This template 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
This navbox is getting pretty heavy. Perhaps it would make sense to split peopla and/or instances of MUDs into separate templates, and only include those templates on the relevant articles? GreenReaper (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or add a stricter inclusion standard. Some of the people in the template don't even have the word MUD in their article. I removed two codebases, Copper and Sequent, as their influence is minimal, Sequent is particularly troublesome, and difficult to proof. --Scandum (talk) 20:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted the edit where you did that. Re Copper and Sequent, Copper at minimum is part of the backstory of Sojourn and Toril, which as you well know are Kind of a Big Deal, and in any event as long as they're codebases that we have articles on they should be in the nav; if you think they're that minor, nominate them for deletion. (Both had far and away more impact than TigerMUD, so you might want to look into that too.) Re MajorMUD, having "major" in the name doesn't make it a major branch of MUDs, and I guess we kind of need to figure out whether it's a game or a codebase; the BBS MUDs are a pain in the ass that way. Re TinyMUD/MU*, MU* more unambiguously is inclusive of MUSH, MOO, MUCK, yadda yadda; referring to TinyMUD, it's not clear whether what's meant is the Tiny family, which is a major branch of MUDs, or TinyMUD as it existed as an individual codebase and as a game, neither of which are a major branch of the MUD family.
I'd definitely suggest removing Sequent from the template as I believe it was stock Diku with some minor bug fixes, and no solid proof Copper started out with Sequent.
MajorMUD is definitely not a MUD, but it might classify as a Mudlib since it requires Major BBS to run. I'm not familiar enough with the architecture to make a good ruling on that one, and classifying Major BBS as a Mud driver would be tricky. Probably easiest to view it as a codebase, and as such it was a major one given there were at least a hundred Major BBS servers running the software at one point of time.
Regarding TinyMUD, AberMUD, DikuMUD, MOO, and LPMud, they all started out as a game, then becoming a codebase, then becoming a family. From an encyclopedic viewpoint the most neutral would be to list TinyMUD and MOO as major branches. MUSH should be renamed to TinyMUSH and fixed up, I think TinyMUCK is already properly named. The whole MU* thing seems like an NPOV violation when more objective alternatives are available. --Scandum (talk) 00:35, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
IfMOO is a subcategory of MUD, I suggest creating a subcategory on this template to list them separately. The MUDs list is too big and looks clunky. I create a talk paragraph since this is kind of a major change. EternalFlare (talk) 07:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's a good idea. If we privilege MOO as a special subcategory, there's no clear rationale not to privilege all not-proximately-identified-as-MUD subcategories -- MUCK, MUSH, MUSE, etc. out to the gratuitously-forked MAGE and MAZE and whatever in the Tiny family -- and then we have a ridiculous situation of subcategories for one item and so on. And honestly, the whole thing just reeks of the idiotic infighting in the MUD community where Diku people are like "tinies aren't REAL muds because REAL muds are about pointlessly killing shit!" and Tiny people respond with "eww, of course we're not a mud, muds are gross, we're a MUGGLE" and I just have no goddamn patience for it. —chaos5023 (talk) 18:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done.—chaos5023 (talk) 15:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
