![]() | Good Game: Pocket Edition was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 02 January 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Good Game (TV program). The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | Good Game (TV program) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I was thinking maybe there should be a simplified section for the 'Episodes'. I don't think details on every episode is appropriate to the nature of a encyclopedia article. Maybe a section saying what an episode of Good Game involves in general instead? Any ideas? Rol335 11:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps simplifying it for the main article and moving the episode synopses to a separate page? DarkProdigy 18:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree, there should be a link to another page titled "List of Good Game episodes" Neuroxic ( talk) 03:04, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Just wondering if anyone out there know if there is going to be another series starting sooner or latter. Loved this show considering it was really the only gaming show there was on Austrtalian TV. -- MattyC3350 00:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I just found an article on there forum that states that there program will be back on near the end of september. Should this be included in the article? Cheers -- MattyC3350 22:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I have been following the "Good Game: Game" through the show and there website. Was wondering if it would be worth putting up a bit more information about it on here. As to who they are running through, what was involved in the decision to make an "Office War's" game and so on. MattyC3350 ( talk) 06:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I intend to upload a larger version of the Good Game logo within the next few days. -- Daneel ( talk) 03:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I am Daneel, known on the show as Dr Daneel, yes. I had intended to upload a low resolution image of the central Good Game logo, without the complex background. Width is 640px, I can (and will) shrink it to below 500. I no longer work for the ABC, nor am I affiliated with it in any way, so hopefully this doesn't constitute as a COI. -- Daneel ( talk) 13:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
The article is copping a series of emotive edits from fans disappointed with the replacement of one of the long terms hosts. The edits are neither accurate or informative and I have removed duplicated and emotive statements. 59.167.51.240 ( talk) 10:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I have completely removed the controversy section and put what little relevant information there is into Hex and Junglists sections. Hosts get replaced all the time and there is nothing particularly controversial about Junglists replacement (apart from the "suddenness" of it), by this time next month it will have all blown over. Sanguis Sanies ( talk) 08:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/30/2729132.htm ABC has written article on the issue and so has News.com http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,28348,26280838-5014239,00.html These are both major news sources. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 07:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The recent emotive edits are far from encyclopedic. It's almost like some people think this article can be used to reinforce their views rather than state impartial facts. I for one am not thrilled about the host changes but life will go on and I look forward to a time when this can be distilled to a short sentence in the bio section rather than a full blown section. 59.167.51.240 ( talk) 09:05, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if we could rename the "controversy" section as it is questionably neutral? Could we perhaps change it to "Junglists' departure"? "Replacing Junglist"? or something similar? Sanguis Sanies ( talk) 09:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The controversy section fails to mention the anger felt by most the Good Game community at Junglist's removal. A fact that is mentioned in the two news articles I linked to. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 11:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I found a resource mentioning the community's anger. http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/good-game-presenter-claims-abc-gender-bias-after-axing-20091030-hoch.html I think it would be fair to mention that the core viewers of the show are angry at the removal of Junglist. The SMH is a real major newspaper and not a news blog; I believe it is a reliable resource. 123.243.133.44 ( talk) 06:30, 31 October 2009 (UTC) Just want to mention that I am 60.241.195.251 but I'm using another computer right now. 123.243.133.44 ( talk) 06:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
When Kapowski was removed there wasn't a news article or anywhere near this much anger. First you demand proof that the fan base is angry and now that I give it to you; you discount it. Fans are angrier THAN BEFORE. This is a major event in the show. Just because not every viewer has posted on the forum doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a fair statement the core audience of the show is angry at the changes. I never said all Good Game viewers are angry just a majority of the core viewers. Even a news article mentioned it. A majority of the responses to the news articles have been negative. I suggest a compromise. The Wikipedia article mentions the majority of the forum's anger at the removal of the Junglist. I'm not saying all its viewers are angry; just quoting the SMH article that its core viewers are angry. You wanted a citation and I gave it to you. What proof do you want? I'm not trying to start a flame war and apologize if I sound rude but I'm getting frustrated. This is in my opinion a key event in the history of Good Game.
I would like to quote the SMH article " The removal of Ray has greatly angered the show's core base of loyal viewers who were used to having ownership of the show and being involved in decisions.
Some felt betrayed and thought that the show was selling out to reach a mass audience." It SAYS the core audience is angry. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 09:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I've added how SOME of the fans believe the show has sold out to reach a more mainstream audience. Its from the same source (SMH) so I didn't add an extra source. I'm satisfied with the article now. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 22:20, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Those pro the inclusion of detailed controversy details are missing a key point: is the dissatisfaction with a decision by a commercial supplier (which the ABC is despite it's government umbrella) significant enough to expand the topic of this article in a meaningful way?
I suggest no and as an apparently minority core viewer I was surprised by the sudden absence of Junglist and noted that Hex had pretty much the same dialogue as before. I really don't know why this gossip deserves so much attention. 121.45.209.71 ( talk) 04:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
New quote box seems to exacerbate undue weight. One side of the story, in a section where the other side is only represented with one sentence. Perhaps include a para from current quote and a para from the rebuttal on the next page of its source? 110.175.246.103 ( talk) 05:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Just suggesting, due to Jeremy Ray "Junglist" being a veteran of the show and now the whole controversy about his sacking, should we maybe create an article about him? -- Victory93 ( talk) 08:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm afraid I've had to remove a few new additions, but I'm bringing them here as it may be possible to source them, and clearly I wouldn't have the same concerns if they could be sourced. Specifically:
I see these all as good faith additions, it's just that there's some very strong claims that I feel need to be supported rather than added as they are. - Bilby ( talk) 23:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I was being lazy - I feel that I have sources for all those items, and I will endeavour to add source links over the next few days. Truth31 ( talk) 03:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I withdraw the above comments - I read through the discussion under the heading Junglist and realise there is little point in me trying to improve the 'controvery' section when there are people trying to say there is no controversy and activly campaigning to remove it altogether. Truth31 ( talk) 21:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed this article isn't much up to date. Can we please try to? And also if possible any pics of the hosts or the segments? I mean I've noticed few were removed earlier, maybe bring them back with the need copyright thing needed so they stay. -- Victory93 ( talk) 05:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
SO this week the Half Life mod Black Mesa received 10 rubber chickens from both Bajo and Hex, does that warrant adding it to the list? I mean it's just a mod and not even a finished one at that but I feel like it warrants mention 60.241.211.70 ( talk) 17:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
It's actually much harder than you might think to get sources for this TV show... which is a shame because it is utterly brilliant and deserves an FA article. For that reason, I'm gathering together a bunch of usable sources for us to use in the article to make it awesome.-- Coin945 ( talk) 16:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
This article seems to feel overdone. The page is filled with quotes that are unnecessary or could be summarised and some of the information feels absolutely needless. Another issue with me is the ridiculous amount of sections in the article. First of all, sections like Philosophy and Book feel as if they do not belong and could be removed to allow a more organised and spaced out page. Much of the articles sections aside from the aforementioned feels like it could be highly simplified into less sections that are quick to get to and don't take hours of reading. I'm not suggesting we turn the article back into the small one we once knew but we definitely need to make the article more spaced out, more simplified and get rid of a whole lot of needless quotes that dominate every section.
Sendator ( talk) 07:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Sendator ( talk) 11:22, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Good Game. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:43, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Good Game. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:33, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to Good Game (TV program). Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 18:05, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Good Game (television series) →
Good Game (TV series) – As per
WP:NCTV.
TheDeviantPro (
talk) 09:13, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Good Game (TV program). 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | Good Game: Pocket Edition was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 02 January 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Good Game (TV program). The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Good Game (TV program) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I was thinking maybe there should be a simplified section for the 'Episodes'. I don't think details on every episode is appropriate to the nature of a encyclopedia article. Maybe a section saying what an episode of Good Game involves in general instead? Any ideas? Rol335 11:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps simplifying it for the main article and moving the episode synopses to a separate page? DarkProdigy 18:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree, there should be a link to another page titled "List of Good Game episodes" Neuroxic ( talk) 03:04, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Just wondering if anyone out there know if there is going to be another series starting sooner or latter. Loved this show considering it was really the only gaming show there was on Austrtalian TV. -- MattyC3350 00:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I just found an article on there forum that states that there program will be back on near the end of september. Should this be included in the article? Cheers -- MattyC3350 22:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I have been following the "Good Game: Game" through the show and there website. Was wondering if it would be worth putting up a bit more information about it on here. As to who they are running through, what was involved in the decision to make an "Office War's" game and so on. MattyC3350 ( talk) 06:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I intend to upload a larger version of the Good Game logo within the next few days. -- Daneel ( talk) 03:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I am Daneel, known on the show as Dr Daneel, yes. I had intended to upload a low resolution image of the central Good Game logo, without the complex background. Width is 640px, I can (and will) shrink it to below 500. I no longer work for the ABC, nor am I affiliated with it in any way, so hopefully this doesn't constitute as a COI. -- Daneel ( talk) 13:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
The article is copping a series of emotive edits from fans disappointed with the replacement of one of the long terms hosts. The edits are neither accurate or informative and I have removed duplicated and emotive statements. 59.167.51.240 ( talk) 10:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I have completely removed the controversy section and put what little relevant information there is into Hex and Junglists sections. Hosts get replaced all the time and there is nothing particularly controversial about Junglists replacement (apart from the "suddenness" of it), by this time next month it will have all blown over. Sanguis Sanies ( talk) 08:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/30/2729132.htm ABC has written article on the issue and so has News.com http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,28348,26280838-5014239,00.html These are both major news sources. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 07:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The recent emotive edits are far from encyclopedic. It's almost like some people think this article can be used to reinforce their views rather than state impartial facts. I for one am not thrilled about the host changes but life will go on and I look forward to a time when this can be distilled to a short sentence in the bio section rather than a full blown section. 59.167.51.240 ( talk) 09:05, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if we could rename the "controversy" section as it is questionably neutral? Could we perhaps change it to "Junglists' departure"? "Replacing Junglist"? or something similar? Sanguis Sanies ( talk) 09:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The controversy section fails to mention the anger felt by most the Good Game community at Junglist's removal. A fact that is mentioned in the two news articles I linked to. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 11:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
I found a resource mentioning the community's anger. http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/good-game-presenter-claims-abc-gender-bias-after-axing-20091030-hoch.html I think it would be fair to mention that the core viewers of the show are angry at the removal of Junglist. The SMH is a real major newspaper and not a news blog; I believe it is a reliable resource. 123.243.133.44 ( talk) 06:30, 31 October 2009 (UTC) Just want to mention that I am 60.241.195.251 but I'm using another computer right now. 123.243.133.44 ( talk) 06:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
When Kapowski was removed there wasn't a news article or anywhere near this much anger. First you demand proof that the fan base is angry and now that I give it to you; you discount it. Fans are angrier THAN BEFORE. This is a major event in the show. Just because not every viewer has posted on the forum doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a fair statement the core audience of the show is angry at the changes. I never said all Good Game viewers are angry just a majority of the core viewers. Even a news article mentioned it. A majority of the responses to the news articles have been negative. I suggest a compromise. The Wikipedia article mentions the majority of the forum's anger at the removal of the Junglist. I'm not saying all its viewers are angry; just quoting the SMH article that its core viewers are angry. You wanted a citation and I gave it to you. What proof do you want? I'm not trying to start a flame war and apologize if I sound rude but I'm getting frustrated. This is in my opinion a key event in the history of Good Game.
I would like to quote the SMH article " The removal of Ray has greatly angered the show's core base of loyal viewers who were used to having ownership of the show and being involved in decisions.
Some felt betrayed and thought that the show was selling out to reach a mass audience." It SAYS the core audience is angry. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 09:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I've added how SOME of the fans believe the show has sold out to reach a more mainstream audience. Its from the same source (SMH) so I didn't add an extra source. I'm satisfied with the article now. 60.241.195.251 ( talk) 22:20, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Those pro the inclusion of detailed controversy details are missing a key point: is the dissatisfaction with a decision by a commercial supplier (which the ABC is despite it's government umbrella) significant enough to expand the topic of this article in a meaningful way?
I suggest no and as an apparently minority core viewer I was surprised by the sudden absence of Junglist and noted that Hex had pretty much the same dialogue as before. I really don't know why this gossip deserves so much attention. 121.45.209.71 ( talk) 04:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
New quote box seems to exacerbate undue weight. One side of the story, in a section where the other side is only represented with one sentence. Perhaps include a para from current quote and a para from the rebuttal on the next page of its source? 110.175.246.103 ( talk) 05:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Just suggesting, due to Jeremy Ray "Junglist" being a veteran of the show and now the whole controversy about his sacking, should we maybe create an article about him? -- Victory93 ( talk) 08:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm afraid I've had to remove a few new additions, but I'm bringing them here as it may be possible to source them, and clearly I wouldn't have the same concerns if they could be sourced. Specifically:
I see these all as good faith additions, it's just that there's some very strong claims that I feel need to be supported rather than added as they are. - Bilby ( talk) 23:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I was being lazy - I feel that I have sources for all those items, and I will endeavour to add source links over the next few days. Truth31 ( talk) 03:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I withdraw the above comments - I read through the discussion under the heading Junglist and realise there is little point in me trying to improve the 'controvery' section when there are people trying to say there is no controversy and activly campaigning to remove it altogether. Truth31 ( talk) 21:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed this article isn't much up to date. Can we please try to? And also if possible any pics of the hosts or the segments? I mean I've noticed few were removed earlier, maybe bring them back with the need copyright thing needed so they stay. -- Victory93 ( talk) 05:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
SO this week the Half Life mod Black Mesa received 10 rubber chickens from both Bajo and Hex, does that warrant adding it to the list? I mean it's just a mod and not even a finished one at that but I feel like it warrants mention 60.241.211.70 ( talk) 17:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
It's actually much harder than you might think to get sources for this TV show... which is a shame because it is utterly brilliant and deserves an FA article. For that reason, I'm gathering together a bunch of usable sources for us to use in the article to make it awesome.-- Coin945 ( talk) 16:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
This article seems to feel overdone. The page is filled with quotes that are unnecessary or could be summarised and some of the information feels absolutely needless. Another issue with me is the ridiculous amount of sections in the article. First of all, sections like Philosophy and Book feel as if they do not belong and could be removed to allow a more organised and spaced out page. Much of the articles sections aside from the aforementioned feels like it could be highly simplified into less sections that are quick to get to and don't take hours of reading. I'm not suggesting we turn the article back into the small one we once knew but we definitely need to make the article more spaced out, more simplified and get rid of a whole lot of needless quotes that dominate every section.
Sendator ( talk) 07:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Sendator ( talk) 11:22, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Good Game. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:43, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Good Game. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:33, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to Good Game (TV program). Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 18:05, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Good Game (television series) →
Good Game (TV series) – As per
WP:NCTV.
TheDeviantPro (
talk) 09:13, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Good Game (TV program). 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)