This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Advance Wars article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Advance Wars" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Advance Wars received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
I don't know why Norvy has taken out two of the most popular AW sites' links, but I'm putting them back on. Lawrence Hall 4 July 2005 15:56 (UTC)
Is there a reason for the outright removal of all external links to Advance Wars communities from corresponding pages here? They lead readers to relevant places where they can learn more about the game and discuss it, don't they? Is that not the point of an External Link section? Forgive me if I'm missing the rationale, but reasons such as "DIE LINKSPAM" are not very explanatory. Flare777 19:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Is there scope for a link to a Nintendo Wars Wiki to be given? I'm asking, as I'm putting together Wars Wiki, which as the name suggests, also covers Advance Wars... Now, I know it's very... empty right now, but we're slowly getting the project off the ground. And yes, it will be (and already does, to some extent), providing information that the article doesn't cover. --Ginger Ninja (16th March 2009) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.9.8 ( talk) 17:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Not to say that we should involve these, but I seem to recall walkthroughs that tell you basically everything to do in the level, and shows you images of how it should look. Do you think we should put that under External Links (assuming we can find it)? -- A Link to the Past 20:43, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
Anyone who is qualified, might you delete the character list and actually delve into the characters as opposed to how they perform? -- A Link to the Past 16:50, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
It might be helpful to list the various units, their costs, movement types, etc. It would really help to illustrate the gameplay. -- Cyde Weys talk contribs 14:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
I did find an external link. It seems Advance wars web has a nice collection of them. The site is http://awbw.amarriner.com/units.php
-I am new to posting links, so i cannot do a clickable link yet :(
I'm afraid that the External Links section needs trimming. There are four links to fan sites, all of which have pretty much the same information. As External Links can only link to sites that have information not included in the article, three of them have to be deleted, or all of them. I'll leave it to a vote to decide which ones get deleted. Wolf ODonnell 14:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't there being a section discussing the problems with the AI? it would show how the series developed (like how it cheats with fog of war of AW1's obsession with APC's
Romanista 16:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find an appropriate source for the following. As players, we all know it's true, but to meet WP guidelines it does need a source.
It was taken out recently, but if someone finds a source it can go back in. Alex9788 10:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
and a link to advance wars by web may be interesting, as it allows online play http://awbw.amarriner.com/ (didn't add it myself because of the earlier link discussion Romanista 16:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC) or maybe a mention pf stuart campbell's article about gameboy advance emulation, discussing how you can use advance wars for play by maiil Romanista 16:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC) both this suggestion and the AI would in my opinion expand the article from a simple game lemma to an interesting article about the series giving more information than the official info.. http://www.excellentcontent.com/emuzone/ez131.htm
From the Nintendo Wars article:
Advance Wars, known in Japan as Game Boy Wars Advance, was not released in Japan before the Game Boy Wars Advance 1+2 compilation (consequently, neither was its sequel, Game Boy Wars Advance 2). The English version was released in North America on September 9th, 2001.
Other places seem to verify this. From IGN:
Game Boy Wars Advance 1+2
Release: 11.25.04
The first two Advance Wars games at last arrive to Japan in one bundle pack.
I know we can generally trust places like GameFAQs for release dates, but it seems to me this one just came out of nowhere, and Advance Wars doesn't seem to exist in Japan outside of the compilation with the second game (find me the box art, I dare you). Notice how there ISN'T a release date for the second game, and I very much doubt they'd release AW1, then AW1+2. I think it's safe to say October 10th was just made up.
So if anyone has any objections to me removing this, please voice them :p -- Cyberdude93 04:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
the bleu fighter jet looks more like the Mirage 2000 than like any russian warjet i find.
You seriously need to turn this to series article. Because, first of all. AW started as Nintendo Wars on NES so yeah..you should.
There's a list of COs, is it worth creating one of units? I'll do it, just checking it would be supported to avoid an AfD. Comments? Alex9788 10:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Short answer: No. Long answer: WP:NOT#GUIDE, WP:NOT#INFO, scope guidelines. A list of COs could even be said to violate one of those policies depending on what you put in it. For this reason, I'm going to be editing the units section and merging it into Gameplay. Ong elvin 13:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Being an expert on planes, you may recognise that the so-called "fighters" do not resemble real life fighters, and are a much closer match to the A-10 Thunderbolt II. However, please be assured that in this game, that graphic corresponds to a fighter, a unit that fights other air units and is most certainly not "a twin-engine jet aircraft to provide close air support of ground forces by attacking tanks, armored vehicles, and other ground targets". Quite to the contrary, this unit is entirely restricted to attacking other air units. Your attempt to make the article more accurate is appreciated, but please accept that Geoff B, who may or may not have inferior knowledge to you regarding planes, has more experience with the game and is in this particular case correct. Thank you, Alex9788 11:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Here are the two pics:
They are pretty clearly based off each other. Cheers, Je t Lover ( Report a mistake) 23:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I know, it can be very frustrating, see my post above in the AI section. To me that's clearly obvious, but unfortunately it's unsourced so I can't put it in the article. Rules are rules. On the other hand, look at this paragraph:
There's no source for the bit about Zeroes, and no-one's challenged that, so maybe this could go in unsourced (I'd say this paragraph would be as appropriate a place as any). I'm quite sure JetLover would be in favour of that, interested as to what Geoff B's opinion is? Alex9788 08:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
You can all stop arguing this point. I've killed the picture because it's no longer necessary. See the section I added below ( Article Cropping) for some more details. Ong elvin 13:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I've cropped a bunch of information from the article. Sure it's all true and might be considered useful, but Wikipedia is not a game guide. Likewise, it is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and should not include information that is only relevant to gamers. Ong elvin 13:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Acknowledged, and on the whole it was a good edit, but I think you were a little excessive with the cropping in places. For example, I think that picture was appropriate, and some information should have been summarised rather than deleted. Please see my last edits, I haven't added much. If you disagree with any of what I did please edit that bit particularly rather than revert the whole thing. Thanks, Alex9788 17:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Nintendo Wars lists the series as turn-based strategy, as does the Video game genres page, but on all the game pages, they're called turn-based tactics games. Why is this? Is it because of the games' focus solely on combat, despite the economic management component and generation of new units in almost all scenarios (whereas in TBT games "players [...] complete their tasks using only the combat forces provided to them")? 128.54.228.80 06:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:Mak-sturm4a.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 15:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Not sure if most game articles cover similar games that they largely copy, it would seem potentially encyclopedic (if it can be sourced of course) although no doubt subjective at times (like say musician genres and influences usually do) so I could see arguments to avoid getting into it. Anyway if it is of interest my immediate impression was this was heavily derived from Battle Isle and the like. -- 86.164.126.9 ( talk) 05:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
See the Desert Commander NES game for similarity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.52.93 ( talk) 17:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Advance Wars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Advance Wars article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Advance Wars" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Advance Wars received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
I don't know why Norvy has taken out two of the most popular AW sites' links, but I'm putting them back on. Lawrence Hall 4 July 2005 15:56 (UTC)
Is there a reason for the outright removal of all external links to Advance Wars communities from corresponding pages here? They lead readers to relevant places where they can learn more about the game and discuss it, don't they? Is that not the point of an External Link section? Forgive me if I'm missing the rationale, but reasons such as "DIE LINKSPAM" are not very explanatory. Flare777 19:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Is there scope for a link to a Nintendo Wars Wiki to be given? I'm asking, as I'm putting together Wars Wiki, which as the name suggests, also covers Advance Wars... Now, I know it's very... empty right now, but we're slowly getting the project off the ground. And yes, it will be (and already does, to some extent), providing information that the article doesn't cover. --Ginger Ninja (16th March 2009) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.9.8 ( talk) 17:16, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Not to say that we should involve these, but I seem to recall walkthroughs that tell you basically everything to do in the level, and shows you images of how it should look. Do you think we should put that under External Links (assuming we can find it)? -- A Link to the Past 20:43, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
Anyone who is qualified, might you delete the character list and actually delve into the characters as opposed to how they perform? -- A Link to the Past 16:50, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
It might be helpful to list the various units, their costs, movement types, etc. It would really help to illustrate the gameplay. -- Cyde Weys talk contribs 14:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
I did find an external link. It seems Advance wars web has a nice collection of them. The site is http://awbw.amarriner.com/units.php
-I am new to posting links, so i cannot do a clickable link yet :(
I'm afraid that the External Links section needs trimming. There are four links to fan sites, all of which have pretty much the same information. As External Links can only link to sites that have information not included in the article, three of them have to be deleted, or all of them. I'll leave it to a vote to decide which ones get deleted. Wolf ODonnell 14:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't there being a section discussing the problems with the AI? it would show how the series developed (like how it cheats with fog of war of AW1's obsession with APC's
Romanista 16:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find an appropriate source for the following. As players, we all know it's true, but to meet WP guidelines it does need a source.
It was taken out recently, but if someone finds a source it can go back in. Alex9788 10:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
and a link to advance wars by web may be interesting, as it allows online play http://awbw.amarriner.com/ (didn't add it myself because of the earlier link discussion Romanista 16:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC) or maybe a mention pf stuart campbell's article about gameboy advance emulation, discussing how you can use advance wars for play by maiil Romanista 16:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC) both this suggestion and the AI would in my opinion expand the article from a simple game lemma to an interesting article about the series giving more information than the official info.. http://www.excellentcontent.com/emuzone/ez131.htm
From the Nintendo Wars article:
Advance Wars, known in Japan as Game Boy Wars Advance, was not released in Japan before the Game Boy Wars Advance 1+2 compilation (consequently, neither was its sequel, Game Boy Wars Advance 2). The English version was released in North America on September 9th, 2001.
Other places seem to verify this. From IGN:
Game Boy Wars Advance 1+2
Release: 11.25.04
The first two Advance Wars games at last arrive to Japan in one bundle pack.
I know we can generally trust places like GameFAQs for release dates, but it seems to me this one just came out of nowhere, and Advance Wars doesn't seem to exist in Japan outside of the compilation with the second game (find me the box art, I dare you). Notice how there ISN'T a release date for the second game, and I very much doubt they'd release AW1, then AW1+2. I think it's safe to say October 10th was just made up.
So if anyone has any objections to me removing this, please voice them :p -- Cyberdude93 04:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
the bleu fighter jet looks more like the Mirage 2000 than like any russian warjet i find.
You seriously need to turn this to series article. Because, first of all. AW started as Nintendo Wars on NES so yeah..you should.
There's a list of COs, is it worth creating one of units? I'll do it, just checking it would be supported to avoid an AfD. Comments? Alex9788 10:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Short answer: No. Long answer: WP:NOT#GUIDE, WP:NOT#INFO, scope guidelines. A list of COs could even be said to violate one of those policies depending on what you put in it. For this reason, I'm going to be editing the units section and merging it into Gameplay. Ong elvin 13:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Being an expert on planes, you may recognise that the so-called "fighters" do not resemble real life fighters, and are a much closer match to the A-10 Thunderbolt II. However, please be assured that in this game, that graphic corresponds to a fighter, a unit that fights other air units and is most certainly not "a twin-engine jet aircraft to provide close air support of ground forces by attacking tanks, armored vehicles, and other ground targets". Quite to the contrary, this unit is entirely restricted to attacking other air units. Your attempt to make the article more accurate is appreciated, but please accept that Geoff B, who may or may not have inferior knowledge to you regarding planes, has more experience with the game and is in this particular case correct. Thank you, Alex9788 11:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Here are the two pics:
They are pretty clearly based off each other. Cheers, Je t Lover ( Report a mistake) 23:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I know, it can be very frustrating, see my post above in the AI section. To me that's clearly obvious, but unfortunately it's unsourced so I can't put it in the article. Rules are rules. On the other hand, look at this paragraph:
There's no source for the bit about Zeroes, and no-one's challenged that, so maybe this could go in unsourced (I'd say this paragraph would be as appropriate a place as any). I'm quite sure JetLover would be in favour of that, interested as to what Geoff B's opinion is? Alex9788 08:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
You can all stop arguing this point. I've killed the picture because it's no longer necessary. See the section I added below ( Article Cropping) for some more details. Ong elvin 13:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I've cropped a bunch of information from the article. Sure it's all true and might be considered useful, but Wikipedia is not a game guide. Likewise, it is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and should not include information that is only relevant to gamers. Ong elvin 13:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Acknowledged, and on the whole it was a good edit, but I think you were a little excessive with the cropping in places. For example, I think that picture was appropriate, and some information should have been summarised rather than deleted. Please see my last edits, I haven't added much. If you disagree with any of what I did please edit that bit particularly rather than revert the whole thing. Thanks, Alex9788 17:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Nintendo Wars lists the series as turn-based strategy, as does the Video game genres page, but on all the game pages, they're called turn-based tactics games. Why is this? Is it because of the games' focus solely on combat, despite the economic management component and generation of new units in almost all scenarios (whereas in TBT games "players [...] complete their tasks using only the combat forces provided to them")? 128.54.228.80 06:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:Mak-sturm4a.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 15:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Not sure if most game articles cover similar games that they largely copy, it would seem potentially encyclopedic (if it can be sourced of course) although no doubt subjective at times (like say musician genres and influences usually do) so I could see arguments to avoid getting into it. Anyway if it is of interest my immediate impression was this was heavily derived from Battle Isle and the like. -- 86.164.126.9 ( talk) 05:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
See the Desert Commander NES game for similarity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.52.93 ( talk) 17:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Advance Wars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)