pouët.net

In German, Czech, Finnish and Russian an article about ASD on Wiki is available https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_Software_Development

P.S.: It’s funny, but the Russian version is the most detailed.

Less editors on non-English Wikipedias. That's a blessing and a curse - less deletionism, but also less standards.

True. Wikipedia does not work properly if there are not enough editors. In smaller countries there are instances of local Wikipedia getting hijacked by some group with a political agenda. Peddling half-truths and lies. This "secret group" can consist of as little as 2 or 3 people. It's not that hard to pay 2 or 3 people to sit at home and consistently build up their Wiki status, "rise through the ranks" so to speak. This situation is then hard to remedy, because the lies get spread by admins and superusers. As soon as someone corrects an obvious lie, an admin corrects it back. So it basically ends up the case of who was there first. It's so sad.

don't give people ideas about correcting wiki articles about cracktros ;)

It's always sad when detailed reports are to be deleted because "citation needed" and you read it and think "Yes, I was there and it was exactly like that!"...
Must be even worse when it's about your own demo-group.

who needs vanity pages about dogs when they're about to be eaten by evil immigrants

as a veteran wikipedian (even though exclusively active on the german wikipedia) i can only say that the deletion was absolutely ridiculous. firstly, why on earth would you take "freax" as _the_ reference, now that there is lots of excellent academic research on the scene, including publications where ASD is dealt with? (i'm pretty sure that it is mentioned in daniel botz's and doreen hartmann's monographs). secondly, there was zero discussion, only one delete vote. on the german wikipedia, this would definitely not do, usually several votes are required. i'm sorry that i got to know about this so late, otherwise i would have chimed in the discussion there...

Non-notable band.

I'm a little bit surprised that it's possible to delete an WP-article that's already present in other languages.

Wikipedias of different languages are totally separate of their content. One tangible example is that English Wikipedia uses a broad definition of Christianity which includes Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons (like academic religious studies usually do) while some other Wikipedias use a narrow definition which excludes movements that do not follow the principles of ecumenical faith (ie. rejecting trinity). Now this choice obviously has wide repercussions about how articles on Christianity need to be worded.

I know. But shouldn't the fact that an article already exists in another language be enough proof that it's relevant enough for WikiPedia?

I will begrudgingly and with great consternation accept that Pizza Enrico is notable in Finland, but I refuse to accept they are notable anywhere else.

Well, that's why it's called a demo "scene", right? Because we assume it's of little interest outside our circle?

For "reliable sources" and "notability", it doesn't have to be just books. Online articles on well-established sites and academic papers should work too. Blogs and Youtube would be out though.

I'm a long time Wikipedia editor, though I gave up editing and trying to save demoscene and tracker related pages a long time ago. Kosmic Free Music Foundation finally got axed after 18 whole years. Hornet Archive was purged way back in 2010. I figure, we've gotten good enough at preserving demoscene-related information, and found enough outreach programs, to not really need Wikipedia for anything other than a basic summary.

There's also that version of the story where the philosopher Demoscenes punches people in the face when they dare disrespect his realtime mosaic machine. I _LOVE_ this version. Sadly it hasn't been recognised as a valid part of the official corpus by the self-appointed editors that decide these kinds of things. And I don't know why, and I'm getting mad ! It's been alluded to, albeit vaguely, in one of Cicero's speeches at the Roman Senate a few centuries later, so you'd think it SHOULD be canon. So why is it silenced ? Nobody knows !

If there's a lesson here, for the life of me I wouldn't know.

I guess what I'm saying is : somewhere, sometime, Sisyphus is watching you, catching his breath, wiping his brow, leaning on the boulder that has, once more, rolled down the trail. Everything has to be done again. He knows the Gods are fickle. And he's smiling at you, Navis, and the ASD guys. With great sympathy and a hint of humor.

On a side note, speaking of tracker related pages, you reminded me that United Trackers and Trax in Space are gone too. It would be sound to believe CSDb, Pouet and Demozoo will not last either.

Wait, do you mean that slightly feminine dude that walks and moves his hands all hip-hoppy from that demo?

we should carve scene history in stone tablets on some mountain!

Or at least punch it on cards. ;)

…and store them at Crystal Peak command center.

wikipedia deletionists should all be deleted.

If I search google books for "andromeda software development", the group is mentioned in at least 2 books. Isn't this enough to revert the deletion?

The article on ASD has now been returned in a draft form where it can be edited and its deletion can be discussed again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andromeda_Software_Development

Article's unsourced text has already been partially replaced with sourced material. The previous version can be seen here:
https://pastebin.com/raw/7VLvzEmf

What happens next is up to us.

Newest Skrolli has articles about Alternative Party, Assembly and Zoo. The Wikipedia articles for Altparty and Assembly are already pretty well sourced, but perhaps this could be used as a source for an article about Zoo, and make some other demoscene releated articles more deletion proof. I haven't read the magazine yet, but they have sceners writing for them and I'm pretty confident it would be a good source.

I still don't think this is important - we're already self documenting, Wikipedia isn't good for outreach, and if we want institutional validation, UNESCO provides that in a way that might have some real benefits when applying for grants or such somewhere down the line - but if we are going to have a presence there, I'd be happier if that presence isn't mostly based on a single outdated and disputed book from 2005 :)

Thanks for the support guys - I'm not bitter, it was usually my goto link if somebody asks me what is this all about - so give him the demoscene and ASD article online.
We can probably make our own website a bit less cryptic and minimal. Some more text would help. It's getting harder explaining realtime graphics and parties etc. (- What "party" you're nearly 50!)

Or not. "Cryptic" is an inseparable part of the whole demoscene "culture" imho. I don't think doing away with that part in order to make oneself more understandable to the mainstream is the way to go.