That’s unnecessary 
Are there any specific areas where you found Slick to be more “noob friendly” or is this just going to forever remain in “gut feeling” territory?
I really enjoyed using the StateBasedGame with Slick, I found it easy to get started with. It was great for Ludum Dare, as I could a menu operational within minutes, not having to worry about much else.
That said, I haven’t used LIBgdx, so I don’t know if it has it’s equivalent.
Slick2D has been one of my favorite gateways into OpenGL, still is. However, programs still have a life-cycle and it all depends on how many people want to work to keep it updated. I hate to point this out, but being “mad” or “sad” about Slick2D isn’t going to fix Slick2D.
All Slick2D needs to become relevant again is a group of programmers to update it using the new LWJGL drivers and to also finish the bridge that was started with Slick2D and LibGDX. I’d even go so far to say that if the two were merged, you can “Have your cake and eat it too.”
It is very hard to be “sad” at Slick2D, because it only takes a programmer with a little bit of time to keep it relevant. Don’t underestimate the power of open source. Once your project is out there, then you don’t know who will end up picking it up to make it better than what it is now.
The answer is dead obvious… contribute to libgdx project an extra library that provides a neat Slick-like abstraction/interface/encapsulation or whatever u wanna call it on top of libgdx. That’d be far easier to do than to carry on with the Slick project… which probably requires a miracle to make current.
Slick-gdx addon project anyone?
Ok… I’m off 
Eh? Who said that?
That’s not good example. Not reliable and you can see the owner’s comment. If you want to take existing wrapper/template try Gemserk’s one, you can find it on Github.
[quote=“wesley.laferriere”]
Yes, but you mis-read “you can make one” as “one is being made”.