Has the simutrans article from english wikipedia been assaulted by wiki vandals? I've been searching along the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simutrans&action=history">Revision history</a> log but I haven't found anything
current one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simutrans
as it was : http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simutrans
The ES version was translated from the old large version of that article. Perhaps it's me but I think the old one give much more "important" info about the game. IMHO, the current one is so short. A brief description about Simutrans features and history, a screen capture and a couple of links... :-\
It's the first edit by Haipa Doragon. I saw that, too, a few weeks back.
Maybe the change was for good. Is Wikipedia the place to list all features? Plus reading through the old content, there seems to be a lot of weird stuff. How you can build tunnels and so on. That's why I (personally!) think the edit wasn't just "evil".
Comparing to the OpenTTD-article, it is indeed rather very short. I also liked the german version much better than the english one.
Thanks for the clarification VS, now I'm more calm.. ;)...anyway, I'm agree with prissi, the article is very short. It does not mention anywhere the different paks and mods, but talks a lot about the different primary and secondary colors (¿?) IMHO It points out things and features than are not the ones that distinguish Simutrans from the rest of games (darkened night times complete, bankruptcy option...)
I think it needs to be corrected by somebody from the community that has more experience in Simutrans.
Oh, of course. It certainly needs another rewrite.
I wouldn't be surprised if wikipedia deletes it because Simutrans is not "notable" enough to deserve a page.
I have a very poor opinion of their site because they are committing fraud by claiming to be a "democratic" "encyclopedia" website.
Well since translator cannot be used for translating today, I decided to rewrite the whole Simutrans article in the English wikipedia and also add in sources. I hope it is alright but feel free to edit it or even revert back but I more worried is the cite source problem (see discussion page).