Easy Allies in Wikipedia
-
I think Easy Allies should have their own page in Wikipedia. "The other guys" already have theirs. I feel that it would bring this certain kind of credibility to EZA. It would anchor them into that massive library for people to easily find or stumble upon, and it would become immediately clear in the first few sentences what Easy Allies actually is and what they do. A lot of people use and prefer Wikipedia to look for info on something, as it usually offers it in a clear and brief-ish way.
Should this be something that EZA should do themselves, or could it be a fan-project? Written and updated that way? I've never written anything there, so I'm not exactly sure how it would work. Still, I think that it would always need an OK from one of the nine guys, so maybe it'd be the easiest if they wrote it themselves.
-
Ok, so I went to do the dishes, and realized immediately that this is Wikipedia that I'm talking about. Literally "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". So I guess what I meant was that maybe EZA should write the first draft themselves, the basis for everything. Then it could be further developed by others every now and then.
Anyway, the main idea is that this should exist in my opinion. And it wouldn't be the biggest thing to set up, I figure. Time-wise etc.
-
Typically you need to be an entity of note outside of your own content. You need to have plenty of references, etc. I think an EZA page would likely get deleted at this point.
-
@Hazz3r said in Easy Allies in Wikipedia:
Typically you need to be an entity of note outside of your own content. You need to have plenty of references, etc. I think an EZA page would likely get deleted at this point.
This. Until EZA gets BIG, we'll have to be satisfied with the brief mentions on the GameTrailers page.
-
Oh, okay. Well damn. Had no idea about that. It just feels like there're pages for so many weird minor things all around that a page for EZA would have been a no-brainer. References to GameTrailers aren't enough?
-
I don't think GameTrailers would be enough, seeing as again, they're not effectively a third-party.
There's an article on what qualifies something for their own article funnily enough: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
-
I realise that I'm bumping an old thread, but this seems worth it.
A Wikipedia page for Easy Allies has been approved, you can view it here.
-
Excellent! :)
-
Awesome!
-
...although I don't see how that Moriarty case is an essential thing to mention there. Maybe for just more references, I'd like to think.
-
Yeah it does seem weird to mention that. EZA has gone through many moments that have led to patrons backing out, but none of them have been super controversial outside of the core fanbase.
-
It should be mentioned somewhere that they make reaction videos ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_video ) for video game press conferences, as these get them the most views.
-
Game Sleuth is the most watched
-
@iboshow On youtube, yes it's the top video, but @Oscillator was probably also thinking of Twitch viewership as well.
-
@kristen-rogers said in Easy Allies in Wikipedia:
@iboshow On youtube, yes it's the top video, but @Oscillator was probably also thinking of Twitch viewership as well.
No, I was thinking of the YouTube views. Game Sleuth's views have been plummeting since the first episode, but the reaction vids have stayed steady.
-
@oscillator Game Sleuth views have risen since the first episode.
-
@iboshow The first episode is over a million views. The latest is under 30k.
GS episode views:
1: 1.2m
2: 108k
3: 82k
4: 219k
5: 156k
6: 73k
7: 28k
-
This post is deleted!
-
Uhh, what happened? I apparently got mentioned by the above person, but the post got deleted and their account is gone.
-
@Capnbobamous It looks like they deleted their account for some reason after saying it was their first post here. They were just asking about the moments of people backing out that you mentioned.
