 | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 February 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | A fact from Firefly Online appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 February 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Clarification
editIs there any sort of way to clarify what Browncoats and the Alliance are? I know readers can reference the Firefly article, but I think some paraphrasing or mentioning would be nice. :) Bananasoldier (talk) 02:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm just moving the article but I'll do that when I've moved it. Samwalton9 (talk) 23:01, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Actually I removed that altogether, it's not really necessary until the implications have been expanded on by sources. Samwalton9 (talk) 23:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- I guess we could provide a link to the Browncoats article. Are the sources trying to say that only gameplay from a Browncoat perspective will be available upon the game's release? Bananasoldier (talk) 08:03, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
- Actually I removed that altogether, it's not really necessary until the implications have been expanded on by sources. Samwalton9 (talk) 23:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Gamebreaker reliability
edithttp://www.gamebreaker.tv/news/first-look-firefly-online/
Is this source reliable? Thanks, --Bananasoldier (talk) 02:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Possibly, but their source is the io9 article and they don't seem to expand on it so I would just use that. Samwalton9 (talk) 11:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Release
editWhen is this game going public? I know that the publisher keeps changing the date. So it would meen the editers of this page would have to edit more. Yet, there has to something on the net that would give a better idea then "2013 or 2014". Comics1996 (talk) 21:23, 11 March 2016 (UTC)comics1996
Advertisement
editA drive-by {{advert}} tag was added to the article, without elaboration. If anyone thinks it's necessary, I would hope they'll be able to articulate opportunities for improvement, e.g., per the tag, what POV language or external links should be different. (Also see related DYK comment.) czar ♔ 13:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Background section
editI think a "Background" section would be a good addition to the article, to (briefly) explain the setting of the game to those not familiar with the Firefly franchise. Nothing too weighty, just a couple of paragraphs introducing the series, describing the scifi western setting (new solar systems made up of hundreds of planets, post- civil war, many people making a living on the fringes pioneer-style), listing or linking to the characters (so later statements like "the original crew of the Serenity will voice their in-game characters" now have context), and explain where the game will fit in relation to the series and the movie (between them is what I think has been specified, with players to cross paths with the past, but not spend the entire game interacting with them). Whack on a {{Further Information}} template to palm people off who want in-depth information into Firefly and Serenity. Thoughts? -- saberwyn 06:45, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hm I don't know. We already link to the franchise article for people to read, and I've just changed original crew to a link to the TV series. I think that's alright for background. Though if sources have talked about where the story fits in that would definitely be relevant. Sam Walton (talk) 08:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Dead
editAt this point, the consensus among those who have been watching is that the game is dead. Stormkith (talk) 00:30, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- While I absolutely agree, I'm unsure the policy on how to handle that because there's no source for it and for us to say that it's dead constitutes original research ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 00:40, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- Understood. But with the website no longer resolving, the Cortex app no longer functioning, and the QMx license having lapsed, it's pretty clear it's dead. According to a number of sources on Steam and Reddit, Spark Plug Games is out of business as well. I'm unsure how to relay all that information in the entry without running afoul of original research rules. Stormkith (talk) 05:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- One could conceivably do the research, write an article and offer it for publishing to a fan or gamer website/magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:1230:B448:A466:FA3E:1F8E:46C (talk) 06:00, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- Understood. But with the website no longer resolving, the Cortex app no longer functioning, and the QMx license having lapsed, it's pretty clear it's dead. According to a number of sources on Steam and Reddit, Spark Plug Games is out of business as well. I'm unsure how to relay all that information in the entry without running afoul of original research rules. Stormkith (talk) 05:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Hold on guys - SamWalton9 is adamant that until all scrapes of evidence of something existing from the internet has been accomplished, we cannot use past tense. We cannot declare death. Surely - replays on streaming and possible mentions aside - it is ALIVE (see SamWalton9 citations for the creation of respectable cited content on wikipedia).
- I appreciate you're here to make a point, but I agree. I didn't change the article to past tense. Sam Walton (talk) 10:07, 13 November 2019 (UTC)