sales.[25] This controversy was compounded by the fact that it later emerged in a MindArk press release, that the real life personality behind the new mall owner was in fact 32-year-old Jason Peterson[26], a notorious cybersquatter and administrator of numerous pornography based domain names based in Connecticut, USA who had previously been found guilty by WIPO on numerous accounts of “bad faith domain registration and use”.[27][28][29][30][31][32][33]"
and that the word "controversially" be removed from the line
"Flerin Neomaven Flerinson", controversially purchased the newly acquired Twin Peaks Shopping Mall from Onkel RobRoy Bob for an undisclosed sum"
so that the article reads as such:
On 28 December 2006, in conjunction with the release of Version Update 8.8, three Shopping Malls were made available for purchase through the public auction on Calypso. The Shopping Malls are located in some of Calypso's busiest trading regions: Port Atlantis, Twin Peaks and a newly discovered outpost on the Amethera continent called Emerald Lakes. After two final hours of exciting bidding, all three Shopping Malls were sold. Twin Peaks Shopping Mall was sold for $35,000 USD (350,004 PED) to avatar "Onkel RobRoy Bob", Port Atlantis Shopping Mall was sold for $70,067 USD (700,667 PED) to avatar "Epsilon Eps Vaz", and Emerald Lakes Shopping Mall was sold for $74,601 USD (746,007 PED) also to "Onkel RobRoy Bob". The owner of each mall also receives a 2.5% land owner sales tax on any items sold within their mall. However, shortly following the end of the auction, famed avatar and owner of popular community website EntropiaForum.com, "Flerin Neomaven Flerinson", purchased the newly acquired Twin Peaks Shopping Mall from Onkel RobRoy Bob for an undisclosed sum.
Fishflop 04:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Skippie, you ignore the fact that this line of the current version of the posted Entropia Universe article:
having previously registered several relevant internet domain names prior to the original announcement of the mall sales.[25]
is completely false. Look at domain registration date in the reference provided: December 24th, 2006. Based on the author's own reference, the claim is clearly untrue, but this does not prevent 79.74.21.186 from claiming this is a "controversy" in the next sentence. Clearly this author is bending the facts to further his/her biased views and personal vendetta.
Skippy, your statement
and subsequent unethical cybersquatting on, most of the available domain names containing the word "Entropia"
is inaccurate, and laden with common misconceptions and emotions regarding domain name registrations. Cybersquatting only applies to trademarked terms. The word 'entropia' is not protected by such trademarks, thus there is no cybersquatting taking place. Perhaps you should read the references you provide as 'proof' a little more carefully. From the wikipedia entry Cybersquatting:
Cybersquatting, according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad-faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else.
Your hasty (misguided) judgement and unfamiliarity with basic terms and concepts regarding domain name registrations is then used to characterize neomaven as a "culrpit" (implying guilt or culpability, where in fact none exists) in your next sentence:
The controversy was compounded by the fact that it later emerged in a MindArk press release that the culprit behind this activity was in fact the new secretive owner of the "Twin Peaks Mall"
Also, what was "secretive" about the new owner of the Twin Peaks Mall? To my knowledge, the announcement that RobRoy sold the mall to neomaven was made the same day that the mall auctions ended, a few hours later in fact. Again you use deceptive and emotive language to try to strengthen your (clearly biased) points.
This misquoting and twisting of facts is used again by you here:
Stating that the history of the Entropia community has "absolutely nothing to do with Entropia Universe" is about as relevant as saying that reference to the Watergate scandal has "absolutely nothing" to do with the article on Richard Nixon, or that there should be no mention of the Iraq War criticism in the article on George W. Bush.
I have never claimed that the "history of the Entropia Community has "absolutely nothing to do with Entropia Universe"", only that the activities of its participants outside of Entropia Universe have no place in an article about Entropia Universe. The outside business activities of other participants are neither mentioned nor scrutinized anywhere else in this article, why is an exception made here, and how are such issues related in any way to Entropia Universe? Rather, this seems to be a clear case of an attmept to "dig up dirt" and mount a personal attack by jealous competitiors or envious fellow participants, which is clearly not in the spirit of Wikipedia's official policies and guidelines.
Finally, you claim that Fishflop is a "sock puppet account" yet the person responsible for the content under discussion here is an Unregistered Wikipedia user, identifiable only by the IP address 79.74.21.186. It is thus impossible to converse with this editor on a talk page, and he/she has yet to justify these off-topic, inaccurate and vicious personal attacks on the discussion page.
Again I submit that these biased and unrelated comments should be removed from this article, as they are in places grossly inaccurate, intentionally misleading, ill-informed, or altogether unrelated to the article topic: Entropia Universe.
Fishflop 00:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
K. Buzzo 12:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
K. Buzzo, you write that "given the pure facts as they currently exist", yet you continue to ignore the facts when you propose the following text:
"Flerin Neomaven Flerinson", controversially purchased the newly acquired Twin Peaks Shopping Mall from Onkel RobRoy Bob for an undisclosed sum, having previously registered several relevant internet domain names prior to the start of the auction.
Once again, the malls were announced on Dec. 12th 2006, and any domains relating to malls and shopping were registered nearly two weeks after that.
As I stated above:
It is totally inaccurate to state that domain names related to the malls were registered before the auction of the malls. The Shopping Malls were announced on Dec. 12, 2006:
http://account.entropiauniverse.com/pe/en/rich/5078.html?newspage=26
However the domain entropiashopping.com was not registered until Dec.24th 2006:
Secondly, you are correct that the term "Entropia Universe" is covered by trademark. However, the word "entropia" is not, nor are domains such as those mentioned in this article and discussion, such as entropiamall.com etc.
Given this fact, and your comments above, why does your proposed edit include discussion of the non-Entropia Universe related business dealings of Flerin neomaven Flerinson when such information has nothing to do with Entropia Universe or this article?
This controversy was compounded by the fact that it later emerged in a MindArk press release that the real life personality behind the new mall owner was in fact a known cybersquatter who had previously been found guilty by WIPO on numerous accounts of “bad faith domain registration and use”
No other participant mentioned in this article is subjected to such scrutiny, so why is it allowed in this paragraph, and what do such comments add for a reader interested in information about Entropia Universe?
Fishflop 16:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Special attention needs to be paid to WP:LIVING. In particular:
Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space.
Any statement added to this article regarding a living person must include reliable sources that leave absolutely no doubt about the statement's validity.
This policy applies equally to biographies of living persons and to biographical material about living persons in other articles. The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia, but especially for edits about living persons, rests firmly on the shoulders of the person who adds or restores the material.
Please read and consider
this policy in regards to the latest edit war.
--
JKeene
04:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
It's impossible to enforce policy, especially the three-revert rule, in the midst of an edit war between dynamic IPs. I'm not even going to bother to block anybody right now. If the unconstructive reverting continues, I will semiprotect the article. If obvious sockpuppets then proceed to edit it, their puppetmasters will be checkusered and blocked from editing Wikipedia. Bishonen | talk 14:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC).
Hello (English is not my first language). I didn't find any info about death in this game. Is it possible? If so - what happen - do you spawn somewhere? Do you loose your (not so) virtual money?
TIA
Image:Project Entropia.jpg 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) 05:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I removed an extremely serious WP:BLP violation here [2]. This makes the claim someone is cooperating with a paedophile, but there are absolutely no reliable sources to support the claim. There were a bunch of forum posts, which other then NOT being reliable sources, they don't even appear to support the claim. The only source which comes close to WP:RS is [3] which makes no mention of Jason Peterson at all Nil Einne ( talk) 12:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello there, I am not a regular user of wikipedia so don't wish to add to this article directly because I'm not sure of the standards for referencing/citation. However, I believe that one of the most substantial controversies surrounding Project Entropia isn't addressed in the article.
For at least two years, Project Entropia's promotional literature, as well media coverage deriving from this, has made mention of an 'ATM card' that allows users of the game to withdraw PEDs with a real-life debit card. In actuality, this card does not exist and has not in any functioning sense for approximately two years. I understand that there was a brief period when the service was available, but it was withdrawn after serious legal problems facing the Bank that supported the Cash Card - North York Credit Community Union (NYCCU.)
NYCCU lost its backing from MasterCard when they were sued for providing services in territories where they were not fully licensed. Whether or not this directly related to MindArk's Cash Card is not clear to me, but the underlying principles are certainly ones that apply to any financial service offered through the game; and appear to have hampered the company's attempt to find an alternative partner.
The fact that MindArk sold these Cash Cards that are now not functioning isn't really the controversy - owners have reported that they receive refunds in a prompt matter - it's that the publishers continue to promote the game with the promise of a service that has not been available for 2 years. The card is a 'gimmick' that features heavily in media coverage of their novel product and they continue to advertise it themselves, causing substantial controversy in the community.
In addition to this, MindArk has been notoriously reticent (and possibly even dishonest) in providing information on the status of the product - claiming 18 months ago that they were 'developing graphics' for the product (i.e. at a late stage of development) and not updating this information.
The most popular Entropia Universe forum has a long-running thread which includes official MindArk statements as well as an indicator of the displeasure of the community and background on the NYCCU scandal -
http://www.entropiaforum.com/forums/mindark-news/100817-entropia-universe-cash-card-update.html
Additionally, there have been constant complaints about the amount of time traditional (non-Cash Card) withdrawals take - between 1 and 3 months. I'm afraid I don't have any additional citation for this.
92.22.70.175 ( talk) 20:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC) Blake Campbell
In the past year or so, there have been a few developments; more to do wtih the developers Mindark, but also linked with the Entropia Universe that should be worth a mention; The formation of First Planet Company, a mindark subsidary to maintain Planet Calypso; Connections to Motorhead Frontman Lemmy; Partnership with SEE Virtual Worlds, LLC, a new division of SEE Touring Attractions Inc. ; Getting down to the final 3 in a list of interested parties to host a NASA MMO; Partnership with nVidia, etc. etc. More info on the Mindark and Entropia Universe sites (www.mindark.se, entropiauniverse.com), respectively. It seems that Entropia is more of a content delivery platform, rather than the game it originally started out as now.
I apologise for throwing quite a few bits of info out here without any references (yet), but I can track the links down tomorrow and can respond with citations for each of these developments, and sort them into chronological order, etc.. just wrote them down off the top of my head so theres probably still more to add, too. Regards Agalvayne ( talk) 22:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |