Flipnote Memo Is Coming Soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
For those who keep being fucking pricks and saying "OMG u can edit wikipedia so it's not reliable", let me just tell you something.
YES, anyone edit the pages. But you're suggesting that there isn't a single person that is there to revert any unsourced material or vandalism. If you were to put "The 3DS sux", someone will undo that edit. If you were to put "Star Fox 64 3D will be release in September 11th, 2011", then it will stay there. Although it already is there anyway, but you get what I mean. Fake, unsourced material, i.e. rumours are NEVER left on Wikipedia. The chances of actually finding completely false info is about 3%, particularly on an article about something very popular.

That being said... GameFAQs, who again, only accepts release dates if a reliable source is given... has the following release dates for Flipnote Memo:
*silence*

Or in English... the fucking dicks don't even HAVE the game in their database.

Have you gone to college? Because in nearly every class I took, the Professor & TA made a point of saying that Wikipedia is not a credible source. I knew a couple of people who cited Wikipedia in their bibliography and their grades got knocked down, as they should have.

With Wikipedia, there's no accountability because there is no name or publication attached to each entry--only the oftentimes incomplete citations at the bottom of the page.

But to go back to the topic at hand, I'd be shocked if it came out in the next week. We'll be lucky to see a Flipnote Studio release before the end of the year but at least some other applications will be out before then (Netflix).
 
IMO, if doing something for college/school/university/whatever, simply using Wikipedia without any other sources, may not be allowed, however, flat out saying "Wikipedia is unreliable" with no other reason other than "OMG anyone can edit the pages", is what gets me.
As I said... Wikipedia is just as reliable as any other freaking website on the entire internet.

Now... anyone can edit Wikipedia... but which of THIS is actually completely fake, or false?

Super Mario Galaxy 2​ (スーパーマリオギャラクシー2 Sūpā Mario Gyarakushī Tsū[sup]?[/sup]) is a platforming video game developed by Nintendo for the Wii. It was first announced at E3 2009 and is the sequel to Super Mario Galaxy. It was released in North America on May 23, 2010,[sup][1][/sup] in Japan on May 27, 2010, in Europe on June 11, 2010, and in Australia on July 1, 2010.[sup][5][/sup] It is the fourth original 3D platformer in the Mario series, after Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy.

In the game, the protagonist Mario pursues Bowser into outer space, who has captured Princess Peach and taken control of the universe using Power Stars. Mario's subsequent adventures revolve around traveling to various galaxies to recover the Power Stars in order to travel to the center of the universe and rescue the princess.

The game was originally planned as a simple iteration of Super Mario Galaxy with few modifications and a projected development time of a year (this version would be called More Super Mario Galaxy). It was later decided that the game was to be developed as a fleshed-out sequel when the development staff continued to build upon the game with dozens of new ideas, and so development time expanded to two and a half years. Among the additions are dynamic environments, new power-ups, and, most notably, the ability to ride Yoshi.

Upon its release, Super Mario Galaxy 2 was met with critical acclaim, and it has been hailed as one of the highest-rated video games of all time by aggregation sites such as Metacritic and GameRankings. The game is one of the best-selling games on the Wii with 6.36 million copies sold worldwide.[sup][6][/sup]
 
For those who keep being fucking pricks and saying "OMG u can edit wikipedia so it's not reliable", let me just tell you something.
YES, anyone edit the pages. But you're suggesting that there isn't a single person that is there to revert any unsourced material or vandalism. If you were to put "The 3DS sux", someone will undo that edit. If you were to put "Star Fox 64 3D will be release in September 11th, 2011", then it will stay there. Although it already is there anyway, but you get what I mean. Fake, unsourced material, i.e. rumours are NEVER left on Wikipedia. The chances of actually finding completely false info is about 3%, particularly on an article about something very popular.

That being said... GameFAQs, who again, only accepts release dates if a reliable source is given... has the following release dates for Flipnote Memo:
*silence*

Or in English... the fucking dicks don't even HAVE the game in their database.
You are super cute <3

To be honest, I can wait. If it's like the DSi version, then I don't care. It got old.
 
Your argument is getting increasingly silly, Fox.
You cannot just say "Wikipedia is credible" or "Wikipedia is not credible". Some pages are, some less so. You just have to use your best judgement on the matter. In cases where there all of the info is common knowledge anyway, and there are lots of sources to back it up, such as TheUltimateKnight's example, then Wikipedia is credible, and a damn sight more convenient that any other site. But in examples where it is talking of things to come, with few if any sources, of course it is less so.
 
The argument that Wikipedia is as credible as other encyclopedias, such as Encyclopedia Britannica, is completely stupid and unfounded. Just because Wikipedia has more articles, is more convenient and is mostly correct doesn't make it credible. Wikipedia's shortcomings, in comparison to other encyclopedias, is clear:

1) The average quality of writing in Wikipedia articles is subpar compared to others, like EB.
2) Wikipedia articles are subject to author's bias.
3) The fact that many articles are written by multiple authors sometimes leads to a very unfocused, patchwork result.
4) EB and other encyclopedias have paid editors and fact checkers that go over EVERY article.
5) Content in some entries is simply copied & pasted from other sources. In other words, plagiarized.

Wikipedia is great at what it does and is an excellent starting point for any research. But to say that it is the end all resource is completely misguided.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not saying that Wikipedia is the most reliable website in the history of the world wide web, I'm just saying that people shouldn't be using that freaking stupid nonsense argument that.... and just to show how retarded it is, I'm going to spell it like a retard:
"OMG U KIN EDIT TEH ARTEKOLZ SO WIKIPEDIA IZ COMPLETLY UNRILIEBUL!"

That's exactly what I mean. Like if I was to say that I read on Wikipedia that this happens at that place at that time, or that this character is in this game, or this person composed the soundtrack to this film/game or... whatever, it's when people simply say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia" -- some how suggesting that because it's freely editable, that 100% of the entire fucking site is 0% reliable. Again, I'm not saying it's 100% reliable, because there are certain articles that may be incorrect. However, most likely it's simply a case of being out of date, rather than incorrect, for example, if an article says "Star Fox 64 3D currently does not have a release date for North America", that was correct until the date was announced, however, it's only simply out-dated. However, if it was to say "Mario Kart 3DS will features 50 retro courses, and 50 new courses", then THAT would be completely false. And there's rarely ANY time where you'll actually see such crap. Wikipedia is very reliable most of the time. Again, I'm not talking any complicated crap, I'm talking about the retarded 12 year old n00bfucking cunts. "omg i herd on wikipedia that this and that" "lulz wikipedia iz teh editablez it not reliabelz"
 
Yo. Chiddlers.
This isn't a topic about Wikipedia. Go make one if you want to continue this discussion.
 
I'm not saying that Wikipedia is the most reliable website in the history of the world wide web, I'm just saying that people shouldn't be using that freaking stupid nonsense argument that.... and just to show how retarded it is, I'm going to spell it like a retard:
"OMG U KIN EDIT TEH ARTEKOLZ SO WIKIPEDIA IZ COMPLETLY UNRILIEBUL!"

That's exactly what I mean. Like if I was to say that I read on Wikipedia that this happens at that place at that time, or that this character is in this game, or this person composed the soundtrack to this film/game or... whatever, it's when people simply say "Anyone can edit Wikipedia" -- some how suggesting that because it's freely editable, that 100% of the entire fucking site is 0% reliable. Again, I'm not saying it's 100% reliable, because there are certain articles that may be incorrect. However, most likely it's simply a case of being out of date, rather than incorrect, for example, if an article says "Star Fox 64 3D currently does not have a release date for North America", that was correct until the date was announced, however, it's only simply out-dated. However, if it was to say "Mario Kart 3DS will features 50 retro courses, and 50 new courses", then THAT would be completely false. And there's rarely ANY time where you'll actually see such crap. Wikipedia is very reliable most of the time. Again, I'm not talking any complicated crap, I'm talking about the retarded 12 year old n00bfucking cunts. "omg i herd on wikipedia that this and that" "lulz wikipedia iz teh editablez it not reliabelz"

OK, it's clear that we're talking about different things. For all matters gaming, Wikipedia is correct 99.99% of the time. It's a topic that's well documented and fairly cut and dried. I'm talking about ALL articles on Wikipedia & Wikipedia as a resource for research.

Flandre Scarlet said:
Yo. Chiddlers.
This isn't a topic about Wikipedia. Go make one if you want to continue this discussion.

I'm pretty sure we've already established that Flipnote Studio isn't coming out on the 30th. So I'd say the thread has fulfilled its original purpose.
 
Possibly, but just one last thing. I'm not necessarily talking about gaming. It can be about anything. For example, someone might post details about an upcoming episode of some show, and someone else might say "OMG Wikipedia. Editable. Unreliable"
 
Yo. Chiddlers.
This isn't a topic about Wikipedia. Go make one if you want to continue this discussion.
Forgots to lock?
No! Please don't.
crying.gif
It seems like all of my topics get locked, even if they are good, and I get extremely tired of it, so please don't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top