User talk:Fasten
Ref: Talk:Games
Hi! I noticed that you zapped all your hard work! :( And left just a question... personally, can't talk for others, I don't mind having a game / game review section. If you hadn't had zapped it, I would probably now be asking for a more 'educational' or 'pedagogical' slant to it :)
I think you should recover your work... as a matter of fact, I just 'rolled it back' :) You can probably work from there with a more 'pedagogical' slant to it... :) Cheers! --Xavi 16:18, 17 January 2007 (EST)
- The majority of Linux games that exist are not written with pedagogical goals. The more interesting games may be older commercial games written with pedagogical goals. (see WINE) The game Ancient Empires Lux, for example, links to Wikipedia articles from within the game but it provides no motivation for the player to read the articles. That mistake can also be found in games developed with pedagogical goals when the authors have just combined a knowledge part and a game or a collection of games. Examples for games that try to provide more motivation are (e.g.) Genius - Task Force Biologie, Chemicus II and Mathica --Fasten 08:27, 18 January 2007 (EST)
- I agree with you about games not being pedagogical... although my perception is that most games have a pedagogical reading or aspect in them but are not designed to have them. For example, most games were made just to have fun (although the game industry changed that in order for them to make money ;) Later on, somebody may analyze them for their pedagogical value and praised or lambasted them. I doubt (correct me if I'm wrong) that chess was developed to teach strategy, but after analysis it was found that strategy was a major component in how to win the game - thus it can be used to teach strategy, its concepts, amongst other things.
- I don't know what the inventor of chess intended it to be, andragogy may have been a goal. Many games contain logical challenges, even XBlast does have some logical challenges. --Fasten 10:08, 18 January 2007 (EST)
- Anyway, maybe a pedagogical analysis should be done on many of those games... don't know your credentials in pedagogical issues (mine are nill ;) but maybe you could try searching edutainment review sites and see what are their criteria, analysis and reviews... --Xavi 09:50, 18 January 2007 (EST)
- I don't have any credentials in pedagogy myself. --Fasten 09:55, 18 January 2007 (EST)
- I agree with you about games not being pedagogical... although my perception is that most games have a pedagogical reading or aspect in them but are not designed to have them. For example, most games were made just to have fun (although the game industry changed that in order for them to make money ;) Later on, somebody may analyze them for their pedagogical value and praised or lambasted them. I doubt (correct me if I'm wrong) that chess was developed to teach strategy, but after analysis it was found that strategy was a major component in how to win the game - thus it can be used to teach strategy, its concepts, amongst other things.
license question
I'm a bit baffled by your removal of the summary in the Java page because it's "GFDL, not the cc-Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5"... Care to explain? (without too much legalese, please ;) After all it's clearly a quote, and given credit for it. --Xavi 16:44, 31 January 2007 (EST)
- There are some issues with the way you made the quote, not with the use of Wikipedia content in general:
- Main Text:
- You may not add, remove, or change any content or links within the Main Text itself (with exceptions)
- License and Copyright Statement:
- You must link to a local copy of the GFDL.
- You must make it clear that the content from Wikipedia is available under the GFDL license.
- Aggregation and cover pages:
- Embedding a Wikipedia Document within a larger webpage. (legally questionable)
- --Fasten 07:58, 2 February 2007 (EST)