This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 110 | Archive 111 | Archive 112 | Archive 113 | Archive 114 | Archive 115 | → | Archive 120 |
User:TheMeaningOfBlah insists that Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U should feature boxart of both the Wii U and 3DS versions of the game, and has been reverted by myself and other editors; despite the fact that such an inclusion would violate WP:VGBOX ("only one cover should be present, regardless of platform or regional differences").
I'll also copy-paste from his talkpage more reasons on why I believe two images to be inappropriate:
I have no intention to edit war over this. Should this one article somehow be exempt from guidelines that cover all other articles? Also the other party has so far provided no policy-based rationale except for " let's ignore it". Satellizer (´ ・ ω ・ `) 02:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
TheMeaningOfBlah ( talk) 02:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
For archival purposes, I'll point out that TheMeaningOfBlah changed their username to VanishedUser sdu9aya9fs232 ( talk · contribs).-- 十 八 10:00, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a strong case to be made that these are two different products, each of which are notable enough to have identifying art. Each of the games will have had a separate (but concurrent) development process, each of the games will have significant reliable coverage dedicated to it specifically. A merged article can sustain multiple cover images if each are independently notable, such as New Super Luigi U or Bastion Original Soundtrack. I find the rationale for including identifying artwork for the notable 3DS game to be a lot stronger than the rationale for the second Okami cover (which was quickly replaced, and whose only notable feature (the IGN watermark) is easily described in text). - hahnch e n 12:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
:As for Pokemon B/W, I wholeheartedly disagree with using the cover for B2/W2 in there. It won't be an issue once it's split out, but presently, there is a main subject, B/W. B2/W2 is a part of the article only because it's not yet notable enough to not be. -
New Age Retro Hippie
(talk)
(contributions) 21:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
So what is the outcome of this? Both images are still present. « Ryūkotsusei » 15:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
This past week I was appointed one of the three FLC delegates, which means mainly that I close FLCs and FLRCs; more useful for WP:VG it means that if anyone has any questions at any point about lists, featured lists, or the featured list process, I'm not only knowledgeable but certified! Feel free to bug me any time. -- Pres N 17:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Pokémon, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. On behalf of @ DragonZero, czar ⨹ 10:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
God of War: Betrayal is up for nomination to be TFA on June 20, the game's 8th anniversary - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/God of War: Betrayal. -- JDC808 ♫ 16:21, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Please come participate in the discussion on changing Romanization in the Japan-related manual of style. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a general inquiry/request for help from anyone who has an interest in the Megami Tensei series. I am clsoe to completing a major rewrite for the series article with the intention of bringing to GA, but I am lacking references concerning many of the subseries (Maiji Tensei, Last Bible, ect.) Could anyone provide me with GA-acceptable references giving reliable release year info and such. You cna leave them on my talk page and I'll take them into my sandbox for use. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 11:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Is there some accepted source of information on bandwidth usage of different online games? Is there a site collecting this information that can be used as a reference? I understand it can be different depending on the game modes. I don't think the game authors will improve bandwidth usage unless they are measured on it. Some games seem to take 100+MB/hr and others are KB/hr of game play. Bpringlemeir ( talk) 13:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
So I started reading the dev blog for Thimbleweed Park, and realized that almost the entire development process, including a lot of detail about the budget, etc, is documented so far. I've never actually experienced that before ( Broken Age comes close, though), so I'm kind of at a loss at how to organize all this information in the article. Do I do it entirely chronologically, and if so, would I make use of sub-sections such as "January 2016"? Or do I have one section about everything design related, then one about everything programming related, etc.? Are there any other games with heavily documented development processes, whose articles I could look at? -- IDV talk 07:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
It's been a while since this has happened and currently the project has a large number of outstanding GANs and other articles that require attention, so another review thread is definitely required. Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Requests also has the usual backlog that can be attended to if anybody feels like it. JAG UAR 23:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, I restructured the main Sega article from this: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sega&diff=next&oldid=639493832
To this: /info/en/?search=Sega
But have I couple more plans besides the initial main Sega article:
Currently these are pages for Sega "divisions and subsidiaries". Official companies like Creative Assembly, SegaSoft etc. makes sense but articles for what is considered internal such as SEGA WOW, SEGA AM2, SEGA AM3, Sonic Team, Amusement Vision, Sega Sports R&D have stuck around and were even created long after Sega announced absorbing it's developing companies: https://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/ir/release/pdf/past/sega/2005/20040519_4.pdf Now yes, Sonic Team should keep their page, because they still have an internet presence: http://www.sonicteam.com/ Sega-AM2 is debatable since it has a japanese wiki site, and the palmtree AM2 logo has popped up a couple of times, but really it has no website presence, it now also consists of staff of AM3 too...plus it is called R&D2 now.
/info/en/?search=Category:Sega_divisions_and_subsidiaries
Claims such as these also stuck around on pages for a while: "On July 1, 2004 Sammy merged the AM teams into three groups. The merge did not affect Sega-AM2 or Sonic Team." or ". Unlike most of the other old AM departments, it remains a separate division within Sega." All these are incorrect, Sega has been like Nintendo with internal EAD groups for most of it's life. Like most other companies there are simply internal R&D divisions.
There has not been an effort to simply make a list of all games Sega has published and documenting their internal developers from the beginning to now, similar to Nintendo. This has caused to make pages like SEGA PC.
I made this page containing all of Sega games, similar to page from Capcom, Konami, Square Enix etc. List of Sega games
Then there is my sandbox page that is a new version for the Sega development studios page
My plan is to have it similar to the Sega arcade games...one page for the system boards (in my case the development studios), and one page for the games. Except like Sonic Team (for previous reasons mentioned), the rest of the pages would be made redundant merged or redirected. Also this page is redundant too, with this template.
Opinions? Particalury asking the people who have been involved in previous dicussions: @ Dissident93:, @ Lukeno94:, @ TheTimesAreAChanging:
-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 16:08, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Problems with list formatting, you say? If only some enterprising editor had written a guide to writing good lists of games. @ Tripple-ddd: the formatting you tried on List of Sega games is bad (and so is the Nintendo one) - try going for the way List of Square Enix video games is formatted. Given how long your list is, you might consider breaking it up by year to keep it manageable- List of Sega video games (1980-90), etc. You might also try writing it in a sandbox and then moving it to article space only when it's done. -- Pres N 21:58, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94: I explained prior how there is no chronological problem on the development studios page, and how it works. When the employee gets a producer or management position, his past biography get's mentioned.
You also provided no evidence of problematic grammar and punctuation. "Hiroshi Kataoka joined in 1992 working with Yu Suzuki since Virtua Racing. His debut as director was the Fighting Vipers series, Fighters Megamix and Sonic The Fighters." This sentence does not have it for example.
@ PresN: Honestly I thought about doing lists like Square Enix and Atlus ones, with genres, release regions etc. But I settled for the method which I guess is not considered GA or Featured material.
What is so particulary wrong about having a set-up like this like this:
List_of_Sega_arcade_system_boards (list and description of arcade boards, in my case it would be the studios) List of Sega arcade games (list of games accompanied by the arcade board, list of each of the studios in my case)
One article, desribing all the departments and studios, and one listing all the games. They are lenghty articles, and yes it is not GA or featured, but the arcade pages have not had any complaints. All I would wanna do is change one mediocore article with another, really. Years of statusquo, yes, but it is not good statusquo, by not being attempted to be improved by anyone in years.
The problem is Lukono94 considers it objectively worse than the current slew of Sega articles. By which I mean the development team related ones.
I mean really, the current Sega development studios articles has claims like this "due to disagreements of where the Sonic franchise is headed, Naoto Oshima left Sega"...the current AM2 page has phrases from an 90's magazine and says "monster successes"...the current Sega Rosso page says that it is former Ridge Racer employess. And they are unsourced, at least I have one external source, that yes is just one, and a fanwiki (a japanese one that is considered fairly trustworthy, since the japanese have things like departments etc. readily avaible though hiring sites and magazine previews, and these magazines are probably old by now). But at least it's one source, as opposed to nothing.
And yes, some Sega Studios were notable when they were independent. But really it get's confusing, when putting a seperate article for a period of history of a studio, that continued afterwards with it's lineage but was broken up, and absorbed a different studio etc.
All I want to do is simplify it, and have structure similar to the other gaming companies on Wikipedia. Tripple-ddd ( talk) 00:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok you really can't compare celeberities or famous people that consistently have official media and so on calling them their "unofficial names". In japanese media and official sega japan's hiring sites and similar information it is clearly as follows: CS1,2,3 and R&D1, R&D2 etc. Like here the Linkeldn of Makoto Osaki does not say manager of AM2, but manager of R&D2, or the fact that official internet presence of R&D1, does not say AM1 or SEGA WOW. Or how Sonic Team is rather often referred to as CS2? (here is a japanese interview where this is the case: http://app.famitsu.com/20150203_489144/). And then there are Sonic Allstars Racing credits, which is an international released game if the japanese sites don't count ( SEGA Corporation [2] section) which has no Sonic Team, Amusement Vision, SEGA AM2 etc. whatsoever.
Again, I stated that I think having multiple pages for a period of history for a variety of studios, makes it too complicated. Having it in one stream of information, makes it consistent and simple, seeing as they were always internal studios. Like, I mean there is no page for EAD3 or EAD Toyko, they are notable after all in some way. That is my argument, your argument is simply "it's worse" or "you are wrong".
At most, I could dig having time period pages...such as Sega Research and Development Development (1983-1990), and then Sega Subsidiaries (2000-2004), which also include the lists etc.
But then again objectively worse and all that, for now I'll try to add more sources and improve the writing and propose it again later.-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 15:35, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
This discussion is getting long and confusing so I'm creating a separate subsection just for improving the Sega article. I've been doing some tidying up and sorting out the references. Additional verification is needed in a bunch of places. Reading through it though, I think that some text should be split out of the History section. Some of the information isn't relevant to the company's history and would be better in a separate section titled "Products and services". Does anybody have any suggestions for the article? -- The1337gamer ( talk) 14:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Should redirects like Grand Theft Auto VI, Mafia 3 exist? None of these games are announced or confirmed. Will these redirects violate WP:TOOSOON even they are just redirects? AdrianGamer ( talk) 06:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
So yeah... GoNintendo had some hardware problems during a server move or something, and as a result most articles from 2014 and all from 2015 except today's and yesterday's, are gone. Additionally, old articles seem to have new URLs. I am aware that GoNintendo isn't considered a great source for WP's purposes, but it it still being used in a bunch of articles here.
This is a good opportunity to take a look at articles using GoNintendo refs and either replace them with a better source or update the URL/add an archived link. Is it possible to get a list of some sort of all WP articles that link to GoNintendo? -- IDV talk 01:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I was visiting my folks for Mother's day yesterday and had a chance to browse through some old Nintendo Power magazines. I noticed that as I found an old one from 1994 reviewing Donkey Kong (Game Boy), I discovered that game rankings gave it a full rating of 4.1/5. However, Nintendo Power wasn't giving overall ratings at this time, only ratings based on graphics, fun, play control, etc. There was no overall grade, but I think gamerankings was using an average of their scores. Could we suggest not using this site for older Nintendo Power ratings? Or does anyone have any other thoughts on this? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 16:59, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
We have two Featured Articles that will appear on the main page this month. On the fourth we have Secret of Mana. And on the twelfth, Batman: Arkham Asylum. Congrats to the editors who got the articles to what they are now. GamerPro64 15:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
New addition: Anachronox will be up on May 26. Congrats ZeaLitY and GamerPro64! -- Pres N 18:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I have some articles that I think should go through the AfD or ProD processes, but I'm not sure what checks I need to carry out first. The articles in question are:
I feel that there is no value to having these, and that they violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE, but I find it difficult to describe exactly why. My reasoning for picking these articles out is that they seem to just carry out the function of their respective categories, Category:Video games developed in the Czech Republic, Category:Video games developed in the Netherlands and Category:Video game companies of the United Kingdom, and that having articles containing these types of list is clearly not seen as necessary for other countries. But is this enough of a reason? I felt that they might not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but when I looked into that it seems that I would have to conduct a search for sources myself in order to justify requesting deletion. This seems wrong, as my issue is that I think the article couldn't be notable, regardless of sources. So is it not a notability issue? And therefore, is it even valid to ask for deletion at all? Hopefully someone here will be able to help me or take up the cause and add these to articles for deletion so it can be properly discussed.
Communal t ( talk) 18:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The stylization of 'eSport' is under discussion, see talk:electronic sports -- 65.94.43.89 ( talk) 05:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Cor, have a look at Lost Saga, its like articles used to be in the olden days; its even got flagicons in the infobox. - X201 ( talk) 20:33, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Kamen Rider: Climax Heroes has got a massive Playable characters table - X201 ( talk) 14:40, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that the data in the video game reviews module has changed the long pipe names, so that means that I no longer have to use "width=26m" anymore, right? -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 17:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
There is a dispute going on between an IP user then User:Mimic716 and myself on the Vagrant Story article about tweets from the game's developer Matsuno. There seems to be a misunderstanding on the developer's statement based on his tweets. The game seems to be retconned by Square Enix as being part of Ivalice, when originally it was intended by Matsuno to be on a separate universe, and any Ivalice references made is intended as a trivial allusion or "fan service" as quoted from the developer's tweets. However, User:Mimic716 insists that "...this does NOT mean that the games take place in different worlds or universes..." but fails to cite a reference. I've been going back and forth on this, close to 3RRing. I'm requesting ways to address this dispute better. — Bl ue 。 20:34, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I've been in contact with the Insurgency developers regarding a free media release, but have been too busy myself to write even a half-way decent article. Insurgency is a multiplayer first-person shooter for Windows and Mac, it is a standalone sequel to the mod, Insurgency: Modern Infantry Combat. The game has a score of 74 on Metacritic [1], and is quite popular for an indie FPS with 1k-2k concurrent players daily [2]. It was released in 2014 and is actively supported.
I thought that other editors would be interested in writing an article, and the developer has donated 5 free copies of the game for this purpose. If you'd like a copy, send me an email. Each key will only go to an active editor who has previously worked on video games content. It requires Steam.
Please don't send a request if you have no intention of editing/creating the article in the near future, and please don't send a request if you don't have the hardware to run it. The developers are also interested in having editors upload screenshots and video in future, and then releasing those as free-use, but I haven't formalised this yet. - hahnch e n 21:05, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Quick question I wanted to confirm the answer to before I start addressing this. I've got an IP going around and removing composers from various HD/3D remakes, like this, stating that because the composers didn't compose new music for the new release, they shouldn't be listed? Is that how we do it? I wouldn't think so, as it in no way implies that they did create new music, only that their music was in fact featured, which is true. An HD/3D remake with the original game's music is still featuring the composers work, right?
Anyways, just double checking in case there's a thought process I'm not aware of here. Let me know. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Earlier reports
|
---|
176.248.107.108 ( talk · contribs) has been making quite a few changes related to publishers and their categories, such as "rolling up" publisher/developer credits from the subsidiary that made the game to the parent company. I've reverted some of it myself, such as including Activision Blizzard as a developer on Blizzard games. Another example would be where they removed Sierra Entertainment from some older games as well as new ones since it's reactivation and replacing with Vivendi and Activision Blizzard. Some of their edits appear to be straight up improvements, and everything seems to be 100% good faith, though I did do a warning after they repeated some of the changes once I'd asked them to stop on Blizzard articles. The user has edited under multiple IPs and I believe maybe 2 registered accounts, based on some page histories. The IP is also adding categories for publishers to the articles, and I'm not 100% sure what the stance here is... For example, should the Ubisoft video game category contain games developed by Ubisoft, or also published by? Category:Vivendi video games was apparently created and populated by this user, but I do not believe Vivendi was ever a developer directly. Someone else may need to review the edits and see if any other cleanup should be made. My watch list was mostly related to Activision Blizzard games. -- ferret ( talk) 18:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
86.139.95.89 ( talk · contribs) is now engaged in this. This time adding Vivendi Games as the developer for multiple games, even those released long after the Activision Blizzard merger. Edit history behavior suggests it's the same user. -- ferret ( talk) 16:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
176.24.181.122 ( talk · contribs) and 176.250.202.128 ( talk · contribs) may be worth a look as well. Seem to fit same pattern - X201 ( talk) 16:45, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Now operating as 90.220.112.68 ( talk · contribs)... are these proxies or something? Exact same behavior. -- ferret ( talk) 23:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Now operating as 2.126.202.120 ( talk · contribs). Just started up looks like... -- ferret ( talk) 19:05, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Newest IP: 86.163.219.42 ( talk · contribs). Same behavior patterns. Mixture of good category updates with bad changes to infobox fields and inappropriate categories. -- ferret ( talk) 13:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Sergecross73: 2.126.56.27 ( talk · contribs) appears to be the newest incarnation.-- 十 八 22:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Another: 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs). The1337gamer ( talk) 11:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Possible new hit, 90.222.22.159 ( talk · contribs). Primarily adding Japanese publisher categories, i.e. adding "Sega video games" to a game publisher in Japan by Sega. -- ferret ( talk) 19:08, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Found another, 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs). -- ferret ( talk) 11:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Another User:2.220.194.151 - X201 ( talk) 08:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Another User:94.10.4.121, could we add any of his usual edits to the edit filter? - X201 ( talk) 19:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC) User:90.222.19.240 is today's. -- ferret ( talk) 14:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
User:90.222.57.67 is today's. -- ferret ( talk) 21:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Good afternoon! User:90.222.19.1 is today's. -- ferret ( talk) 21:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Another I think. Only 4 edits but they seem to be the same as the previously blocked users: 2.124.56.69 ( talk · contribs) -- The1337gamer ( talk) 16:03, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
|
This one seem to have been missed. 90.222.58.107 ( talk · contribs). Hasn't been active for a week but making the same publisher changes, and listing Sega as a developer on Sonic articles when Sonic Team is already listed. -- The1337gamer ( talk) 16:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I've collapsed the older reports, and slapped together a consolidated (and sorted) list of the past users:
176.24.181.122 ( talk · contribs) 176.248.107.108 ( talk · contribs) 176.250.202.128 ( talk · contribs) 2.124.56.69 ( talk · contribs) 2.126.202.120 ( talk · contribs) 2.126.56.27 ( talk · contribs) 2.126.57.175 ( talk · contribs) 2.220.194.151 ( talk · contribs) 31.52.7.7 ( talk · contribs) 67.255.219.44 ( talk · contribs) 77.96.101.235 ( talk · contribs) 86.139.95.89 ( talk · contribs) 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs) 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs) 86.163.219.42 ( talk · contribs) 90.195.158.128 ( talk · contribs) 90.208.223.148 ( talk · contribs) 90.220.112.68 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.19.1 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.19.240 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.22.159 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.57.67 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.58.107 ( talk · contribs) 94.10.4.121 ( talk · contribs) Crash zachary ( talk · contribs) Zachary rules ( talk · contribs)
-- ferret ( talk) 17:04, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
2.124.58.118 ( talk · contribs) just started. -- ferret ( talk) 15:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Ferret, X201, Sergecross73, PresN, The1337gamer, Juhachi, and Favre1fan93: Can we either move this to WP:SPI or WP:LTA or set up a separate subpage (at e.g. WP:WikiProject Video games/Abuse) for this? Given the continuing activity, this talk page is probably not the best location for the continuing reports, which are are mostly being made experienced users. Or look into an WP:Edit filter for this continuing behavior? -- Izno ( talk) 17:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
That's precisely what I'm suggesting. ( Don't get snippity.) My point is that the collaboration is becoming a routine factor on a day-to-day basis, making it a better fit for its own page. Other abuse might also be able to go on a page like the proposed /Abuse, though I can't think of any off the top of my head (I know we've had a few cases of continuous abuse).
I had little difficulty ignoring it when it was still a new topic of interest, but its continued presence on this page day after day is obnoxiously wearing. -- Izno ( talk) 16:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
One suggestion I will make is that this should be a new topic every month. So that the older stuff gets archived. - X201 ( talk) 13:06, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
With the passing of Sega video game consoles, WP:VG now has 10 featured topics in total! Congratulations to Red Phoenix, Indrian, SexyKick, and TheTimesAreAChanging! (and me, I guess.) And thanks to all the contributors to the previous 9 featured topics, as well as the contributors to our 14 good topics. -- Pres N 05:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Should the article title use Roman or Arabic numerals? An editor pointed out that cover art now uses Roman numerals so I moved the page to The Witcher III: Wild Hunt. But another brings up the point that the official website uses Arabic, I've noticed that a lot of other sources seem to use Arabic numerals so I've moved it back to its original location. Are there any other examples of this where both styles are being used in different places, which should it be here? -- The1337gamer ( talk) 17:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Following up on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 106#moving forward on task force cleanup consensus, I see two options on ways to handle the remaining, dead task forces:
Action & adventure (merge adventure, Castlevania, Devil May Cry, Mega Man, Mortal Kombat, Silent Hill, Soul), FPS (merge Call of Duty, Gears of War), Retrogaming (merge arcade, retro), RPG (merge D&D, not the separate project), Strategy (merge C&C)
Salv mentioned last time that genre TFs would be vague and I can easily see the genre task forces being template work that doesn't actually help anyone. Genres TFs could be useful if editors needed to coalesce and unify article style/jargon... but I don't see a need for the above genre TFs. If there was a need (and, again, these TFs have been inactive for years so I don't believe there is one), company-based TFs would be easier to organize than franchise-specific TFs. So while I was more for option #1 a year ago, I think option #2 (deprecate the above TFs) makes more sense now. Thoughts/consensus? – czar 22:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
All right—option two is the clear favorite. – czar 18:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I cleaned the low-hanging fruit from last year's cleanup. Here are a few more that have been inactive for years. Should be uncontroversial, but wanted to make sure there is no final objection before clearing them out:
We could also deprecate MUD, Atari, PlayStation, and Xbox, but they see more occasional activity. Thoughts? – czar 18:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, since we've done a great job in the past few months knocking out some of the cleanup categories, I thought I'd bring to y'all's attention one of the smaller ones remaining: Category:Video games articles needing attention. Only 20 articles in it! This category is intended for articles "needing immediate attention"- which means that there's some major issue with it beyond just "it's a start-class article". maybe a section needs to be deleted, maybe a table is terribly formatted, whatever. It doesn't take much to clear this category- pull up an article, look for the major flaw that requires "immediate" attention, and remove the category (or |attention=y from the talk page template). Don't see anything you think is worthy of "immediate" attention? Go ahead and remove the category anyway- it's certainly an easy category to abuse. If a few people poke at this, we could be done in a day.
On a side note- does anyone know why Category:Video games with 3D graphics exists? Ran into it when knocking off a few articles from the attention category. It's... certainly under-populated for what it says it is. And pretty unusable if it was actually populated. -- Pres N 18:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ done – czar 15:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I finished the Category:Video games articles needing expert attention cat too. The only ones left are the Warcraft characters that I have already said I think should be merged as not independently notable. "Expert attention" isn't a great backlog category—I was cleaning out stuff from six years ago... If someone wants input, the best way to handle it is to start a thread here and ask people to watchlist the article in question or to do something specific to the article. I think we should be looking at deprecating this "expert attention" category as duplicating the function of the "attention" category (which itself should really be named "immediate attention"). My own take would be to phase out both "expert attention" and "attention" cats altogether as both poorly scoped, do not entice editors to adopt articles, and never adequately explain explain the perceived issue in need of an expert. The video game cleanup and normal tags suffice, and posting at WT:VG is even better. (Also see Template talk:WPBannerMeta/Archive 10#Proposal_to_remove_the_attention_tag.) Thoughts? – czar 00:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I have made a site called Fantasy Forest land before dragons. I don't think you have talked about this game yet. Please visit the page. Click this link Fantasy Forest land before dragons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsliangel ( talk • contribs)
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before (and searching through the archives I couldn't find anything) and WP:VG/DATE didn't give me a clear answer, but I was wondering if there's a guideline or even a clear consensus if the year of release should or shouldn't be mentioned before the actual genre and before the full release date. See for instance Call of Duty: Black Ops III: "(...) is an upcoming 2015 first-person shooter (...) and is expected to be released (...) November 6, 2015" or Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag: (...) is a 2013 historical fiction action-adventure open world stealth video game (...) a sequel to 2012's Assassin's Creed III (...) The game was first released on the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii U in October 2013 and was later made available on the PlayStation 4, Microsoft Windows and Xbox One in November 2013", mentioning 2013 three times and 2012 too. Articles like Battlefield 4, Mass Effect 3 or Super Mario World also put the year first. A lot of articles do not have this however. Any thoughts? -- Soetermans. T / C 06:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, I made a template but I don't think I have made it specific enough. I want to find out if the majority of people think it should be deleted. --☣
Anar
chyte☣ 06:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
The page in question:
Template:Navbox video game topics
Talk page:
Template talk:Navbox video game topics
Sign here if you think it should be kept.
Sign here if you think it should be deleted.
The current Infobox animanga/Game template doesn't include the same personnel fields (director, composers, artist, etc) as the normal video game infobox. As a result, I attempted to add them in, so it would be more consistent, however a user has reverted me, stating that it bloats the infobox. What I'm asking for is for VG project members to help me with a consensus, so I propose three different options:
Any thoughts or suggestions? ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 21:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
So my previous proposal got shut down by @ Lukeno94:, due to, in his view, poor grammar and no references.
So I redid mainly the first article to meet his standards.
/info/en/?search=User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox
Purpose: Replacing content of Sega development studios, and also merging it with following pages Sega AM2, SEGA Hitmaker, Amusement Vision, Sega WOW, Smilebit. The above has a better detail and sourced content of it's material.
/info/en/?search=User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox2
Purpose: Actual list of all Sega games, Sega developed and published, as a previous one did not exist. Highlights the above mentioned departments and studios and accompanies them.
/info/en/?search=User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox3
A new list for Sega's arcade games, replacing the former List of Sega arcade games. This will the List of Sega arcade video games, developed or published by Sega. It has no medal games, photobooth machines and prize games, or mere distrubution of titles unrelated to Sega. These games will be featured in their own respetive articles such as medal games, where all of Sega's (and other companies) medal games will be included. Same goes for Purikara machines.
Opinions?
-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 21:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94: Seems like you are continuening to judge things personally and not make proper arguments. You are the only one claiming that the articles are a nightmare to read (and you can't compare your game article with my article documenting employees), and you are also the only one who keeps reverting articles (with a couple of exceptions on Sonic Team and Sega AM2 articles). Also nobody else said that the article is objectively worse. Who else said so? Point me to it. You say it doesn't matter that that the subsidiaries were always first party in-house studios located in the same place, well to your standards what does matter? You are claiming that AV is a second party studio, but do not provide a source. You clearly don't even seem to care given you never give suggestions to anything, but rather just complain. Thanks tough, for pointing out the issue of capital letters in instances, that is indeed a problem, tough I can't see others.
@ Sergecross73: It is not very likely that people will participate in improving the current slate of Sega articles, given their state for more than 5 years now. I hear the suggestion of making multiple articles per decade (for both lists of games and studios), which I'm seeing as inconsistent personally. No other article is set up this way. So why should the Sega ones be the exception.?
Well it is not a major restructuring really. I added to the current articles with content/sourcing, and didn't remove anything, or at least the content did not receive complaints. And then there is new one that did not exist before (list of Sega games). If I would try from sratch again (as most likely nobody else would try), the articles would end up the same as my proposed ones. @ Lukeno94: has made intangible claims, such as formatting and inconsistent dates, so I can't really base anything of this. User:PresN suggested to make an a split for articles on studios and a list for games. Which is what I did. -- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 16:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94:Tables? What tables? The article consists of words, not tables. Information that is already elsewhere? The current studio list article and current studio articles document next to nothing and not as in detail as my article does (with the exception of the Sonic Team, which might be the only duplicated thing). But so what? Shigeru Miyamoto and EAD articles duplicate certain information. No context for affiliated studios? They are affiliated studios, I could add that these companies that Sega partnered up for published releases, would that be ok? Please respond back about the following things:
-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 18:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94: This is a table:
Header text | Header text | Header text |
---|---|---|
Example | Example | Example |
Example | Example | Example |
Example | Example | Example |
This is a text:
Wikipedia (Listeni/ˌwɪkɨˈpiːdiə/ or Listeni/ˌwɪkiˈpiːdiə/ wik-i-pee-dee-ə) is a free-access, free content Internet encyclopedia, supported and hosted by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. Those who can access the site can edit most of its articles. Editors are expected to follow the website's rules.[6] Wikipedia is ranked among the ten most popular websites[5] and constitutes the Internet's largest and most popular general reference work.[7][8][9]
Tables are barely relevant in my article so I just don't get what you mean, especially not in the context of what you talk (dotting around, what do you mean by that?). Also the article is not supposed to be a list of studios but more like the EAD article, which I already established.-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 19:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I've been lurking around this conversation for a while and I'm surprised this hasn't really been brought up for a while, if at all. @ Lukeno94:, while it may be frustrating that @ Tripple-ddd: is breaking rules outlined at WP:MOS, you are breaking rules outlined at WP:CIVIL, specifically name calling ("if you are this incompetent when it comes to writing") and being too intense ("That says EVERYTHING about the mess you're making."). We are meant to be helping this user improve his lists, not make him feel more agitated; at the end of the day, that approach will get us nowhere. If you have frustrations, please try to walk Tripple-ddd through what you're saying calmly, and if that doesn't work, ask for some help from other editors. Wikipedia is meant to promote a cooperative environment, and your tone is going against that. BlookerG talk 20:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Dissident93: Why do you think having no duplicates makes things less complicated? It's not a practice I see on Wikipedia. 2 articles can cover a different subject but feature some of the same games. And while I can see splitting western and japanese published games, the japanese games are still ihrerently linked to in-house development (producer in Sega Japan).-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 16:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Wasn't sure what to do with this, so I figured I'd note here that User:Andiar.rohnds was doing some odd stuff here (where he went back and forth with some rather offensive content) and more notably, here. I'm not particularly fond of our "buzzword" articles either, but this isn't exactly the kind of behavior we want. ~ Mable ( chat) 18:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Casting a wider net on this issue, after a disagreement at Talk:Kotaku#Italics. Historically, WP:VG has drawn the line for using italics on print sources (magazines, books, etc.) and no italics for all websites. This is reflected in the usage of italics at Template:Video game reviews since at least 2010. Recently it has come to my attention that the line "Website titles may or may not be italicized depending on the type of site and what kind of content it features. Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized (Salon.com or The Huffington Post). Online encyclopedias and dictionaries should also be italicized (Scholarpedia or Merriam-Webster Online). Other types of websites should be decided on a case-by-case basis." has been added to the MOS:TITLE page. Should the project revise our current italics guidelines on video game websites? I don't have a strong horse in this race, other than my desire for consistency. Axem Titanium ( talk) 20:55, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
"Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized"has existed in the MoS since 2011, but lived at WP:ITALICS before its more recent move to the /Titles page. What italics guideline do we have that needs to be updated? The MoS supersedes any guideline we'd need. I'll add to the point that "Kotaku is a blog" that (1) it is a news blog, and (2) that blogs are still creative works like magazines and are italicized by Chicago, the only stylebook I know to address blogs specifically. And there is precedent for using italics for websites in the reviews template, though it was inconsistent before all italics were stripped in the transition to Lua. WPVG has not in any recent history drawn the line for italics at print sources, and if anything, there is an already acknowledged, clear case based on the MoS (and WTVG discussion history) to update the reviews template with italics for online vg news sources—it's just a matter of someone drafting the code. – czar 06:15, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
I have just proposed a YouTube Wikiproject that would cover any Articles relevant to YouTube People, Culture, Organisations and Business
I would love to get lots of support for this --- :D Derry Adama ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
RMCD Bot malfunctioning
|
---|
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electronic sports to be moved to ESports. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for BioShock to be moved to BioShock (video game). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Final Fantasy VII (Famicom) to be moved to Final Fantasy VII (NES video game). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Star Wars: Battlefront to be moved to Star Wars: Battlefront (2004 video game). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Batman: The Brave and the Bold – The Videogame to be moved to Batman: The Brave and the Bold – The Video game. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Survival mode to be moved to Survival game. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for MediEvil (video game) to be moved to MediEvil. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Marcus "Dyrus" Hill to be moved to Dyrus. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC) |
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, the first video-game inspired film to be promoted to featured status, is now also the first video-game inspired film to be nominated for TFA. All comments on the nomination are welcome, see here. Cheers. Freikorp ( talk) 12:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Did we get rid of these? I was reading this today and thought "does a table exist for this article?" (no) and poked at a few other games that I thought had one, but I didn't see one. Did something happen? Zero Serenity ( talk - contributions) 18:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
My intention is not to call attention towards a discussion outside this project's scope. It is mostly on how I should handle future works. I was told a Japanese cover is always preferred since it's the original work. However, in the VG articles I've seen, there is always the English localization's cover in the infobox. Why is this the case? DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:20, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Basically as the title says. Not only do I want to have some serious cleanup done to the article, but I also want to go through and find sources to expand upon the reception, analysis, and concept and creation sections (since I'm sure that a lot of commentary has been made that hasn't been put in the article as of yet). - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 23:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
So this month alone the backlog for Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Requests has gotten three months taken care of. 2011 still has a month in there but I believe that with the summer upon us, articles can be made with the choices presented. And who knows? A new Good Article (which has been done before) or a Featured Article could be made from one of these redlinks. GamerPro64 21:00, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorting through the requests ( here) is difficult because of the way it's laid out. Would it be possible to make it so this page is laid out similar to this and this? Those pages have them alphabetically and in sections instead of by Month+Year, which can get out of hand very easily. --☣ Anar chyte☣ 03:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi everybody,
Seeing ProtoDrake's message, I checked out Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. In the infobox, it mentions "year of inception". I didn't notice that field before and I looked up in the {{ Infobox video game series}}. The description says "Year of first release in the series", but there's already a field for first release. That's a bit redundant, right? Now, Fabula Nova Crystallis uses the inception field as when it was announced in 2006, which makes more sense to me. But the field is still called 'inception'. Doesn't that sound like when the developer came up with the idea, before it was revealed? -- Soetermans. T / C 11:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone know what the compilation
field was for on the Video game reviews template? -
X201 (
talk) 11:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Not sure how to proceed with this problem. The developer of Beyond Eyes, Sherida Halatoe, has expressed a desire to delete all mention of the PlayStation 4 version from Wikipedia. A number of sources say the game is in development for PS4 (including IGN, GameReactor and TheSixthAxis) and Halatoe herself acknowledges a PS4 version is planned, both on Twitter [3] and her talk page, but I assume, due to Xbox One timed exclusivity, she would now prefer we ignore the PS4 version until the exclusivity period expires. How should we proceed. Do we ignore reliable sources and pretend a PS4 version is not planned, or politely decline the request? — TPX 21:34, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Coming up on June 7 is Flight Unlimited, while on June 20 is God of War: Betrayal! Congratulations to JimmyBlackwing and JDC808! -- Pres N 15:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
If anyone fancies a bit of hack and slash on a list of game items, take a trip to Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 3. Special offer: also comes with a free cast list as long as your arm. - X201 ( talk) 14:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
This has not appeared for yonks, so here it is again as bright as ever. As usual, listed are all the pending Featured, Peer and Good Article reviews. The number of GAs is quite high at the moment. As usual, I draw people's attention to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Requests, which is still suffering from backlog. Contributions welcome and gratefully received.
As the creator, I'm starting this. Here we go: I will trade someone's GA game review for a review of Megami Tensei or a comprehensive review for Fabula Nova Crystallis. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 10:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I think this needs standardisation. It seems like there has been a recent trend in not including colons for certain video game titles. As an example, the Assassin's Creed series: Assassin's Creed#Release_history. A bunch of articles titles have colons and others don't. I've seen this with other video game articles as well. -- The1337gamer ( talk) 22:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
A good source for name formatting info are annual reports, investor relations releases and trademark applications, as these avoid the demented styling of the advertising dept. and have to display names in plain typed text. - X201 ( talk) 10:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
For a game that has personnel added over time, I.E. Terra Battle adding composers/artists from Kickstarter stretch goals, do we add the year the game was released (so it would be 2014 on everybody's article worklist) or the year their contribution was added (so 2015 for all the extra composers). MMOs do the second option don't they? ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 19:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Consensus from prior discussions was to deprecate all inactive task forces. I wanted to run the next and hopefully final inactive batch past WTVG just to make sure there were no final objections: PlayStation, Xbox, Atari, MUD, Strategy, Adventure. – czar 04:57, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
With E3 next week, we can expect around 50 new games to be announced (if not already teased/announced already). As in the past, we should discourage new articles on these games unless there is sufficient information beyond the announcement to be written; redirects to existing articles are fine of course, and discussing a sequel or related game in a previous game or existing series article is fine too. -- MASEM ( t) 22:57, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Atsushi Seimiya has been nominated at Redirects for discussion. Your input at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 10#Atsushi Seimiya would be appreciated. And while you're there, there's Wort, wort, wort! right below it. -- BDD ( talk) 13:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox This is supposed to replace Sega development studios, making it fuller with more sources.
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox2 Full list of Sega titles, could split it into two if it's considered too big (one article for Sega systems, one for non-Sega systems). With the list of PC games, the current Sega PC article should also be merged/deleted.
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox3 A revamped Arcade list, with purely video games developed and published by Sega. Other arcade machines, verion updates etc. are covered in other articles.
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox5 So this is rewritten text for the current crop of Sega studios, also with sources...I won't replace any of them like I said before, just changing the content within them. Instead of six tough, there should be five (Amusement Vision and Smilebit merged)
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox6 New list, purely for mobile, similar to Square Enix
So again, asking for opinions from @ Dissident93:, @ TheTimesAreAChanging:, @ Lukeno94:.
I know Dissident, said that my articles are not in Manual of Style, referring to bad formatting. But that is still a rough suggestion that I can't make much out of, what are you exactly referring to? Maybe point to something from this article: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting -- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 21:42, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94:
@ Lukeno94: 1. Well I fixed the nationality capitilization, and added the missing word from that sentence. I don't know what you mean by ref inconsistencies and errors, how should they be implemented better? How can they implemented differently? (can someone edit someone elses sandbox? if that works, why don't you that, and show me directly what you want) I don't know what you by the tables, since the "titles" row, doesn't even exist anymore. The Japanese wikis are still the only reliable source for that content, and there is little reason for distrusting it. The information is from job ads, magazine information and interviews, as well as analyzing credits. Alot of which is unaccessible now and is in japanese. That is still better than the current crop of Sega Studio articles which have no sources AT ALL.
@ Dissident93: 2. How are the tables confusing, at most I could see them being redundant...what you are linking in particular just lists the studios, and how they changed. The studios would then have links which are the articles in the fifth sandbox.
3. Why get rid of published titles? Especially the Japanese published games are linked with developed ones, as I said before. Why don't you think an article For List of Sega video games (Sega systems) and List of Sega video games (non Sega systems) is better?
3. I only see one unused comma mark. Question: do all of you talk about errors that are visible or also ones that only can be seen if you edit the source? Why does the introduction need to be redone? What would you suggest? How is the star system trivial? Do you want to bloat out the article with all the update version like the current one? Why not let the reader immediately see which games are stand-alone and which got updates?
4. The purpose of the fourth sandbox is to show the content I plan to revise the current crop of Sega Studios with. I explained this.
5. Well first you say that the previous article is bloated but now you say all the mobile games should be there too which is what would result of what you are against. Overall yes, I probably agree that making an article which contains fully informative tables, as well as a chronological order is better. There are some things that "should" happen, but as it is I see little wrong with the current sandboxes going live without major overhaul. This Sega development studios article has pretty much no sources, and the articles linked within them do neither, really how is anything not an improvement?
And unrelated to the articles in discussion, could you also explain why you consider this article article worse than my sandboxes? As I stated that one has clear errors, or do you mean that just because of a fuller table?
And why have you removed the financial information on the Sega Sammy Holdings page, when Disney has it? And about the company history, do you think the reasons of the merger (the first couple of sentences), are still appropriate to include and should be rewritten or does the current info need to be rewritten? -- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 11:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, all. I'm preparing a rewrite for Stella Deus: The Gate of Eternity and have encountered a serious problem: I can't find a story synopsis anywhere beyond the bare-bones setting given in the publicity blurb and what little is there one the page at present. Can anyone help give me a synopsis of what happens? Or direct me to a link where the English script is archived, or even a translation of the Japanese script so I can make a rough setup? If anyone could that, it would be most helpful. I've got everything else about the article all wrapped up and ready to write in my sandbox. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 19:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
-- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 22:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
It's just a start. It's gotten tons of press coverage and the fans will sort it out. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 23:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Article is in better shape. Development section still needs trimming and reorganization. The game has spent 14 years in development hell. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 04:33, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
With the recent Virtual Console release of the original mother as EarthBound Beginnings I think it is worth considering moving Mother (video game series) back to Earthbound (series) since two of the three games in the series now use Earthbound. Granted there was a successful request to move it to the current title last October but I believe that this new announcement could change things considerably.-- 67.68.31.244 ( talk) 22:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
So I know almost nothing about wiki editing (I know how to indent, sign, bold, hyperlink, make new sections... that's about it), which I'm sure you can tell by my lack of an account here, but I'd be willing to help out on this (despite my lack of an account here), especially since it's generally as easy as opening the game page in a new tab and spending three seconds looking for the info. In the age of the Glorious PC Master Race this particularly comes to mind. Perhaps even make separate columns to distinguish multiplats grounded on consoles from multiplats grounded on PC. Details such as "on SNES and Amiga" aren't a big deal and probably don't need distinguishing from "on SNES and PC", especially since porting between IBM PC, or computers of any kind, is generally more of a rarity the further back you go. My main concern is games that play like shit (can I say that?) due to lack of analog stick support on PC/lack of multiplayer/whatever else, and these would be easier to distinguish if, for example, Playstation 1 told me which games were also available on PC. I'd go to Mobygames for this but it seems like different platforms have linked separate entries for each release- rather unfortunate, and makes simply generating a list harder. Because of the analog stick thing I mentioned, I feel like the fifth and sixth generations are the most pressing, or at least the ones I'm the most interested in. 2602:301:774A:D980:84A5:4316:F8AE:A589 ( talk) 05:12, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
There's a discussion that I was beckoned to on the Amiibo talk page. It's discussing the release wave terminology, specifically prompted by Falco's release window. — Ost ( talk) 19:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi all. I'm wondering if there is any consensus with the project on using a Twitch video as a source (with {{ cite av media}}). I'm not too familiar with the service to know if posted videos (theoretically) stay on the site until the user possibly removes them (thus being a viewable source in the future, like say YouTube), but I am looking to use an official channel's video as a possible source. For those interested it is this video for the content starting around the 05:20:28 mark until the end. It would be used on the Kingdom Hearts III page. I have not watched the content yet myself, but am just wondering ahead of time if I find anything useful I can take note to add it to the article. Thanks. (And apologies if this has been discussed, but I didn't think it was, based on a quick search of the archives.) This also may be a mute point shortly if Square Enix uploads this content to their YouTube channel, as they have with previous E3s, but I still think this is a good discussion to have. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 06:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Whenever I use the website [nintendolife.com] as a source, the question rises: should I cite it as Nintendolife, NintendoLife or Nintendo Life? Furthermore, is it a good idea to put square brackets around the website's name when I cite from it? I would love for it to have an article because it is comes up so often when looking for sources, but I know there aren't any reliable sources to base such an article on... But yeah, what are your thoughts? ~ Mable ( chat) 20:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
So the recent Persona games ( Persona 4 Golden, Persona 4 Arena, Persona Q: Shadow of the Labyrinth, Persona 4: Dancing All Night, Persona 5) have/will all be released outside of Japan without the Shin Megami Tensei moniker, so would be right to move to the article to Persona (series)? It's always simply been Persona in Japan, and now it seems to be the same worldwide. Some discussion of this is already on the talk page there, but was ignored, so I'm posting this here for better visibility. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 20:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
I've generally looked round, and Dissident93 is right. The general popular name is Persona without the SMT moniker. I've done most of the moving, updates, ect. on the Persona articles, but there was some things that I can't do or really can't face alone. I really need help. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 09:29, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Does the collapsed table at Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn#Armoury and job system fall under WP:GAMEGUIDE and WP:GAMECRUFT? -- The1337gamer ( talk) 21:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Can people have a look at Nintendo World Championships ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ? There have been a lot of changes in the last two years, and now instead of a large amount of detail on the 1990 event, there is much less detail on both the 1990 and 2015 events.
Is this the appropriate level of detail? Should the event series article be separate from the individual event articles? A discussion is open on the talk page about separate event articles as well (2015/1990) at talk:Nintendo World Championships
-- 70.51.203.69 ( talk) 06:55, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I think it goes without saying that GameSpot links can get spotty. There's a link used for the The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay article that I cannot find on their site since its dead and at one point there was a robots.txt issue with it. This isn't the first time this happened, see here, but I'm not entirely sure how this can be resolved. GamerPro64 20:55, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I noticed something while I was browsing the Google website. I was browsing to find the GameRankings website, and then I noticed that, instead of www.gamerankings.com, it just leads me to http://rankings.gamefoxy.com. It seems that GameFoxy.com is taking over GameRankings. And there are also GameFoxy.com replicas of Giant Bomb (giantbomb.gamefoxy.com), G4TV (g4tv.gamefoxy.com), GameSpot (gamespot.gamefoxy.com), and GameFAQs (www.gamefoxy.com), and other gaming websites I know of. I don't know if the GameFoxy.com website is safe or not. I'm so curious. -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 18:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 110 | Archive 111 | Archive 112 | Archive 113 | Archive 114 | Archive 115 | → | Archive 120 |
User:TheMeaningOfBlah insists that Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U should feature boxart of both the Wii U and 3DS versions of the game, and has been reverted by myself and other editors; despite the fact that such an inclusion would violate WP:VGBOX ("only one cover should be present, regardless of platform or regional differences").
I'll also copy-paste from his talkpage more reasons on why I believe two images to be inappropriate:
I have no intention to edit war over this. Should this one article somehow be exempt from guidelines that cover all other articles? Also the other party has so far provided no policy-based rationale except for " let's ignore it". Satellizer (´ ・ ω ・ `) 02:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
TheMeaningOfBlah ( talk) 02:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
For archival purposes, I'll point out that TheMeaningOfBlah changed their username to VanishedUser sdu9aya9fs232 ( talk · contribs).-- 十 八 10:00, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a strong case to be made that these are two different products, each of which are notable enough to have identifying art. Each of the games will have had a separate (but concurrent) development process, each of the games will have significant reliable coverage dedicated to it specifically. A merged article can sustain multiple cover images if each are independently notable, such as New Super Luigi U or Bastion Original Soundtrack. I find the rationale for including identifying artwork for the notable 3DS game to be a lot stronger than the rationale for the second Okami cover (which was quickly replaced, and whose only notable feature (the IGN watermark) is easily described in text). - hahnch e n 12:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
:As for Pokemon B/W, I wholeheartedly disagree with using the cover for B2/W2 in there. It won't be an issue once it's split out, but presently, there is a main subject, B/W. B2/W2 is a part of the article only because it's not yet notable enough to not be. -
New Age Retro Hippie
(talk)
(contributions) 21:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
So what is the outcome of this? Both images are still present. « Ryūkotsusei » 15:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
This past week I was appointed one of the three FLC delegates, which means mainly that I close FLCs and FLRCs; more useful for WP:VG it means that if anyone has any questions at any point about lists, featured lists, or the featured list process, I'm not only knowledgeable but certified! Feel free to bug me any time. -- Pres N 17:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Pokémon, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. On behalf of @ DragonZero, czar ⨹ 10:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
God of War: Betrayal is up for nomination to be TFA on June 20, the game's 8th anniversary - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/God of War: Betrayal. -- JDC808 ♫ 16:21, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Please come participate in the discussion on changing Romanization in the Japan-related manual of style. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a general inquiry/request for help from anyone who has an interest in the Megami Tensei series. I am clsoe to completing a major rewrite for the series article with the intention of bringing to GA, but I am lacking references concerning many of the subseries (Maiji Tensei, Last Bible, ect.) Could anyone provide me with GA-acceptable references giving reliable release year info and such. You cna leave them on my talk page and I'll take them into my sandbox for use. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 11:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Is there some accepted source of information on bandwidth usage of different online games? Is there a site collecting this information that can be used as a reference? I understand it can be different depending on the game modes. I don't think the game authors will improve bandwidth usage unless they are measured on it. Some games seem to take 100+MB/hr and others are KB/hr of game play. Bpringlemeir ( talk) 13:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
So I started reading the dev blog for Thimbleweed Park, and realized that almost the entire development process, including a lot of detail about the budget, etc, is documented so far. I've never actually experienced that before ( Broken Age comes close, though), so I'm kind of at a loss at how to organize all this information in the article. Do I do it entirely chronologically, and if so, would I make use of sub-sections such as "January 2016"? Or do I have one section about everything design related, then one about everything programming related, etc.? Are there any other games with heavily documented development processes, whose articles I could look at? -- IDV talk 07:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
It's been a while since this has happened and currently the project has a large number of outstanding GANs and other articles that require attention, so another review thread is definitely required. Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Requests also has the usual backlog that can be attended to if anybody feels like it. JAG UAR 23:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, I restructured the main Sega article from this: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sega&diff=next&oldid=639493832
To this: /info/en/?search=Sega
But have I couple more plans besides the initial main Sega article:
Currently these are pages for Sega "divisions and subsidiaries". Official companies like Creative Assembly, SegaSoft etc. makes sense but articles for what is considered internal such as SEGA WOW, SEGA AM2, SEGA AM3, Sonic Team, Amusement Vision, Sega Sports R&D have stuck around and were even created long after Sega announced absorbing it's developing companies: https://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/ir/release/pdf/past/sega/2005/20040519_4.pdf Now yes, Sonic Team should keep their page, because they still have an internet presence: http://www.sonicteam.com/ Sega-AM2 is debatable since it has a japanese wiki site, and the palmtree AM2 logo has popped up a couple of times, but really it has no website presence, it now also consists of staff of AM3 too...plus it is called R&D2 now.
/info/en/?search=Category:Sega_divisions_and_subsidiaries
Claims such as these also stuck around on pages for a while: "On July 1, 2004 Sammy merged the AM teams into three groups. The merge did not affect Sega-AM2 or Sonic Team." or ". Unlike most of the other old AM departments, it remains a separate division within Sega." All these are incorrect, Sega has been like Nintendo with internal EAD groups for most of it's life. Like most other companies there are simply internal R&D divisions.
There has not been an effort to simply make a list of all games Sega has published and documenting their internal developers from the beginning to now, similar to Nintendo. This has caused to make pages like SEGA PC.
I made this page containing all of Sega games, similar to page from Capcom, Konami, Square Enix etc. List of Sega games
Then there is my sandbox page that is a new version for the Sega development studios page
My plan is to have it similar to the Sega arcade games...one page for the system boards (in my case the development studios), and one page for the games. Except like Sonic Team (for previous reasons mentioned), the rest of the pages would be made redundant merged or redirected. Also this page is redundant too, with this template.
Opinions? Particalury asking the people who have been involved in previous dicussions: @ Dissident93:, @ Lukeno94:, @ TheTimesAreAChanging:
-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 16:08, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Problems with list formatting, you say? If only some enterprising editor had written a guide to writing good lists of games. @ Tripple-ddd: the formatting you tried on List of Sega games is bad (and so is the Nintendo one) - try going for the way List of Square Enix video games is formatted. Given how long your list is, you might consider breaking it up by year to keep it manageable- List of Sega video games (1980-90), etc. You might also try writing it in a sandbox and then moving it to article space only when it's done. -- Pres N 21:58, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94: I explained prior how there is no chronological problem on the development studios page, and how it works. When the employee gets a producer or management position, his past biography get's mentioned.
You also provided no evidence of problematic grammar and punctuation. "Hiroshi Kataoka joined in 1992 working with Yu Suzuki since Virtua Racing. His debut as director was the Fighting Vipers series, Fighters Megamix and Sonic The Fighters." This sentence does not have it for example.
@ PresN: Honestly I thought about doing lists like Square Enix and Atlus ones, with genres, release regions etc. But I settled for the method which I guess is not considered GA or Featured material.
What is so particulary wrong about having a set-up like this like this:
List_of_Sega_arcade_system_boards (list and description of arcade boards, in my case it would be the studios) List of Sega arcade games (list of games accompanied by the arcade board, list of each of the studios in my case)
One article, desribing all the departments and studios, and one listing all the games. They are lenghty articles, and yes it is not GA or featured, but the arcade pages have not had any complaints. All I would wanna do is change one mediocore article with another, really. Years of statusquo, yes, but it is not good statusquo, by not being attempted to be improved by anyone in years.
The problem is Lukono94 considers it objectively worse than the current slew of Sega articles. By which I mean the development team related ones.
I mean really, the current Sega development studios articles has claims like this "due to disagreements of where the Sonic franchise is headed, Naoto Oshima left Sega"...the current AM2 page has phrases from an 90's magazine and says "monster successes"...the current Sega Rosso page says that it is former Ridge Racer employess. And they are unsourced, at least I have one external source, that yes is just one, and a fanwiki (a japanese one that is considered fairly trustworthy, since the japanese have things like departments etc. readily avaible though hiring sites and magazine previews, and these magazines are probably old by now). But at least it's one source, as opposed to nothing.
And yes, some Sega Studios were notable when they were independent. But really it get's confusing, when putting a seperate article for a period of history of a studio, that continued afterwards with it's lineage but was broken up, and absorbed a different studio etc.
All I want to do is simplify it, and have structure similar to the other gaming companies on Wikipedia. Tripple-ddd ( talk) 00:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok you really can't compare celeberities or famous people that consistently have official media and so on calling them their "unofficial names". In japanese media and official sega japan's hiring sites and similar information it is clearly as follows: CS1,2,3 and R&D1, R&D2 etc. Like here the Linkeldn of Makoto Osaki does not say manager of AM2, but manager of R&D2, or the fact that official internet presence of R&D1, does not say AM1 or SEGA WOW. Or how Sonic Team is rather often referred to as CS2? (here is a japanese interview where this is the case: http://app.famitsu.com/20150203_489144/). And then there are Sonic Allstars Racing credits, which is an international released game if the japanese sites don't count ( SEGA Corporation [2] section) which has no Sonic Team, Amusement Vision, SEGA AM2 etc. whatsoever.
Again, I stated that I think having multiple pages for a period of history for a variety of studios, makes it too complicated. Having it in one stream of information, makes it consistent and simple, seeing as they were always internal studios. Like, I mean there is no page for EAD3 or EAD Toyko, they are notable after all in some way. That is my argument, your argument is simply "it's worse" or "you are wrong".
At most, I could dig having time period pages...such as Sega Research and Development Development (1983-1990), and then Sega Subsidiaries (2000-2004), which also include the lists etc.
But then again objectively worse and all that, for now I'll try to add more sources and improve the writing and propose it again later.-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 15:35, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
This discussion is getting long and confusing so I'm creating a separate subsection just for improving the Sega article. I've been doing some tidying up and sorting out the references. Additional verification is needed in a bunch of places. Reading through it though, I think that some text should be split out of the History section. Some of the information isn't relevant to the company's history and would be better in a separate section titled "Products and services". Does anybody have any suggestions for the article? -- The1337gamer ( talk) 14:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Should redirects like Grand Theft Auto VI, Mafia 3 exist? None of these games are announced or confirmed. Will these redirects violate WP:TOOSOON even they are just redirects? AdrianGamer ( talk) 06:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
So yeah... GoNintendo had some hardware problems during a server move or something, and as a result most articles from 2014 and all from 2015 except today's and yesterday's, are gone. Additionally, old articles seem to have new URLs. I am aware that GoNintendo isn't considered a great source for WP's purposes, but it it still being used in a bunch of articles here.
This is a good opportunity to take a look at articles using GoNintendo refs and either replace them with a better source or update the URL/add an archived link. Is it possible to get a list of some sort of all WP articles that link to GoNintendo? -- IDV talk 01:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I was visiting my folks for Mother's day yesterday and had a chance to browse through some old Nintendo Power magazines. I noticed that as I found an old one from 1994 reviewing Donkey Kong (Game Boy), I discovered that game rankings gave it a full rating of 4.1/5. However, Nintendo Power wasn't giving overall ratings at this time, only ratings based on graphics, fun, play control, etc. There was no overall grade, but I think gamerankings was using an average of their scores. Could we suggest not using this site for older Nintendo Power ratings? Or does anyone have any other thoughts on this? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 16:59, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
We have two Featured Articles that will appear on the main page this month. On the fourth we have Secret of Mana. And on the twelfth, Batman: Arkham Asylum. Congrats to the editors who got the articles to what they are now. GamerPro64 15:05, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
New addition: Anachronox will be up on May 26. Congrats ZeaLitY and GamerPro64! -- Pres N 18:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I have some articles that I think should go through the AfD or ProD processes, but I'm not sure what checks I need to carry out first. The articles in question are:
I feel that there is no value to having these, and that they violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE, but I find it difficult to describe exactly why. My reasoning for picking these articles out is that they seem to just carry out the function of their respective categories, Category:Video games developed in the Czech Republic, Category:Video games developed in the Netherlands and Category:Video game companies of the United Kingdom, and that having articles containing these types of list is clearly not seen as necessary for other countries. But is this enough of a reason? I felt that they might not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but when I looked into that it seems that I would have to conduct a search for sources myself in order to justify requesting deletion. This seems wrong, as my issue is that I think the article couldn't be notable, regardless of sources. So is it not a notability issue? And therefore, is it even valid to ask for deletion at all? Hopefully someone here will be able to help me or take up the cause and add these to articles for deletion so it can be properly discussed.
Communal t ( talk) 18:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The stylization of 'eSport' is under discussion, see talk:electronic sports -- 65.94.43.89 ( talk) 05:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Cor, have a look at Lost Saga, its like articles used to be in the olden days; its even got flagicons in the infobox. - X201 ( talk) 20:33, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Kamen Rider: Climax Heroes has got a massive Playable characters table - X201 ( talk) 14:40, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that the data in the video game reviews module has changed the long pipe names, so that means that I no longer have to use "width=26m" anymore, right? -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 17:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
There is a dispute going on between an IP user then User:Mimic716 and myself on the Vagrant Story article about tweets from the game's developer Matsuno. There seems to be a misunderstanding on the developer's statement based on his tweets. The game seems to be retconned by Square Enix as being part of Ivalice, when originally it was intended by Matsuno to be on a separate universe, and any Ivalice references made is intended as a trivial allusion or "fan service" as quoted from the developer's tweets. However, User:Mimic716 insists that "...this does NOT mean that the games take place in different worlds or universes..." but fails to cite a reference. I've been going back and forth on this, close to 3RRing. I'm requesting ways to address this dispute better. — Bl ue 。 20:34, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I've been in contact with the Insurgency developers regarding a free media release, but have been too busy myself to write even a half-way decent article. Insurgency is a multiplayer first-person shooter for Windows and Mac, it is a standalone sequel to the mod, Insurgency: Modern Infantry Combat. The game has a score of 74 on Metacritic [1], and is quite popular for an indie FPS with 1k-2k concurrent players daily [2]. It was released in 2014 and is actively supported.
I thought that other editors would be interested in writing an article, and the developer has donated 5 free copies of the game for this purpose. If you'd like a copy, send me an email. Each key will only go to an active editor who has previously worked on video games content. It requires Steam.
Please don't send a request if you have no intention of editing/creating the article in the near future, and please don't send a request if you don't have the hardware to run it. The developers are also interested in having editors upload screenshots and video in future, and then releasing those as free-use, but I haven't formalised this yet. - hahnch e n 21:05, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Quick question I wanted to confirm the answer to before I start addressing this. I've got an IP going around and removing composers from various HD/3D remakes, like this, stating that because the composers didn't compose new music for the new release, they shouldn't be listed? Is that how we do it? I wouldn't think so, as it in no way implies that they did create new music, only that their music was in fact featured, which is true. An HD/3D remake with the original game's music is still featuring the composers work, right?
Anyways, just double checking in case there's a thought process I'm not aware of here. Let me know. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 14:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Earlier reports
|
---|
176.248.107.108 ( talk · contribs) has been making quite a few changes related to publishers and their categories, such as "rolling up" publisher/developer credits from the subsidiary that made the game to the parent company. I've reverted some of it myself, such as including Activision Blizzard as a developer on Blizzard games. Another example would be where they removed Sierra Entertainment from some older games as well as new ones since it's reactivation and replacing with Vivendi and Activision Blizzard. Some of their edits appear to be straight up improvements, and everything seems to be 100% good faith, though I did do a warning after they repeated some of the changes once I'd asked them to stop on Blizzard articles. The user has edited under multiple IPs and I believe maybe 2 registered accounts, based on some page histories. The IP is also adding categories for publishers to the articles, and I'm not 100% sure what the stance here is... For example, should the Ubisoft video game category contain games developed by Ubisoft, or also published by? Category:Vivendi video games was apparently created and populated by this user, but I do not believe Vivendi was ever a developer directly. Someone else may need to review the edits and see if any other cleanup should be made. My watch list was mostly related to Activision Blizzard games. -- ferret ( talk) 18:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
86.139.95.89 ( talk · contribs) is now engaged in this. This time adding Vivendi Games as the developer for multiple games, even those released long after the Activision Blizzard merger. Edit history behavior suggests it's the same user. -- ferret ( talk) 16:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
176.24.181.122 ( talk · contribs) and 176.250.202.128 ( talk · contribs) may be worth a look as well. Seem to fit same pattern - X201 ( talk) 16:45, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Now operating as 90.220.112.68 ( talk · contribs)... are these proxies or something? Exact same behavior. -- ferret ( talk) 23:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Now operating as 2.126.202.120 ( talk · contribs). Just started up looks like... -- ferret ( talk) 19:05, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Newest IP: 86.163.219.42 ( talk · contribs). Same behavior patterns. Mixture of good category updates with bad changes to infobox fields and inappropriate categories. -- ferret ( talk) 13:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Sergecross73: 2.126.56.27 ( talk · contribs) appears to be the newest incarnation.-- 十 八 22:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Another: 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs). The1337gamer ( talk) 11:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Possible new hit, 90.222.22.159 ( talk · contribs). Primarily adding Japanese publisher categories, i.e. adding "Sega video games" to a game publisher in Japan by Sega. -- ferret ( talk) 19:08, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Found another, 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs). -- ferret ( talk) 11:41, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Another User:2.220.194.151 - X201 ( talk) 08:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Another User:94.10.4.121, could we add any of his usual edits to the edit filter? - X201 ( talk) 19:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC) User:90.222.19.240 is today's. -- ferret ( talk) 14:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
User:90.222.57.67 is today's. -- ferret ( talk) 21:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Good afternoon! User:90.222.19.1 is today's. -- ferret ( talk) 21:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Another I think. Only 4 edits but they seem to be the same as the previously blocked users: 2.124.56.69 ( talk · contribs) -- The1337gamer ( talk) 16:03, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
|
This one seem to have been missed. 90.222.58.107 ( talk · contribs). Hasn't been active for a week but making the same publisher changes, and listing Sega as a developer on Sonic articles when Sonic Team is already listed. -- The1337gamer ( talk) 16:09, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I've collapsed the older reports, and slapped together a consolidated (and sorted) list of the past users:
176.24.181.122 ( talk · contribs) 176.248.107.108 ( talk · contribs) 176.250.202.128 ( talk · contribs) 2.124.56.69 ( talk · contribs) 2.126.202.120 ( talk · contribs) 2.126.56.27 ( talk · contribs) 2.126.57.175 ( talk · contribs) 2.220.194.151 ( talk · contribs) 31.52.7.7 ( talk · contribs) 67.255.219.44 ( talk · contribs) 77.96.101.235 ( talk · contribs) 86.139.95.89 ( talk · contribs) 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs) 86.163.219.23 ( talk · contribs) 86.163.219.42 ( talk · contribs) 90.195.158.128 ( talk · contribs) 90.208.223.148 ( talk · contribs) 90.220.112.68 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.19.1 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.19.240 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.22.159 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.57.67 ( talk · contribs) 90.222.58.107 ( talk · contribs) 94.10.4.121 ( talk · contribs) Crash zachary ( talk · contribs) Zachary rules ( talk · contribs)
-- ferret ( talk) 17:04, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
2.124.58.118 ( talk · contribs) just started. -- ferret ( talk) 15:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Ferret, X201, Sergecross73, PresN, The1337gamer, Juhachi, and Favre1fan93: Can we either move this to WP:SPI or WP:LTA or set up a separate subpage (at e.g. WP:WikiProject Video games/Abuse) for this? Given the continuing activity, this talk page is probably not the best location for the continuing reports, which are are mostly being made experienced users. Or look into an WP:Edit filter for this continuing behavior? -- Izno ( talk) 17:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
That's precisely what I'm suggesting. ( Don't get snippity.) My point is that the collaboration is becoming a routine factor on a day-to-day basis, making it a better fit for its own page. Other abuse might also be able to go on a page like the proposed /Abuse, though I can't think of any off the top of my head (I know we've had a few cases of continuous abuse).
I had little difficulty ignoring it when it was still a new topic of interest, but its continued presence on this page day after day is obnoxiously wearing. -- Izno ( talk) 16:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
One suggestion I will make is that this should be a new topic every month. So that the older stuff gets archived. - X201 ( talk) 13:06, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
With the passing of Sega video game consoles, WP:VG now has 10 featured topics in total! Congratulations to Red Phoenix, Indrian, SexyKick, and TheTimesAreAChanging! (and me, I guess.) And thanks to all the contributors to the previous 9 featured topics, as well as the contributors to our 14 good topics. -- Pres N 05:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Should the article title use Roman or Arabic numerals? An editor pointed out that cover art now uses Roman numerals so I moved the page to The Witcher III: Wild Hunt. But another brings up the point that the official website uses Arabic, I've noticed that a lot of other sources seem to use Arabic numerals so I've moved it back to its original location. Are there any other examples of this where both styles are being used in different places, which should it be here? -- The1337gamer ( talk) 17:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Following up on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 106#moving forward on task force cleanup consensus, I see two options on ways to handle the remaining, dead task forces:
Action & adventure (merge adventure, Castlevania, Devil May Cry, Mega Man, Mortal Kombat, Silent Hill, Soul), FPS (merge Call of Duty, Gears of War), Retrogaming (merge arcade, retro), RPG (merge D&D, not the separate project), Strategy (merge C&C)
Salv mentioned last time that genre TFs would be vague and I can easily see the genre task forces being template work that doesn't actually help anyone. Genres TFs could be useful if editors needed to coalesce and unify article style/jargon... but I don't see a need for the above genre TFs. If there was a need (and, again, these TFs have been inactive for years so I don't believe there is one), company-based TFs would be easier to organize than franchise-specific TFs. So while I was more for option #1 a year ago, I think option #2 (deprecate the above TFs) makes more sense now. Thoughts/consensus? – czar 22:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
All right—option two is the clear favorite. – czar 18:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I cleaned the low-hanging fruit from last year's cleanup. Here are a few more that have been inactive for years. Should be uncontroversial, but wanted to make sure there is no final objection before clearing them out:
We could also deprecate MUD, Atari, PlayStation, and Xbox, but they see more occasional activity. Thoughts? – czar 18:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey all, since we've done a great job in the past few months knocking out some of the cleanup categories, I thought I'd bring to y'all's attention one of the smaller ones remaining: Category:Video games articles needing attention. Only 20 articles in it! This category is intended for articles "needing immediate attention"- which means that there's some major issue with it beyond just "it's a start-class article". maybe a section needs to be deleted, maybe a table is terribly formatted, whatever. It doesn't take much to clear this category- pull up an article, look for the major flaw that requires "immediate" attention, and remove the category (or |attention=y from the talk page template). Don't see anything you think is worthy of "immediate" attention? Go ahead and remove the category anyway- it's certainly an easy category to abuse. If a few people poke at this, we could be done in a day.
On a side note- does anyone know why Category:Video games with 3D graphics exists? Ran into it when knocking off a few articles from the attention category. It's... certainly under-populated for what it says it is. And pretty unusable if it was actually populated. -- Pres N 18:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ done – czar 15:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I finished the Category:Video games articles needing expert attention cat too. The only ones left are the Warcraft characters that I have already said I think should be merged as not independently notable. "Expert attention" isn't a great backlog category—I was cleaning out stuff from six years ago... If someone wants input, the best way to handle it is to start a thread here and ask people to watchlist the article in question or to do something specific to the article. I think we should be looking at deprecating this "expert attention" category as duplicating the function of the "attention" category (which itself should really be named "immediate attention"). My own take would be to phase out both "expert attention" and "attention" cats altogether as both poorly scoped, do not entice editors to adopt articles, and never adequately explain explain the perceived issue in need of an expert. The video game cleanup and normal tags suffice, and posting at WT:VG is even better. (Also see Template talk:WPBannerMeta/Archive 10#Proposal_to_remove_the_attention_tag.) Thoughts? – czar 00:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I have made a site called Fantasy Forest land before dragons. I don't think you have talked about this game yet. Please visit the page. Click this link Fantasy Forest land before dragons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsliangel ( talk • contribs)
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before (and searching through the archives I couldn't find anything) and WP:VG/DATE didn't give me a clear answer, but I was wondering if there's a guideline or even a clear consensus if the year of release should or shouldn't be mentioned before the actual genre and before the full release date. See for instance Call of Duty: Black Ops III: "(...) is an upcoming 2015 first-person shooter (...) and is expected to be released (...) November 6, 2015" or Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag: (...) is a 2013 historical fiction action-adventure open world stealth video game (...) a sequel to 2012's Assassin's Creed III (...) The game was first released on the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii U in October 2013 and was later made available on the PlayStation 4, Microsoft Windows and Xbox One in November 2013", mentioning 2013 three times and 2012 too. Articles like Battlefield 4, Mass Effect 3 or Super Mario World also put the year first. A lot of articles do not have this however. Any thoughts? -- Soetermans. T / C 06:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, I made a template but I don't think I have made it specific enough. I want to find out if the majority of people think it should be deleted. --☣
Anar
chyte☣ 06:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
The page in question:
Template:Navbox video game topics
Talk page:
Template talk:Navbox video game topics
Sign here if you think it should be kept.
Sign here if you think it should be deleted.
The current Infobox animanga/Game template doesn't include the same personnel fields (director, composers, artist, etc) as the normal video game infobox. As a result, I attempted to add them in, so it would be more consistent, however a user has reverted me, stating that it bloats the infobox. What I'm asking for is for VG project members to help me with a consensus, so I propose three different options:
Any thoughts or suggestions? ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 21:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
So my previous proposal got shut down by @ Lukeno94:, due to, in his view, poor grammar and no references.
So I redid mainly the first article to meet his standards.
/info/en/?search=User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox
Purpose: Replacing content of Sega development studios, and also merging it with following pages Sega AM2, SEGA Hitmaker, Amusement Vision, Sega WOW, Smilebit. The above has a better detail and sourced content of it's material.
/info/en/?search=User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox2
Purpose: Actual list of all Sega games, Sega developed and published, as a previous one did not exist. Highlights the above mentioned departments and studios and accompanies them.
/info/en/?search=User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox3
A new list for Sega's arcade games, replacing the former List of Sega arcade games. This will the List of Sega arcade video games, developed or published by Sega. It has no medal games, photobooth machines and prize games, or mere distrubution of titles unrelated to Sega. These games will be featured in their own respetive articles such as medal games, where all of Sega's (and other companies) medal games will be included. Same goes for Purikara machines.
Opinions?
-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 21:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94: Seems like you are continuening to judge things personally and not make proper arguments. You are the only one claiming that the articles are a nightmare to read (and you can't compare your game article with my article documenting employees), and you are also the only one who keeps reverting articles (with a couple of exceptions on Sonic Team and Sega AM2 articles). Also nobody else said that the article is objectively worse. Who else said so? Point me to it. You say it doesn't matter that that the subsidiaries were always first party in-house studios located in the same place, well to your standards what does matter? You are claiming that AV is a second party studio, but do not provide a source. You clearly don't even seem to care given you never give suggestions to anything, but rather just complain. Thanks tough, for pointing out the issue of capital letters in instances, that is indeed a problem, tough I can't see others.
@ Sergecross73: It is not very likely that people will participate in improving the current slate of Sega articles, given their state for more than 5 years now. I hear the suggestion of making multiple articles per decade (for both lists of games and studios), which I'm seeing as inconsistent personally. No other article is set up this way. So why should the Sega ones be the exception.?
Well it is not a major restructuring really. I added to the current articles with content/sourcing, and didn't remove anything, or at least the content did not receive complaints. And then there is new one that did not exist before (list of Sega games). If I would try from sratch again (as most likely nobody else would try), the articles would end up the same as my proposed ones. @ Lukeno94: has made intangible claims, such as formatting and inconsistent dates, so I can't really base anything of this. User:PresN suggested to make an a split for articles on studios and a list for games. Which is what I did. -- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 16:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94:Tables? What tables? The article consists of words, not tables. Information that is already elsewhere? The current studio list article and current studio articles document next to nothing and not as in detail as my article does (with the exception of the Sonic Team, which might be the only duplicated thing). But so what? Shigeru Miyamoto and EAD articles duplicate certain information. No context for affiliated studios? They are affiliated studios, I could add that these companies that Sega partnered up for published releases, would that be ok? Please respond back about the following things:
-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 18:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94: This is a table:
Header text | Header text | Header text |
---|---|---|
Example | Example | Example |
Example | Example | Example |
Example | Example | Example |
This is a text:
Wikipedia (Listeni/ˌwɪkɨˈpiːdiə/ or Listeni/ˌwɪkiˈpiːdiə/ wik-i-pee-dee-ə) is a free-access, free content Internet encyclopedia, supported and hosted by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. Those who can access the site can edit most of its articles. Editors are expected to follow the website's rules.[6] Wikipedia is ranked among the ten most popular websites[5] and constitutes the Internet's largest and most popular general reference work.[7][8][9]
Tables are barely relevant in my article so I just don't get what you mean, especially not in the context of what you talk (dotting around, what do you mean by that?). Also the article is not supposed to be a list of studios but more like the EAD article, which I already established.-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 19:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I've been lurking around this conversation for a while and I'm surprised this hasn't really been brought up for a while, if at all. @ Lukeno94:, while it may be frustrating that @ Tripple-ddd: is breaking rules outlined at WP:MOS, you are breaking rules outlined at WP:CIVIL, specifically name calling ("if you are this incompetent when it comes to writing") and being too intense ("That says EVERYTHING about the mess you're making."). We are meant to be helping this user improve his lists, not make him feel more agitated; at the end of the day, that approach will get us nowhere. If you have frustrations, please try to walk Tripple-ddd through what you're saying calmly, and if that doesn't work, ask for some help from other editors. Wikipedia is meant to promote a cooperative environment, and your tone is going against that. BlookerG talk 20:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Dissident93: Why do you think having no duplicates makes things less complicated? It's not a practice I see on Wikipedia. 2 articles can cover a different subject but feature some of the same games. And while I can see splitting western and japanese published games, the japanese games are still ihrerently linked to in-house development (producer in Sega Japan).-- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 16:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Wasn't sure what to do with this, so I figured I'd note here that User:Andiar.rohnds was doing some odd stuff here (where he went back and forth with some rather offensive content) and more notably, here. I'm not particularly fond of our "buzzword" articles either, but this isn't exactly the kind of behavior we want. ~ Mable ( chat) 18:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Casting a wider net on this issue, after a disagreement at Talk:Kotaku#Italics. Historically, WP:VG has drawn the line for using italics on print sources (magazines, books, etc.) and no italics for all websites. This is reflected in the usage of italics at Template:Video game reviews since at least 2010. Recently it has come to my attention that the line "Website titles may or may not be italicized depending on the type of site and what kind of content it features. Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized (Salon.com or The Huffington Post). Online encyclopedias and dictionaries should also be italicized (Scholarpedia or Merriam-Webster Online). Other types of websites should be decided on a case-by-case basis." has been added to the MOS:TITLE page. Should the project revise our current italics guidelines on video game websites? I don't have a strong horse in this race, other than my desire for consistency. Axem Titanium ( talk) 20:55, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
"Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized"has existed in the MoS since 2011, but lived at WP:ITALICS before its more recent move to the /Titles page. What italics guideline do we have that needs to be updated? The MoS supersedes any guideline we'd need. I'll add to the point that "Kotaku is a blog" that (1) it is a news blog, and (2) that blogs are still creative works like magazines and are italicized by Chicago, the only stylebook I know to address blogs specifically. And there is precedent for using italics for websites in the reviews template, though it was inconsistent before all italics were stripped in the transition to Lua. WPVG has not in any recent history drawn the line for italics at print sources, and if anything, there is an already acknowledged, clear case based on the MoS (and WTVG discussion history) to update the reviews template with italics for online vg news sources—it's just a matter of someone drafting the code. – czar 06:15, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
I have just proposed a YouTube Wikiproject that would cover any Articles relevant to YouTube People, Culture, Organisations and Business
I would love to get lots of support for this --- :D Derry Adama ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
RMCD Bot malfunctioning
|
---|
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Electronic sports to be moved to ESports. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for BioShock to be moved to BioShock (video game). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Final Fantasy VII (Famicom) to be moved to Final Fantasy VII (NES video game). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Star Wars: Battlefront to be moved to Star Wars: Battlefront (2004 video game). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Batman: The Brave and the Bold – The Videogame to be moved to Batman: The Brave and the Bold – The Video game. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Survival mode to be moved to Survival game. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for MediEvil (video game) to be moved to MediEvil. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Marcus "Dyrus" Hill to be moved to Dyrus. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 23:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC) |
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, the first video-game inspired film to be promoted to featured status, is now also the first video-game inspired film to be nominated for TFA. All comments on the nomination are welcome, see here. Cheers. Freikorp ( talk) 12:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Did we get rid of these? I was reading this today and thought "does a table exist for this article?" (no) and poked at a few other games that I thought had one, but I didn't see one. Did something happen? Zero Serenity ( talk - contributions) 18:35, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
My intention is not to call attention towards a discussion outside this project's scope. It is mostly on how I should handle future works. I was told a Japanese cover is always preferred since it's the original work. However, in the VG articles I've seen, there is always the English localization's cover in the infobox. Why is this the case? DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 05:20, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Basically as the title says. Not only do I want to have some serious cleanup done to the article, but I also want to go through and find sources to expand upon the reception, analysis, and concept and creation sections (since I'm sure that a lot of commentary has been made that hasn't been put in the article as of yet). - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 23:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
So this month alone the backlog for Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Requests has gotten three months taken care of. 2011 still has a month in there but I believe that with the summer upon us, articles can be made with the choices presented. And who knows? A new Good Article (which has been done before) or a Featured Article could be made from one of these redlinks. GamerPro64 21:00, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorting through the requests ( here) is difficult because of the way it's laid out. Would it be possible to make it so this page is laid out similar to this and this? Those pages have them alphabetically and in sections instead of by Month+Year, which can get out of hand very easily. --☣ Anar chyte☣ 03:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi everybody,
Seeing ProtoDrake's message, I checked out Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy. In the infobox, it mentions "year of inception". I didn't notice that field before and I looked up in the {{ Infobox video game series}}. The description says "Year of first release in the series", but there's already a field for first release. That's a bit redundant, right? Now, Fabula Nova Crystallis uses the inception field as when it was announced in 2006, which makes more sense to me. But the field is still called 'inception'. Doesn't that sound like when the developer came up with the idea, before it was revealed? -- Soetermans. T / C 11:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone know what the compilation
field was for on the Video game reviews template? -
X201 (
talk) 11:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Not sure how to proceed with this problem. The developer of Beyond Eyes, Sherida Halatoe, has expressed a desire to delete all mention of the PlayStation 4 version from Wikipedia. A number of sources say the game is in development for PS4 (including IGN, GameReactor and TheSixthAxis) and Halatoe herself acknowledges a PS4 version is planned, both on Twitter [3] and her talk page, but I assume, due to Xbox One timed exclusivity, she would now prefer we ignore the PS4 version until the exclusivity period expires. How should we proceed. Do we ignore reliable sources and pretend a PS4 version is not planned, or politely decline the request? — TPX 21:34, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Coming up on June 7 is Flight Unlimited, while on June 20 is God of War: Betrayal! Congratulations to JimmyBlackwing and JDC808! -- Pres N 15:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
If anyone fancies a bit of hack and slash on a list of game items, take a trip to Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 3. Special offer: also comes with a free cast list as long as your arm. - X201 ( talk) 14:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
This has not appeared for yonks, so here it is again as bright as ever. As usual, listed are all the pending Featured, Peer and Good Article reviews. The number of GAs is quite high at the moment. As usual, I draw people's attention to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Requests, which is still suffering from backlog. Contributions welcome and gratefully received.
As the creator, I'm starting this. Here we go: I will trade someone's GA game review for a review of Megami Tensei or a comprehensive review for Fabula Nova Crystallis. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 10:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I think this needs standardisation. It seems like there has been a recent trend in not including colons for certain video game titles. As an example, the Assassin's Creed series: Assassin's Creed#Release_history. A bunch of articles titles have colons and others don't. I've seen this with other video game articles as well. -- The1337gamer ( talk) 22:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
A good source for name formatting info are annual reports, investor relations releases and trademark applications, as these avoid the demented styling of the advertising dept. and have to display names in plain typed text. - X201 ( talk) 10:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
For a game that has personnel added over time, I.E. Terra Battle adding composers/artists from Kickstarter stretch goals, do we add the year the game was released (so it would be 2014 on everybody's article worklist) or the year their contribution was added (so 2015 for all the extra composers). MMOs do the second option don't they? ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 19:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Consensus from prior discussions was to deprecate all inactive task forces. I wanted to run the next and hopefully final inactive batch past WTVG just to make sure there were no final objections: PlayStation, Xbox, Atari, MUD, Strategy, Adventure. – czar 04:57, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
With E3 next week, we can expect around 50 new games to be announced (if not already teased/announced already). As in the past, we should discourage new articles on these games unless there is sufficient information beyond the announcement to be written; redirects to existing articles are fine of course, and discussing a sequel or related game in a previous game or existing series article is fine too. -- MASEM ( t) 22:57, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Atsushi Seimiya has been nominated at Redirects for discussion. Your input at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 10#Atsushi Seimiya would be appreciated. And while you're there, there's Wort, wort, wort! right below it. -- BDD ( talk) 13:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox This is supposed to replace Sega development studios, making it fuller with more sources.
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox2 Full list of Sega titles, could split it into two if it's considered too big (one article for Sega systems, one for non-Sega systems). With the list of PC games, the current Sega PC article should also be merged/deleted.
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox3 A revamped Arcade list, with purely video games developed and published by Sega. Other arcade machines, verion updates etc. are covered in other articles.
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox5 So this is rewritten text for the current crop of Sega studios, also with sources...I won't replace any of them like I said before, just changing the content within them. Instead of six tough, there should be five (Amusement Vision and Smilebit merged)
User:Tripple-ddd/sandbox6 New list, purely for mobile, similar to Square Enix
So again, asking for opinions from @ Dissident93:, @ TheTimesAreAChanging:, @ Lukeno94:.
I know Dissident, said that my articles are not in Manual of Style, referring to bad formatting. But that is still a rough suggestion that I can't make much out of, what are you exactly referring to? Maybe point to something from this article: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting -- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 21:42, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
@ Lukeno94:
@ Lukeno94: 1. Well I fixed the nationality capitilization, and added the missing word from that sentence. I don't know what you mean by ref inconsistencies and errors, how should they be implemented better? How can they implemented differently? (can someone edit someone elses sandbox? if that works, why don't you that, and show me directly what you want) I don't know what you by the tables, since the "titles" row, doesn't even exist anymore. The Japanese wikis are still the only reliable source for that content, and there is little reason for distrusting it. The information is from job ads, magazine information and interviews, as well as analyzing credits. Alot of which is unaccessible now and is in japanese. That is still better than the current crop of Sega Studio articles which have no sources AT ALL.
@ Dissident93: 2. How are the tables confusing, at most I could see them being redundant...what you are linking in particular just lists the studios, and how they changed. The studios would then have links which are the articles in the fifth sandbox.
3. Why get rid of published titles? Especially the Japanese published games are linked with developed ones, as I said before. Why don't you think an article For List of Sega video games (Sega systems) and List of Sega video games (non Sega systems) is better?
3. I only see one unused comma mark. Question: do all of you talk about errors that are visible or also ones that only can be seen if you edit the source? Why does the introduction need to be redone? What would you suggest? How is the star system trivial? Do you want to bloat out the article with all the update version like the current one? Why not let the reader immediately see which games are stand-alone and which got updates?
4. The purpose of the fourth sandbox is to show the content I plan to revise the current crop of Sega Studios with. I explained this.
5. Well first you say that the previous article is bloated but now you say all the mobile games should be there too which is what would result of what you are against. Overall yes, I probably agree that making an article which contains fully informative tables, as well as a chronological order is better. There are some things that "should" happen, but as it is I see little wrong with the current sandboxes going live without major overhaul. This Sega development studios article has pretty much no sources, and the articles linked within them do neither, really how is anything not an improvement?
And unrelated to the articles in discussion, could you also explain why you consider this article article worse than my sandboxes? As I stated that one has clear errors, or do you mean that just because of a fuller table?
And why have you removed the financial information on the Sega Sammy Holdings page, when Disney has it? And about the company history, do you think the reasons of the merger (the first couple of sentences), are still appropriate to include and should be rewritten or does the current info need to be rewritten? -- Tripple-ddd ( talk) 11:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, all. I'm preparing a rewrite for Stella Deus: The Gate of Eternity and have encountered a serious problem: I can't find a story synopsis anywhere beyond the bare-bones setting given in the publicity blurb and what little is there one the page at present. Can anyone help give me a synopsis of what happens? Or direct me to a link where the English script is archived, or even a translation of the Japanese script so I can make a rough setup? If anyone could that, it would be most helpful. I've got everything else about the article all wrapped up and ready to write in my sandbox. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 19:42, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
-- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 22:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
It's just a start. It's gotten tons of press coverage and the fans will sort it out. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 23:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Article is in better shape. Development section still needs trimming and reorganization. The game has spent 14 years in development hell. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 04:33, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
With the recent Virtual Console release of the original mother as EarthBound Beginnings I think it is worth considering moving Mother (video game series) back to Earthbound (series) since two of the three games in the series now use Earthbound. Granted there was a successful request to move it to the current title last October but I believe that this new announcement could change things considerably.-- 67.68.31.244 ( talk) 22:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
So I know almost nothing about wiki editing (I know how to indent, sign, bold, hyperlink, make new sections... that's about it), which I'm sure you can tell by my lack of an account here, but I'd be willing to help out on this (despite my lack of an account here), especially since it's generally as easy as opening the game page in a new tab and spending three seconds looking for the info. In the age of the Glorious PC Master Race this particularly comes to mind. Perhaps even make separate columns to distinguish multiplats grounded on consoles from multiplats grounded on PC. Details such as "on SNES and Amiga" aren't a big deal and probably don't need distinguishing from "on SNES and PC", especially since porting between IBM PC, or computers of any kind, is generally more of a rarity the further back you go. My main concern is games that play like shit (can I say that?) due to lack of analog stick support on PC/lack of multiplayer/whatever else, and these would be easier to distinguish if, for example, Playstation 1 told me which games were also available on PC. I'd go to Mobygames for this but it seems like different platforms have linked separate entries for each release- rather unfortunate, and makes simply generating a list harder. Because of the analog stick thing I mentioned, I feel like the fifth and sixth generations are the most pressing, or at least the ones I'm the most interested in. 2602:301:774A:D980:84A5:4316:F8AE:A589 ( talk) 05:12, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
There's a discussion that I was beckoned to on the Amiibo talk page. It's discussing the release wave terminology, specifically prompted by Falco's release window. — Ost ( talk) 19:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi all. I'm wondering if there is any consensus with the project on using a Twitch video as a source (with {{ cite av media}}). I'm not too familiar with the service to know if posted videos (theoretically) stay on the site until the user possibly removes them (thus being a viewable source in the future, like say YouTube), but I am looking to use an official channel's video as a possible source. For those interested it is this video for the content starting around the 05:20:28 mark until the end. It would be used on the Kingdom Hearts III page. I have not watched the content yet myself, but am just wondering ahead of time if I find anything useful I can take note to add it to the article. Thanks. (And apologies if this has been discussed, but I didn't think it was, based on a quick search of the archives.) This also may be a mute point shortly if Square Enix uploads this content to their YouTube channel, as they have with previous E3s, but I still think this is a good discussion to have. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 06:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Whenever I use the website [nintendolife.com] as a source, the question rises: should I cite it as Nintendolife, NintendoLife or Nintendo Life? Furthermore, is it a good idea to put square brackets around the website's name when I cite from it? I would love for it to have an article because it is comes up so often when looking for sources, but I know there aren't any reliable sources to base such an article on... But yeah, what are your thoughts? ~ Mable ( chat) 20:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
So the recent Persona games ( Persona 4 Golden, Persona 4 Arena, Persona Q: Shadow of the Labyrinth, Persona 4: Dancing All Night, Persona 5) have/will all be released outside of Japan without the Shin Megami Tensei moniker, so would be right to move to the article to Persona (series)? It's always simply been Persona in Japan, and now it seems to be the same worldwide. Some discussion of this is already on the talk page there, but was ignored, so I'm posting this here for better visibility. ~ Dissident93 ( talk) 20:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
I've generally looked round, and Dissident93 is right. The general popular name is Persona without the SMT moniker. I've done most of the moving, updates, ect. on the Persona articles, but there was some things that I can't do or really can't face alone. I really need help. -- ProtoDrake ( talk) 09:29, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Does the collapsed table at Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn#Armoury and job system fall under WP:GAMEGUIDE and WP:GAMECRUFT? -- The1337gamer ( talk) 21:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Can people have a look at Nintendo World Championships ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ? There have been a lot of changes in the last two years, and now instead of a large amount of detail on the 1990 event, there is much less detail on both the 1990 and 2015 events.
Is this the appropriate level of detail? Should the event series article be separate from the individual event articles? A discussion is open on the talk page about separate event articles as well (2015/1990) at talk:Nintendo World Championships
-- 70.51.203.69 ( talk) 06:55, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I think it goes without saying that GameSpot links can get spotty. There's a link used for the The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay article that I cannot find on their site since its dead and at one point there was a robots.txt issue with it. This isn't the first time this happened, see here, but I'm not entirely sure how this can be resolved. GamerPro64 20:55, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I noticed something while I was browsing the Google website. I was browsing to find the GameRankings website, and then I noticed that, instead of www.gamerankings.com, it just leads me to http://rankings.gamefoxy.com. It seems that GameFoxy.com is taking over GameRankings. And there are also GameFoxy.com replicas of Giant Bomb (giantbomb.gamefoxy.com), G4TV (g4tv.gamefoxy.com), GameSpot (gamespot.gamefoxy.com), and GameFAQs (www.gamefoxy.com), and other gaming websites I know of. I don't know if the GameFoxy.com website is safe or not. I'm so curious. -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 18:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)