Talk:PBD

The topic of PBD is controversial, so think carefully before editing. Please help to keep this article clean. Avoid adding biased views (in either direction) on PBD and mixed-mode / team A chooses. If you want to explain such views, please start a dedicated page such as 'Arguments for PDB', 'Agruments against PBD' ...

If you think the current article is biased, rather than editing the article right away, please suggest a change that would improve it here on the discussion page to see if people agree.

Hoping to avoid an edit-war --Jesper 13:06, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

PBD or Penalty Box Dribble is also Know as PMBC - (Player Manager Ball Control)

----

it's no more, why? I mean player manage ball controll is more correct and easy to understand and we had a famous 12 pages thread on this on koG forum http://www.ko-gathering.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8977&highlight=pmbc --filippodb 14:41, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

I find the term PMBC confusing since I think it somehow implies that it is a "Player Manager only" feature. Don't mind if you add it though, but better not in bold --Jesper 15:46, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

ok, so put it back but not on bold, I won't touch a single line of PBD page, it's too hot for me :p --filippodb 16:07, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

Done!

Colons (:'s) will indent your comments btw ;) --Jesper 16:16, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

another thing: I would love to split the tournament rule controversy on: - tournaments rule (and please replace the -wc history- ) and - mixed pbd controversy - ok? maybe after explain the proposal split clearly the MixedPBD controversy on the 2 point of views. Correct? --filippodb 16:54, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

I have moved the whole sections to Tournament Rules Discussions. It doesn't really belong on the PBD page. --Jesper 17:57, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

the mixed pbd discussion is not only the most debated argument on KOA but also the most important thing for PBD. It'll seem we want to hide far away the discussion to hide the true. For me we can put a copy to the rule discussions page but really a PBD page without mixed PBD discussion will be useless. --filippodb 18:14, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

PBD is in Category:KORPS. I think it should be technical and stating facts not opinions. You can make a link to the discussion page or even link it from the front page. --Jesper 18:19, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

yes, we have to put PBD into tournament category now! People that is going to the next WC should know exactly what is PBD and how it works!! So we can just create 2 pages: PBD (for tournament and newbies) and PMBC for hacking purpouse. I think 99% of the actual visitors don't care of the code, it's useless for them, the code is just between the KORPS members: the developer of new games and applications and KOA hackers ;) --filippodb 19:14, 27 Sep 2005

The page explains what PBD is and which versions has it. That's what most people need to know. Why do you feel it so important to spread your views on PBD to most people? People read the forums and know them already. In addition, a Wiki is not the best place to spread your views is it? --Jesper 18:39, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

wrong! wiki goal is "representing" disputes, not hide it! Do you really know what people want to know when is going to tournament? The difference not the versions! PMBC will be a new page now with tecnical arguments for tecnic people, why are u going to put into silent the debate?? The forum is a crap chaos! --filippodb 20:14, 27 Sep 2005

and don't change the opponent point of view, we're not against mixed pbd, but on forcing everybody to play on mixed!! --filippodb 16:56, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

done! Added all the valid points from the opponents, please let the 2 area indipendent to their proponents, and let people voice their valid points freely

Sorry if I changed your point of view. I only did it when I found it not neutral/balanced and in order to trim the article. I think you are against mixed-mode. Mixed-mode only if agreed is the same as Team A chooses ;) --Jesper 17:57, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

jesper your attitude of doing all yourself without asking others is not acceptable, please explain why did you delete several times content without asking it before! Thanks. --filippodb 22:42, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

Look Filippo, I was cleaning up the article since it had turned into a mess without a clear goal and a clear organisation. Yes, I deleted some stuff I found irrelevant such as wheater or not cracked copies or orininals was used in Milan 2004 etc. I also deleted what I would call some anti-PBD bias such as "PBD is like car wheel traction" etc. At first you didn't complain about this and even said that you wouldn't touch the page anymore since the topic is too hot for you! Then you started to ask me to act as your secretary to put back stuff which I find doesn't belong on the KORPS PBD page. Thinking about this, I realised that the article had dual largely independent goals: firsly PBD info and secondly PBD tournament rules discussion. Since you only cared about the rules discussion, but didn't want do edit page yourself I created the seperate page for you to edit. I think this was an elegant solution but obviously it enraged you. You accused me of trying to hide information! I then suggested you to link to tournament rules discussions from the main page (the front door which everyone sees) but you ignored that. When I argued that PBD is in KORPS and therefore should be technical, you came up with what I would frankly call a bizarre suggestion. You proposed that the PBD article should go in the World Cup section and that the current page should be renamed to PMBC! I already told you that I find the term PMBC confusing (and biased too). If PMBC is PBD then KO2BC is NO-PBD? See the implication that PBC is Player Manager only? Anyway, your suggestion was to have seperate pages for the synonyms PBD and PMBD, in seperate cathegories with different goals and different content. Would you at least agree that this is confusing and should be avoided?

Next thing you started to carry out the changes you knew I was opposed to. Current state of affairs is the (what I would call) mess we have now. Well, I'm not going to change it back without your approval since I am sure you would "win" an edit-war on stamina! Since you feel that I'm trying hide information I suggest that you think of a better name that would fit a spearate page for the Controversy section (the current PBD on World CUP) section. Note the name PBD is already taken! I also think we need a WC2005 Rules page. Then I suggest we link both these pages from the main page and from the PBD page, to make sure that most interested people will find it. I'm not trying to hide anything, I'm just trying to find the best organisation for the content we have and the content you want to add. I hope you realise that now! --Jesper 08:03, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

"Kick Off 2 World Cup 90 (Atari ST): Some versions." This is news to me. Is there definitely a WC90+PBD Atari ST release? I thought the first ST release was 1.2e (NOPBD). I could be wrong though! Can anyone confirm? SteveC

I'm not sure if it's definite, but James Lockerbie mentioned it a while back. Someone should ask him to confirm! See [1] [2] --Jesper 08:54, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

I'll be back in the afternoom, don't have time now... what I want is we agree to a compromise that please everybody and then change the page. Not to change the page when I was clearly stating that I don't want to hide the most important fact of PBD. See u later, I'll be back at 13--filippodb 10:19, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

ok I believe we all want a complete and useful wiki, we had a bad start, so just start to discussing now, take a good compromise/decision to modify the PBD page. If you want to make other changes to main page or rules go for it! If someone will find your change not appropriate he'll ask you why you did such change, for me you can go and change it, no problem, I just need to solve all the few problems on PBD --filippodb 12:49, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

Content on PBD page

PBD page should contain All the infos about help all the people, coders, newbies, WC players, curious and also just for documentation purpouse. For a start who cand decide what to put on the page or not? I think we should pput all the infos we have regarding PBD to have a complete article. Missing this we can't have a complete article. I give you few example, the page about communism on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism and the page about Silvio Berlusconi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi Both are controversial arguments.

Berlusconi page describe ALL aspect of the man, the media tycoon man, the president of Milan football club and the politic man. But it has also a huge section about Controversy and his Legal investigations! So it's a full article, we can't write about him describing only he's a president of milan football club, media tycoon, a politic. Stop. We need to be careful describe all the aspect of the subject to not give a partial description.

The communist page It's a big page, with firstly the description then all the history of the movement, how it changed, and then the actuality. There's of course the article about the criticism of the communism (they don't hide the fact there're some controversy) they explain the critics and there's ALSO a link only because the critics are a lot and they take a lot of space!!

so this are my wiki example of good articles, I want that an article to be like that: as complete as possible. If there're something totally out of topic, just point it out and we'll discuss maybe with some more people.

As for PMBC page, it's a matter of game developer. I don't think there're some pages owned by games developer but every page should help at best the visitors. If you guys want a more "clean" page when you work you can use PMBC page instead PBD, if you don't care about a huge PBD page so we can redirect PMBC to PBD. --filippodb 13:14, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

Following your logic why not have only one big page call 'Dino Dini Games' or perhaps two big pages called 'Kick Off 2' and 'Player Manager'? Ever wondered why books have chapters or why newspapers have seperate sections? Please read my comments above again. I believe that you are trying to force logically distinct topics on the same page. On Wikipedia it happens all the time that pages are split, that subsections grow out of topic to the point where they get a seperate page. A nice logical organisation of the information makes it much more accesible and easy on the reader. I'm talking common sense here but I get the feeling I'm not getting through to you at all. Anyway, why do you think that more people would read a page called 'PBD' than a page call 'Tournament Rules' before going to the World Cup?

Regarding the PMBC page it's a misnormer and you might as well delete it. PBD and PMBD are synonyms. One of then should point to the other. Everything else is plain confusing! --Jesper 13:50, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

jesper, We already have a kick off series page of course: Category:Kick_Off_Series and a Category:Other Dino Dini Games: . But it's just a matter of dimension... And please let's talk about wiki, not books, there're a huge difference. I show you 2 great examples: controversy article on berlusconi page are not already splitted on another page (look at the big dimension), in the communist page the section about controversy is splitted but it's so huge!! So controversy are splitted away when they become so huge, right? so the PBD page is so huge to be splitted?? Of course not, so maybe I believe you think some arguments are not related to the PBD page... can you please explain why the chapter about PBD on WC and PBD discussion are off-topic? I think the visitors want to know if this feature is used or if it was used on a WC!!! And why it is used! "PBD" is hardly only a tecnical argument, because is like I say "Berlusconi" is only a media Tycoon! But we both know PBD is famous because of the debate about the WC rule change and Berlusconi is famous for the political activity, so we can't avoid that. To sum up the primary reason for PBD page is to have a compilation of all the knowledge, so we need to increase the informations. If the page is too big we can split away some article, but really PBD page is so BIG?? I'm sorry but since you can't give me a good wiki example I can't fully agree and BTW what are exactly the articles that you really don't want to see anymore? I'm sorry if I'm rude, I agree you should change some sentences that are not appropriate, no problem, but not depriving the page from arguments. I hope some others should put their opinions here, I don't want to be just an alone jesper-filippodb discussion --filippodb 15:37, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

I don't think that there is a single "right" way to organise WiKi pages. I tend to agree more with Jesper in that the PBD issue and the Mixed mode discussion are two separate things - of course there's some overlapping and that's why we have hyperlinking. I think that it's better to have two separate articles - one beig PBD itself and the other being a Rules Disussion. --Spyros

In most cases, it is a violation of the neutral point of view to specifically break out a controversial section, that's why the article is disputed now. The factual accuracy of the article should also been disputed. Keep in mind article <20Kb should never been splitted (as a wiki common accepted rule). Please read Wikipedia:Article_size on how restructuring and splitting articles, thanks--filippodb 2 oct 2005 (BST)