Talk:Fraction Fever

Establishing Verifiability and Notability

This article badly needs further information to establish notability and verifiability in the form of independent, third party references. This may include reviews, news articles about the subject and so on. Without this kind of information, there is nothing to prove that the content is worthy of inclusion.--Gazimoff (talk) 11:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is a lack of reliable sources. Look around at a lot of video game articles. This is not an uncommon occurrence. Fraction Fever is a genuine, published title for multiple computing/gaming platforms, and I can well imagine that reviews, etc. establishing its notability do exist. They simply must be turned up. I'm a little at a loss why the particular interest in this article, given that you seem to have reviewed other articles in a similar state (though perhaps puffed by vacuous content), but not gone out of your way to contest inclusion elsewhere. Anyway ... yes, I think it's pretty clear the the FF article requires sourcing. D. Brodale (talk) 15:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I picked this up as I was scanning through the unclassified videogame articles and re-rated it as stub. I had a look further, saw that the article had very little history and was effectively two lines of unreferenced text, hence why I prodded it and stuck it on my watch list, as well as notifying the author. Today I noticed that the author had removed the prod and added a link to the bottom of the article, so I put an item up on the talkpage explaining the reasoning and hoping that the original author would take it on board and improve it. I'm trying to encourage article improvement here from people familiar with the topic. Gazimoff (talk) 18:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, unfortunately, it appears that turning up HTMLized resources is going to be a chore given the age of the title in question. There are reasonable grounds to believe such exist, but may be so as print publications from the era (mid-80s). I have my doubts that turning the article around will be a quick job, and you are right that it has been a backwater WP article for a long time. It's not alone in that regard, but that's no excuse for reliably sourcing a subject. I'd probably back a merge into Spinnaker Software should nothing tangible show its face in the next few weeks. D. Brodale (talk) 18:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Fraction Fever. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080119051539/http://nitros9.lcurtisboyle.com:80/fractionfever.html to http://nitros9.lcurtisboyle.com/fractionfever.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)