Javier Barriopedro aka DokZ | 29 Mar 2007 10:31 a.m. PST |
A rather O.K. guys once you get to ignore him, I reckon. The TMP's Larry Dunn might be the same guy, but ours does not read so "weird" even when some of his interventions are rather difficult to deal with at certain times. Other than that, the originator of this topic is not foamous/influential at all, I say. |
Friend of Sam Mustafa | 29 Mar 2007 11:47 a.m. PST |
Just thought I'd chime in, since there has been quite a bit of fuss over Larry Dunn's recent edits on Wikipedia. I have not known Larry for very long, in fact some would say that I don't know him at all. But, I can tell you from reading his posts here and elsewhere, that he is, indeed, the Guru of Wargaming. Just ask him. He'll confirm this fact. He has the answers to everything. And, rarely, if ever, lets a miniature, rule set or other gaming product escape his intense scutiny. Whether it's a horse figure that looks like a sheep dog, or a Janpanese 28mm figure with an odd looking weapon, he's sure to correct us on it, even if we don't truly care. And so my fellow TMP-ers, ask not why Larry has edited the Wikipedia Wargaming article, but why he hasn't edited the entire site! You should ask, because I heard from him that he is on a crusade to edit every Wikipedia article ever written
. And my friend Larry tells me that IABSM is really just a niche wargame compared to classics like I Ain't Larry Dunn, Mum! |
Goldwyrm | 29 Mar 2007 11:58 a.m. PST |
Got to love Wikipedia. What goes around comes around. Seems someone has edited his user profile. link Changes that appear to have been made are in bold. Line 3: Line 3: ==== Selected contributions ==== ==== Selected contributions ==== - I have initiated, or substantially expanded, several Wikipedia articles (or sections in articles), including the following: + I have initiated, or substantially expanded, several Wikipedia articles (or sections in articles), as well as using my personal opinion to edit articles that contain information I do not agree with, despite the validity of the information I am removing, including the following:
|
LarrysAuntie | 29 Mar 2007 12:07 p.m. PST |
Leave me Larry alone. He's a nice boy really. Even if he does smell of wee. |
Gabriel Landowski | 29 Mar 2007 12:22 p.m. PST |
Yeah I tried to post some stuff on Wiki and it got creamed real fast – it seems that I am too close to the subject matter. So I've been trying to figure out how to write about stuff I don't care about and haven't done it yet
. Supposedly if you have nothing to do with the subject matter and it doesn't point to SALE SALE SALE it should be okay – but then again your jury is "them"
.. |
wehrmacht | 29 Mar 2007 12:28 p.m. PST |
I note with interest that our own illustrious member "Combatpainter" has been added to the Wiki entry as a gamer of reknown
below Brigadier Peter Young MC but above Bill Armintrout. w. |
aecurtis | 29 Mar 2007 12:32 p.m. PST |
You mean *this* Bill Armintrout? "Bill Armintrout – The man behind The Miniatures Page, one of the major wargaming focal points on the internet, and where Larry Dunn is a non-entity." Allen |
Condottiere | 29 Mar 2007 12:33 p.m. PST |
Yeah I tried to post some stuff on Wiki and it got creamed real fast – it seems that I am too close to the subject matter. Well, if you are the author and you provide a link to your sales site, then it'd be a violation. If, however, someone else posted the link, presumably with full knowledge of its value to the wargaming community, then that wouldn't violate Wiki-policy. I think that the complaint here is that Mr. Dunn took it upon himself to make certain decisions as to which games/rules were worthy of mention and which ones weren't. Ruffled a lot of feathers. |
For Sale | 29 Mar 2007 12:57 p.m. PST |
If, however, someone else posted the link, presumably with full knowledge of its value to the wargaming community, then that wouldn't violate Wiki-policy is closer to the truth, but LarryDunn chose to delete each mention of the rules marking them as sales "spam" posted by the author even though they were in fact contributed by several different people and not the author at all, as even the most cursory examination of the history page would show. |
Ceterman | 29 Mar 2007 1:24 p.m. PST |
My very first post on TMP was because Larry Dunn ed me off! I have been reading & gleaning much info from TMP for probably 5 years before I joined. It is truly a wealth of gaming info & I believe the best site for all things related to gaming. The post that ed me off was an offhanded remark about Great War Miniaturs. The thread was about the quality of GWM (which I believe are fantastic, as do most who game 28mm WW1) Dunns' comment was something like, I'm paraphrasing here "I don't like them, I wish I did, but they all have faces like Gnomes" or something to that effect, I thought to myself, what a schmuck. I mean these are fantastic minis & if thats all you can say about something, keep it to yourself. I wanted to say something like "OK, Dunn, lets see you sculpt something" but cooler heads prevailed. Now this. I see my first impression was completly correct. What a schmuck. Peter |
Goldwyrm | 29 Mar 2007 1:52 p.m. PST |
An optimist would say you have him to thank for breaking the ice and helping you come out of lurk mode. |
Big Miller Bro | 29 Mar 2007 4:04 p.m. PST |
lol I've had my beefs with Larry on TMP as well- 'differences of opinion' when he feels the need to trash anything he doesnt like
to see that he is being an arse about things on wiki for no good reason pretty much cements him as a Troll in my books |
sapper joe | 29 Mar 2007 5:18 p.m. PST |
Even if I don't have time to make comments on this, I absolutely agree with Ceterman. Larry ticked me off many times about his rude comments about various sculpters and other people who are really trying to make something for others. Instead of a decent critque, he slams them. I don't like people like that. |
Rudysnelson | 29 Mar 2007 7:25 p.m. PST |
Wikipedia seems to be a hacker's heaven. So many entries were nothing but plaragized cut and pastes from other websites. I do not see how they have been sued over and over. A person who has a tainted interest should not be able to judge what is and is not elgible for inclusion in such a site. Maybe Wikipedia and larry has many characteristics in common based upon the posts on this thread. I would not put about as much faith in such ramblings. In regards to the advertising claim any set of rules being listed on such a site would be considered getting free ads unless they were OOP. |
new guy | 29 Mar 2007 8:27 p.m. PST |
Could someone, who has been associated with this wonderful site for a reasonable length of time, please explain who this Larry Dunn is and why everyone seems to either hate him or love him
Or perhaps (based on the general tone of this thread) those that say they love him are really him in disguise? Why do people put up with him if he really is such a bad actor? I would really appreciate an answer
Respectfully, I/S |
SeattleGamer | 30 Mar 2007 12:06 a.m. PST |
I/S
happy to oblige, though I know very little. Fact #1 – I never heard of this guy until yesterday. Fact #2 – I've never run across him here on TMP. Fact #3 – Out on Wikipedia, a number of folks, gamers, have been adding various bits of info to the Miniatures Wargaming thread. You can check out the current info here: link Fact #4 – Someone named Larry Dunn has decided that some rule sets can be mentioned by name, but others cannot, because they are spam (his words). Fact #5 – He has stated in an email to one person who wrote and asked why he was removing certain text that he will bookmark the site, and will continue to remove any offending text. So, someone decided that since Wikipedia is not a discussion forum, but TMP is, a topic was started asking why Larry Dunn has something against certain rule sets. And here you are, reading this. I think that brings you up to speed. I did just check Wiki again, and the offending third paragraph, the one which listed off some rule sets (under the Rulesets topic heading) has been totally removed now, so no set of rules is mentioned. Which leads me to ask: why? Or better yet, why can all of the manufacturers of miniatures be listed at the bottom of the article (43 at present) but NO rules manufacturers can be listed? Come to think of it, I see Old Dominion Game Works listed, and they provide rules only. I feel an edit coming on! Personally, I'm happy to see the third paragraph bite the dust (I mentioned this in an earlier post). I think that just like Minis Manufacturers have their own listing, Rules Manufacturers should have their own listing as well. Hope that helped. Steve |
Derek H | 30 Mar 2007 12:13 a.m. PST |
Personally, I'm happy to see the third paragraph bite the dust (I mentioned this in an earlier post). I think that just like Minis Manufacturers have their own listing, Rules Manufacturers should have their own listing as well. Someone has now set up a separate article which is a list of miniature wargames rules. link The same thing probably needs done for the manufacturers. |
SeattleGamer | 30 Mar 2007 12:36 a.m. PST |
Yep, just noticed that. Decided I will set up an account with them and partake in the discussion behind the scenes so I can at least know why some rules are above reproach, and others are not considered notable. This because the first talk session I read said that while placing the rule sets into some sort of historical period would be helpful, first they need to determine which rules are kept and which are deleted. Steve |
Rudysnelson | 30 Mar 2007 6:49 a.m. PST |
So many classic games like Scotty Bowden's Empire series and my own Guard du Corps and Induanas Colonel and Emirs which was nominated for the HG Wells award in 1984 (but lost to TSATF) are not listed. So many omissions. |
General Monty | 30 Mar 2007 8:05 a.m. PST |
Damn bug
Anyway top marks to whoever did the latest edit on Mr Dunn's Wiki page
link |
new guy | 30 Mar 2007 8:14 a.m. PST |
Thanks Steve
It appears Larry Dunn and Helmet101 are very similar in the manner in which they express their dislike for an individual or company
so from that prospective I understand them pretty well, but that still doesn't answer the thrust of my inquiry. Who is Larry Dunn? Or better still, who does Larry Dunn think he is, and why should we care? Does he really have a place or honor in the wargaming community, or is he just a "hack" whose own "self importance" overshadows and overpowers his "little grey cells". Inquiring minds wish to know
I/S |
javelin98 | 30 Mar 2007 9:31 a.m. PST |
Does he really have a place or honor in the wargaming community, or is he just a "hack" whose own "self importance" overshadows and overpowers his "little grey cells". This is a rhetorical question, right? |
roryfx | 30 Mar 2007 9:36 a.m. PST |
Okay, I'm sorry to stop some of the fun, but the edits on Larry's page aren't helping. Let's get a little more constructive. We are interested in the subject, we have the expertise, if we don't like what Larry is doing, then I suggest we can afflict him with the tyranny of the masses and put it to right. There were some good suggestions in this and other threads about how that article should look. Go get an account on Wiki and get involved. I for one would like to thank Larry for inspiring me to take a little more interest in what's going on at wikipedia. |
roryfx | 30 Mar 2007 9:40 a.m. PST |
Hey, you! Took the words right out of my keyboard! ;-) |
javelin98 | 30 Mar 2007 9:43 a.m. PST |
Silly bug! Anyway, what I actually posted was: Wow
looks like a number of Wiki editors have a problem with this guy, too. Scroll to the bottom of this page and read the comments: link |
roryfx | 30 Mar 2007 11:22 a.m. PST |
He's obviously pretty firm in his opinions. |
Palafox | 30 Mar 2007 1:05 p.m. PST |
|
By John 54 | 30 Mar 2007 2:04 p.m. PST |
Anybody else reeeaaallllly starting to like Larry Dunn? No? Ah well, Larry, Lovin' your work. |
new guy | 30 Mar 2007 7:16 p.m. PST |
That is one warped dude
I've tried to figure out the language of Elk myself to no avail. Too many grunts in the key of A for my taste. I/S |
Condor | 30 Mar 2007 7:18 p.m. PST |
So, who was it that was offended by Redzed's statement? It was either a horse lover or a horse m***ster that did not like being lumped together with the likes of Larry Dung. -Condor |
Tommy20 | 30 Mar 2007 7:49 p.m. PST |
roryfx: Go get an account on Wiki and get involved. Actually, this whole thing has made me realize just how useless wikipedia really is
|
BlackWidowPilot | 30 Mar 2007 7:54 p.m. PST |
Just added Reviresco to the wiki manufacturers' section. Let's see if Larry leaves this alone or not.. Leland R. Erickson Metal Express metal-express.net |
new guy | 01 Apr 2007 5:33 p.m. PST |
I thought it might be interesting to share this with this distinguished forum
This was posted today on Wikipedia today. "I am very new to this venue so please forgive my lack of knowledge of procedure, but I believe what I have to say needs to be said. My company, Command Operations Center, LLC (www.commandoperationscenter.com), conducts Decision-Making training for the US Military using miniature wargame simulations commonly known as TDGs (Tactical Decision-Making Games) We use a proprietary set of rules drawn, in part, from almost every set of Wargame Rules published since I began wargaming 50 years ago, including the rules in question. I, or a member of my company, has read every set of wargame rules published, and I do not remember the name Larry Dunn being associated with any of them. In order to fairly judge a set of rules the individual making the judgement must have experience creating/producing a workable set of rules that are accepted by the public (Wargaming Community) or extensive play testing of rules sets and have the public reputation as a Play-Tester within the gaming community. Mr. Dunn, while he is reportedly (by his own account only) knowledgeable in several areas of history, appears to have no such experience, either as a Play-Tester or an Author of any rules set. With his editing he displays a personal bias against certain rules sets, companies, and specific members of the wargaming community, and has taken advantage of his position within the Wikipedia bureaucracy to place his personal preferences above the good of the Wargaming Community, the Public in general, and the Wikipedia community specifically. I am happy to provide this short list of references who can testify to my credentials in the industry and the position of my company within the professional side of wargaming (some prefer simulation) community. Requests for e-mail contact information for those listed below can be sent to ComOpsCtrLLC@aol.com MGen Bob Hollingsworth USMC (retired)Former Deputy Commander FMFPAC George Geib PhD History, Butler University LTC Marc Axelberg, G-3 JRTC Fort Polk, LA Major Will Gambino, SOTD (Special Operations Training Detachment) Ft. Polk, LA I have reviewed much of Mr. Dunn's input to the Wikipedia community and have noted his firm belief that he is the only source for correct information on several subjects. I should also note he has received the fifth (5th) highest number of "stifles" in the history of the Miniatures Page, the pre-eminent source for Wargame information on the Web. His attitude does not seem to be in line with the guidelines that Wikipedia operates: that of cooperation and shared input. In my view he is a prime example of "power corrupts", and while his input in the areas he so proudly displays have merit he should be banned from contributing to anything connected with Wargaming since his opinions are obviously biased. He appears to have no real expertise from which he could obtain the knowledge necessary to base his opinions about gaming in reality. Respectfully, XXXXXXXXXXXXX 2 April 2007 (UTC) Partner/S3 ComOpsCtr, LLC |
Richard Baber | 02 Apr 2007 12:34 a.m. PST |
I`ve followed this thread (and the other ones too) I find it bizarre that someone (un-apointed) can control what information is available on a free resource. Is it his site or are there other "officers" who you can aproach with complaints?? I have to be honest I`ve often found when doing research that the info in Wikpedia has been cut/pasted from other sites (or vise versa) and therefore there little new material. |
nelly114mk2 | 03 Apr 2007 3:20 a.m. PST |
A typical up his own e megalomaniac! A very self important little man. Probably got the hump because his doctor won't prescribe any more viagra just so he can fully enjoy Pamela Handerson and her five sisters! lol, He probably censors his own orgasms on the grounds that it wasn't what he wanted to see! |
wwiiogre | 03 Apr 2007 11:12 p.m. PST |
Go to Wiki, register then go to this link and complain to the Wiki owner: link chris |