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 100 | ← | Archive 103 | Archive 104 | Archive 105 | Archive 106 | Archive 107 | → | Archive 110 |
Aggregator | Score |
---|---|
GameRankings | X360 - 70.47% (# reviews)
[1] PS3 – 66.15% (#reviews) [2] |
Metacritic | X360 - 69/100 (# reviews)
[3] PS3 - 66/100 (# reviews) [4] |
Publication | Score |
---|---|
Destructoid | 7.5/10 [5] |
Edge | 6/10 [6] |
Eurogamer | 8/10 [7] |
Famitsu | 37/40 [8] |
Game Informer | 7/10 [10] |
GameSpot | 5/10 [11] |
IGN | 7/10 [12] |
PlayStation Official Magazine – UK | 6/10 [9] |
I want to see what you guys think about a possible mass edit.
“ | The first thing we did was go on Wikipedia to the Alpha Centauri webpage, and it has the books that Brian Reynolds and his team read, so we read those, and that was our starting point. | ” |
— PC Gamer interview |
Good work guys. - hahnch e n 16:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Now a DYK nominee: Did you know ... that the team developing Civilization: Beyond Earth, a spiritual successor to Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, visited that game's Wikipedia article to find inspiration? Sven Manguard Wha? 20:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know how one would go about citing a magazine coverdisc? In my case, I need to cite the coverdisc of PC Gamer UK issue 193, which contains a "making of" video relevant to a fan expansion of Thief II: The Metal Age. The making of is available online, but it's fan-made and unpublished. The coverdisc version is the only notable one. Any advice would be appreciated. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 20:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I've been wondering, do we really need Reception charts for multiple consoles? Because someone called 86.138.44.2 has gone and changed the multiple-console Reception charts! I've seen the changes in Oni, Enter the Matrix and The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. He is changing the Reception charts for that matter. But do we really need them? -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 16:26, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I am by no means trying to end the discussion above, but many, such as @ Czar:, @ Favre1fan93:, and myself, also are interested in the specific order the scores should be listed. I have always done it alphabetically. I am going to open a poll to find out which you guys think is better. Remember though that polling is NOT a substitute for discussion. Along with these options, feel free to add your own. These are just the three most prominent I have seen. Also, a few raised the question above as to whether the console should be in parenthesis. I think because the (# reviews) will be in parentheses, the console name should not (see infobox example). Rilech ( talk) 15:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
(added option D - Thibbs ( talk) 15:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC))
Nope, because that gets us back to the reason stated at the top of this discussion. - X201 ( talk) 16:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Creating another poll based on the short discussion in Option E above. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 16:37, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I managed to expand the article Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Survivor 2, cited almost everything but the development section is still bare bones. I couldn't find any English interview about the making of the game. Is there somebody skilled in regards to finding Japanese interviews? It could be of great help. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Sorry this has taken a while. - I've finally made the request for a Bot to move the redundant fields from the 11,000+ articles that need it. The request is here. Not sure if they'll be able to take it on, but we'll find out. - X201 ( talk) 08:20, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Update No news basically. Wikipedia Bot request suggested asking at WikiData BotReq. WikiData BotReq haven't replied after request being up for a week. I'm going to start deleting defunct code next month, with the massively improved AWB code that Wikipedia Bot request created for us. - X201 ( talk) 13:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
A few days ago I created the article and subsequent DYK suggestion for Armello, and upcoming indie game that, while totally notable, hasn't gotten a lot of attention (less than 200 hits since the 14th). It's just one of those projects I'd like to see succeed, especially since it has a Kickstarter going, and if anyone wanted to give the DYK a look or suggest a better hook that'd be great. If not, that's fine too, this is just really more for my benefit of knowing I did everything I could to help it out, even if its just a one-day main page plug. (This message is in no way endorsed by League of Geeks. They aren't even paying me in Vegemite for this.) Nall ( talk) 05:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
A user, Come on body, is unhappy with the new format of the list (just as a refresher, the old list was several lists, separated by platform; the new list is a table sorted by name with all the platforms the game was released on). I discussed it here before changing it to the new format. He keeps reverting it to the old list. I can't keep reverting it (because of the 3 revert rule). The current version of the list is his last revert, here. He doesn't seem willing to talk about it. Since I don't think the list is heavily watched, I'm escalating it here. Any ideas on what should be done next? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I would appreciate any help at the Stubcheck Project where we are currently reassessing the Start-Class articles under this WikiProject's scope. Let's move towards our project goal of maintaining a C+ rating on 20% of our articles! Jucchan ( talk) 21:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
While adding some details of PC Gamer UK copies I own to the library today, I discovered that many (not sure if all, but it's certainly not just the major ones) PC Gamer UK reviews and previews back to 12 December 2006 have been imported to the CVG website here. Not sure if this is common knowledge already, but it doesn't seem to be included in the reference library. If it's useful, where would I include it? The Online Resources section that seems most appropriate for PCG articles seems to only deal with Internet Archive links. — Vanderdecken∴ ∫ ξ φ 22:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Could this be a viable topic for an article? They've gotten a good deal of coverage from the gaming media, some mainstream journalists, and in some cases even the creators of the original games PETA's satirize, but this attention tends to be short-lived for each game. Tezero ( talk) 18:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Nah. Try to just add a section to the Peta article on them. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 20:16, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pokémon Channel/archive1
Ian Rose has told me that more support is necessary if the FAC is to escape archival. Come on, WP:VG, I know you can do this. Or if you oppose for some reason, say that. The FAC is just... it's so close but, per how much support is needed, not quite there. Tezero ( talk) 23:36, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Is anybody available to conduct an image review of Grand Theft Auto V's non free content for its FAC? A delegate is requesting an image review done (presumably as a last spot-check before closing). Thanks. CR4ZE ( t • c) 13:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
After two empty Peer Reviews and an FAC which received no supports or opposes before it was closed, I've opened a third Peer Review and would love comments from you with the aim of starting another FAC afterwards. Thanks, Sam Walton ( talk) 16:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
There is some discussion occurring on this article's talk page about some of the sources used to reference the game's release date. In particular, the section closer to the top titled "Wrong release date" and the section about POV and source overkill at the bottom. If anyone else would like to comment there, it would be appreciated. — Tourchiest talk edits 05:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Czar edited an article I had written, taking the GameRankings score from four digits to two, and leaving the comment "Please only use two digits of precision, per Template:Video game reviews/doc#Guidelines".
I disagree with this guideline, because the logic behind it is flawed. It argues that because review scores give two digits, anything after two digits in an aggregate score is extraneous. Aggregate scores, however, aren't review scores; they're a reflection of the review scores. While there isn't a terribly large difference between 91.02 and 91.52, there is still a difference. If GameRankings feels that it is worth expressing the average in four digits, I don't think that we should overrule that. I would like to amend the linked guideline to remove the restriction on digits.
Thoughts? Sven Manguard Wha? 18:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
I have recently created the article Electronic Entertainment Expo 2014. Feel free to add and help me improve it. Thanks for the help! Chambr ( talk) 21:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Well, this is it. hahnchen has placed the dreaded Oppose vote at the FAC page because he considers the inclusion of the table at all to be in violation of WP:GAMEGUIDE. Seeing as he's not going to be the only one to bring that up, I'd like to form some kind of consensus here about what's to be done with the table. Ideally, me posting this will get the issue resolved more quickly, so I'll have more time to address other complaints at the FAC. (Particularly relevant since he isn't the most active editor around.) I mentioned it once here and at the PR, but without any kind of resultant consensus. Time to give it one more shot.
Anyway, these are the general categories of plans of action I can think of:
To everyone considering voting at the FAC, which would you prefer and why? (Per Wikipedia guidelines, anyway. I'd prefer a giant, blatantly copyvio'd picture of all of the Wisps with the text "ANYONE WHO DOESN'T LIKE SONIC COLORS IS A SQUARE" superimposed in giant, hot-pink Comic Sans, but that ain't happening.) Tezero ( talk) 05:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Also worth noting is that indopug has also opposed over the use of primary sources. I believe that, per WP:VG conventions, they're appropriate in context, but if she (?)'s right, I need to know, and if not, I'd like someone to help me convince her and, more importantly, the FAC coordinators, that it isn't a viable reason for opposition. Tezero ( talk) 15:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, the table's pretty much gone. Hop over if you have a chance, everyone. Tezero ( talk) 00:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Is this developer really notable? Bearian ( talk) 20:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
The above article is currently a FA but someone appointed problems. As I know nothing about it to help, I'm wondering if someone can opine at Talk:Ninja Gaiden (Nintendo Entertainment System)#Issues with sources in development and release sections. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 21:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow has been scheduled to go on the main page on May 6th. I've given the article a go over a few times to prepare it for the main page. Would anyone else be willing to look it over to ensure that there are no more outstanding issues? -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 02:47, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
The article Battlefield 5 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Chambr (
talk) 17:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
I've detailed a few problems with this article on its talk page, and am planning to nominate it for an FAR before too long. If anyone's interested in fixing the issues or telling me why I should screw off, please head over there. Tezero ( talk) 21:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
CalvinK has questioned the use of quote citations in Wisp (Sonic), as a tangent to indopug's (IMO unjustified, but lingering) oppose vote based on the use of primary sources. This has been brought up numerous times, including at some of my past GANs and FACs, and we've reached no clear consensus on when and how, if ever, citing game quotes is necessary. If possible, I'd like us to create some kind of standard we can reference in the future rather than having to argue everything longhand. There are only a handful of game characters at the FA level, so this discussion will probably have to rely a fair bit on non-game FA characters' articles. Tezero ( talk) 18:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
This may sound like devil's advocacy, but i believe that all "appearances" should be cited. Yes, plot related information doesn't need to be cited, but that should only apply when presenting the plot, not highlighting when a character appeared. So if there's a "plot" section in media article, it wouldn't be necessary because its based entirely off of a single media which is what the article is about. However, if the same information provided to support the fact that a character appeared in specific media, it would be better to cite sources, even if they are first-party sources.
Keep in mind, we have to target all readers, not people who have played the game. Lucia Black ( talk) 14:33, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a consensus is forming that Appearances sections for game characters should use quotes sparingly, for unexpected or controversial details, and cite the rest to the game itself, if I'm understanding right. Again, this should be a precedent whose influence extends beyond this article and those of other Sonic characters. To other editors, though, please chime in; even if you add no additional arguments, I want to confirm that this actually represents a number of editors' views. (We'll also need a name for it. Hmm. How about Wisps' Law?) Tezero ( talk) 17:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
This has gotten to something of a standstill. Further positions, anyone? Tezero ( talk) 18:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and created a guideline/essay page at Wikipedia:Wisps' Law. Make or discuss changes as necessary, such as if the consensus changes. Tezero ( talk) 02:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Someone has been vandalizing the article with no apparent end in sight, so I'd appreciate it if an admin could deal with it. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 08:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Is anyone else having trouble accessing Gamespot pages on web.archive.org? I've been going through and updating dead links in some articles, and I can't get ANY Gamespot pages to come up, even one's that I personally retrieved when updating in the past. Here's an example from just now when I was trying to update the Super Mario 64 article. But it's throwing the same error for archive urls of Gamespot articles already used in Wikipedia articles. Is anyone else having this problem, or is it maybe on my end? -- chrisFjordson (talk) 22:36, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I just made an archive of a GameSpot page with WebCite, and it worked for me. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 06:16, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, there's a few templates up for discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 March 30#Bohemia Interactive templates which could use some further input. Sam Walton ( talk) 10:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Requesting comments on the topic of adding expansion packs to the list of best-selling PC games. -- Mika1h ( talk) 18:50, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Midtown Madness for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tezero ( talk) 19:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
I seem to be having a disagreement with a couple of editors over Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. I have maintained that the only confirmed platforms at this time are 360 and XB1. Could use some additional input. CR4ZE ( t • c) 11:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I've been tracing some leads to get better magazine coverage for us. Does anyone live in the Oakland, CA Bay Area? I have a few mega-collector contacts there that may let visitors borrow/scan magazines, but I first wanted to check if any of the WTVG regulars actually would actually be interested. czar ♔ 21:01, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if anyone could help track down examples of the quote in other works. It's proving to be a lot harder than I expected, mostly because the custom Google search is filled to the brim with examples of authors using it as a clever title, drowning out actual examples of its use. I'll have to actually manually examine every single website in our RS list to find examples. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 11:41, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
I wonder if there'd be a justification for actually utilizing those titles, perhaps "The phrase has frequently been appropriated for the titles of video game-related articles, such as..." Tezero ( talk) 15:03, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm also 99% positive I remember the King of Dotnia saying it in 3D Dot Game Heroes. - Thibbs ( talk) 15:40, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Hey good memory! I didn't remember that at all. It gave me the idea to check Mariowiki as well, though, and they claim there's a reference to the line in Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D. Then I decided to check the wikia circuit generally and found a claim for the line in a Spiral Knights ad as well as a claim that it appears in Borderlands 2. So OK. This is what I'm seeing for pop culture refs so far:
And that's just kind of a brief looking about online. To me this list is a bit much. Fun looking for 3rd party shout outs, but it seems like it starts to fall afoul of WP:TRIVIA if we list too many... - Thibbs ( talk) 22:54, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Of that list, I think Another Code would be too vague. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 09:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm considering writing an article about the infamous "Robbing the Cradle" mission from Thief: Deadly Shadows, whose contents, development and reception have quite a few third-party sources. It's just too much to fit in the Deadly Shadows article. The only problem is that I know of no other articles on video game levels that I could base this on. I looked up Call of Duty's No Russian and Mario's World 1-1, but no luck. Is there any precedent for this kind of article, or am I on my own? I would really appreciate any advice. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 01:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
It's not mentioned once by name in the game's article as it is. I'd start there and build it out summary style if necessary. czar ♔ 02:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Now I wanna try making the Dam (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) article. :P - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 02:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I think the new "Robbing the Cradle" article could serve as a model for future level articles. (I agree with Hahnchen that "No Russian" would be an obvious level article, and there are a few others I can think of that would be pretty noncontroversial.) Given that apart from this new one we don't really have any articles on individual levels yet, I think the appropriate model for us should have been to analogize from the way WP:TV handles its episode articles. And that's basically exactly how it turned out. Just looking at today's Featured Article, we can see that the structure used is 1 - Plot; 2 - Production; 3 - Reception; 4 - References; 5 - External links. That's closely tracked by "Robbing the Cradle"'s 1 - Overview; 2 - Development; 3 - Reception and legacy; 4 - Notes. So it looks like a good model to me. - Thibbs ( talk) 19:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
( ←) I'm with Serge on this. I'm not as confident that these article topics meet the GNG. Sure, we can cobble together articles on anything that has recurred enough, but topics that haven't been targeted in-depth by even a single feature are going to appear piecemeal and possibly be a target for AfD later down the line. You're welcome to try, but I'd keep this in mind before sinking tons of time. czar ♔ 15:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
We got another image up for Featured Picture candidacy. It's on a gameplay still for the video game Charlie Murder. Go Support or Oppose on the nomination here if you're into that. GamerPro64 03:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello gentle folk. Quick question. Does anyone have any ideas where one might obtain reliable global sales figures for PS2 games? I know VG Chartz is not considered reliable. I've checked the Sources page here at the project, but there's nothing there of much use. I've worked on several PS2 articles of late, and getting sales figures is blind luck; I came across a GameSpot article with rough figures for Cold Fear for example, and some articles have references to Famitsu. But would anyone have any hints on somewhere I could use consistently? Cheers. Bertaut ( talk) 16:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at WIkimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk) 16:52, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
With Fanfest currently going on I have been updating the Eve Online and Expansions of Eve Online articles as they are very much out of date. One thing I noted was that the page Expansions of Eve Online is going to start to fill up rapidly, very soon.
At Fanfest 2014, CCP Seagull announced the the move from a two expansions per year development cycle to ten expansions per year on a rapid release cycle of six weeks per expansion. This is roughly the same speed at which Firefox updates are released.
Because of this I am wondering if the Expansions of Eve Online page should be updated to be similar to Firefox release history or Android version history. In order to keep it clean.
That being said, a lot of the material on EVE Online is out of date or not cited properly. Am I able to take it on myself to update and cite anything I want? The Eve Online page itself is in need of a major rewrite rather than just additions and I would be happy to work on it but I am just wondering how you go about doing something that large.
Astrel ( talk) 07:30, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
The PS1 game Jumping Flash! is currently at the GAN and the only thing standing in the way is its development section. I've been searching the web for hours and I can't find anything on its early development, I'm wondering if anyone has any information they would like to find/give me on its early development? If anyone can help it would be very much appreciated, thanks! ☠ Jag uar ☠ 13:37, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
A quick note, I had to change the header for this section to remove the Wikilink to the game. Something was causing it to break the edit links on this section and all of the ones following it. Might be a bug worth reporting but I'm not sure specifically where to report it. BcRIPster ( talk) 17:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Finally got around to creating this. I realized something during the process, though: PETA's made other browser games that didn't happen to satirize existing ones, but still with an animal rights focus, as expected. These have received little to no press coverage, however, only appearing on PETA's website. How, if at all, should I work them into this article?
(Also, weird thing happened today: New Age Retro Hippie and I both created pages for Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire unbeknownst to each other. I merged mine into his after realizing, and there's an unrelated discussion on the talk page about information speculation that might be worth checking out.) Tezero ( talk) 00:38, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Basically, I tried using the standard Reception box format for multiple consoles in X-Men Legends and The Da Vinci Code, but some guys reverted it back to multiple console reception box formats (like this one for example)! 86.138.44.2 claims that "this is why other video game articles have the standard reception box format rather than the multiple console reception box format because it saves the trouble of having duplicates and misleads to which console is which, like for instance a PS2 score link in an Xbox score, which really is troubling for people as it doesn't really link to the same console score." But Teancum claims, "Don't see why the multi-console review table cannot be used. Stretching it out so tall ruins the flow of the article anyway." Which of these claims is correct, and which Reception box format is the best in reviewing multiple consoles? Please help me! -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 19:14, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Over at the Admin noticeboard there is a discussion ongoing about the Archive.is blacklist. Input is appreciated. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 05:46, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
So, we have as one of our goals to get "20% of articles C-Class or better: 54.4% complete". I'm quite impressed with a statistic Sergecross73 mentioned a few sections ago: that the Square Enix project has 71% of its articles at that standard. That level of completion isn't realistic for us right now, but would anyone want to start a task force or other organized initiative to attain our 20% aspiration? Tezero ( talk) 21:24, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I've been cleaning up Yakuza (video game) and I've been wondering. Should the characters section be kept? I also have some doubts but better leave it to the peer review. Tintor2 ( talk) 15:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Wikiproject Video Games. I started heavily working on this article Good Game a while back, but unfortunately I often struggle with the copyediting side of things. I'm good at collecting sources and doing info dumps, but I just find it hard to get rid of any information once it's in there. I know it is a bit of a mess so I was wondering if anyone would mind going through it and helping me fix it up. I would be really grateful. This is a show I am really passionate for, so as well as Wikipedia having awesome information on a TV show, it would be a personal win as well. :)-- Coin945 ( talk) 19:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm looking for a final review (or two) on the Deathrow FAC, if you can take a moment this Sunday. It's a quick read (maybe even fun?) and doesn't have any boring minutiae. czar ♔ 13:17, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Could either of these two be useful for the Sonic: After the Sequel article? I've never heard of either site, and neither is listed anywhere on WP:VG/RS. The first one's author, Mat Growcott, "has been a long-time member of the gaming press"... according to Mat Growcott, presumably. The second author, Casey Scheld, also looks to have done a decent number of reviews. Not sure if either of these sites is recognized much by its peers, though. I wouldn't be using them for factual information, only to bolster points about the critical consensus regarding the game, similar to how Cheat Code Central was accepted for Big the Cat's article. Tezero ( talk) 03:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
For the same article, I'm aware that forum posts are tolerated if they're deemed reliable, and these are from the developer of the game himself, but this thread details fixing various glitches and things... is that likely to be anything above trivial? Tezero ( talk) 01:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, this is about a videogame developer called "Bplus" with a less than stellar track record: Its past games have not been reviewed well, with typical metacritic scores between 44 and 52: [14], [15], [16], [17].
Now this company has released a new game called "Bit Boy!! Arcade", where there aren't yet enough reviews to warrant a metacritic rating, but it's not looking good either: [18].
This videogame creator has its own promotional page on the web where it seem oblivious to its track record, featuring lots of positive reviews from pages that I have never heard of: [19]. Which is fine, of course they can do whatever they wish on their own website.
But please take a look at this article: Bit Boy!! Arcade. In the section "Reception", the same pattern of only featuring overly positive reviews is present. ("received almost only positive reviews", quickly followed by "universal praisal").
Now I've asked several of the big videogame review sites to review this game. All of them declined. So there are only reviews from small review sites. And these small review websites are all conspicuously positive. So this is a question about "not enough good data". There is data, but it might be tainted, or obscure.
My question: Are there inclusion guidelines how notable a review website must be to be included in a reception section?
Or my question In other words: can I create a videogame that is so obscure as not to be reviewed by the big boys, get a few positive nods from unknown review websites, and then write on my wikipedia article that I've "received almost only positive reviews" and "universal praisal"?
Thanks. Srezz ( talk) 19:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
I like how we have 8 FACs and only 3 GANs. Tezero ( talk) 01:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Speaking of FACs, from oldest to newest:
Please drop by one or more of these, even if it's just for an image/source review- the oldest three especially could use some love, as no one wants to see articles set there for months only to have to take another run at it. -- Pres N 17:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Wisps is in a weird place: it's kept both of its opposes from the beginning (hahnchen still thinks it's not notable and indopug just isn't interested in coming back), but has gone from zero to four five supports. I really wish there was an easy way to clear this up.
Tezero (
talk) 18:24, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm in ur sections, updatin ur FAC lists. I've also added a VG FLC. Incidentally, I saw a confirmation from FAC director Ian Rose as to what exactly you need (generally) to get an FAC promoted- 3 substantive (non-driveby) reviews with supports (usually 4, though), no un-addressed actionable opposes, and source/image reviews. This is similar to FLC, by the way- there it's 3 or 4 supports, no un-addressed actionable opposes, and the FLC director who promotes it has to agree that it's good enough. -- Pres N 18:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
They've affirmed that the site in New Mexico holds the old ET and other Atari carts - it would nice to get some (Free) pictures from the event. -- MASEM ( t) 19:29, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Voilà: commons:Category:Atari video game burial czar ♔ 19:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I just added that I have copies of the books Chrono Trigger and Earthbound from Boss Fight Books ( [20]) to the book section of the reference library and thought I'd post here to 1) let people know if they want information from them (mainly the new interviews are the new information) and 2) remind people that the video game reference library is a thing that exists, and if you have or want bits from physical/digital books/magazines, you should totally post them there/ask people there for them. -- Pres N 21:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Fourth generation video game consoles for instance. All eight of them have had their names changed with no consensus that I can find. They've all had the "s" removed from the end of the title, and I feel like this is not accurately representative of the articles content.-- Sexy Kick 18:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
I have been reviewing this users past some. It seems like he does a lot of blasting through, changing things as he sees fit on pages, not following conventions, etc... when he feels the current versions don't make sense to him and generally upsetting people along the way. I was a bit frustrated to see him fishing for support and in my eyes, miss-characterizing what he's been doing in his message on Smuckola's Talk page. I've invited him both through his and Smuckola's Talk pages to swing over here and engage the community on the subject. I guess we'll see what happens next. BcRIPster ( talk) 22:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
help Can someone help unravel
all these template changes he made?
BcRIPster ( talk) 23:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
I find this rather irritating. I've given InternetMeme 2 formal, stern warnings against changing these very article titles unless he discusses and finds consensus first. He should absolutely know better. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I changed VG History to correct the reverted links. Video game development looks like it as a test stub he built, them merged to VG Industry. The VG Industry changes seem innocuous but should of had some kind of discussion. I left that one alone though for now but honestly it probably needs revisited. On a secondary note, has anyone looked at all of his WP:EASTEREGG edits? I read a dozen or so and it's no wonder he's getting heat from other editors. I've never run into something like this before and I'm not really convinced he's really making valid choices with this sweep he's doing and he's push back on people who revert his changes. I hate being this way, but someone probably needs to escalate this for review by a higher power. I'm going to sit on this overnight and may write up a complaint to WP:ANI for review but I'm really interested in hearing from everyone else. Anyone else have thoughts here? BcRIPster ( talk) 04:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
So why aren't these sitting at "History of video game consoles (x generation)" again? They shouldn't have been moved without consensus czar ♔ 20:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI http://io9.com/ibms-watson-can-now-debate-its-opponents-1571837847 czar ♔ 07:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Some background first: The page List of commercial failures in video gaming has been around forever starting out as a battleground where people commonly posted failure entries for whatever systems and software they wanted to bash (eg, Microsoft vs Sony and everything from Nintendo was a failure, sigh). Given that many of us felt is was a truly viable topic for expansion, there was a significant clean up that also introduced a scope statement to constrain the hardware section of the list. Since then, the hardware part of the page has been pretty stable but ten years later, the software section still doesn't have a similar scope statement.
In light of the recent discussion that was triggered on the talk page on the subject, we've had a couple of opinions, initiated by a complaint from an IP user that did nothing more than post the complaint (sigh). In the ensuing conversation the concept of comparing this to a list of movie failures set me to thinking and I went over to see what the comparable movie pages look like (eg, Box office bomb / List of box office bombs ).
I know we don't have the same level of raw financial data as easily on hand for video games as the movie guys seem to have but I'm inspired by how they've tackled the topic. So, if you're inclined, please stop by and join the discussion. I'm not suggesting some super star go build out a comparable set of pages. I'm just looking for a larger input pool to see where this goes and if we can improve the page quality. Thanks for your patience in reading through this and I'm eager to read everyone's thoughts. BcRIPster ( talk) 19:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Would anyone have any reliable sources to add to this about Cathryn Mataga (born and most often credited as William Mataga) who worked as a video game programmer for more than 20 years for Broderbund, SSI, and more? BOZ ( talk) 17:24, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi everyone. An RfC has been started a couple of weeks ago regarding the possible merger of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sailor Moon. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#RfC. Your input on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 06:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Future are reorganising their web properties, C&VG faces closure. [21] We have around 3000 links to the site. - hahnch e n 18:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
In considering an extreme case such as the present Telltale episodic games (like The Walking Dead: Season Two) where there are multiple episodes and multiple platforms (and arguably multiple regions, NA + EU), I really would like to see if we can find a way to limit how much we have about release dates in the infobox in favor of pushing as much of the excessive (but still verifiable) data to the article's Development section even if this means carving out a table for the most complex cases. TWD may be atypical, but even for a normal multiplatform game, you've got 2 axes: the platform and the region, that can create anywhere from 4 to 12 different release dates, depeneding.
I'm personally one of those that feels that a release "window" is how the industry considers dates - that a game that releases within the same week though not necessarily on the same day across multiple platforms/regions is still being released, for all purposes, "simultaneously", which as such should simply things as they work in the infobox. Rarely is the difference by a day or so going to make a big difference (and where it does, this can be highlighted via sourcing elsewhere). But how to define this to be simpler in the infobox with a set of consistent rules-of-thumb is where I can't easily draw a line. If I had my optimal way, I'd consider the first day of release on any platform in each region to be the primary dates to present, with all other dates summarized later. For remakes (like the resent number of HD ones) that would be appropriate to mark as a separate date step, but things like Apsyr ports of PC games to Mac (as one example) would not be.
The reason is two fold - first, to simply the data in the infobox in the first place. Second, this is to avoid having release date inline references flooding the infobox (look at the source for TWDS2 and you'll see what I mean). Lead sections - including infoboxes - don't need sourcing as long as the sourcing exists elsehwere, and we should always be mentioning the release dates in the Development section, so the sourcing can be offloaded there. -- MASEM ( t) 14:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
L Final Fantasy Dimensions uses the initial release on the infobox, while Final Fantasy IV: The After Years uses the first and last. Both however use a table to list every single episode release. Perhaps that could be a happy medium. Lucia Black ( talk) 16:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
I have created a
new discussion on whether to merge several Pokémon to their respective List of Pokémon articles. I understand that some people may feel reluctant to participate since we just finished the Sonic characters discussion, but I think that this is the optimal time to discuss these articles that come up time and time again in notability discussions.
Jucchan (
talk) 21:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello all. There is currently a discussion at Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters regarding the notability of individual Sonic the Hedgehog characters, and whether or not certain articles should be merged. The thread is " Notability". Best, Mz7 ( talk) 20:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
If people from outside here were invited to participate in this discussion, you can bet they would tell you're being absurd with your memetic misunderstanding of Wikipedia and the articles are perfectly okay. Go and see some average non-VG character article on Wikipedia, randomly. For example, when I purged Bond characters (there used to be like over 100 of the articles there), I wasn't even allowed to do it with Le Chiffre because reasons (the tags are mine, and one article that I created instead of merging is Wai Lin for a comparison) and a quite typical reaction looks like that (but at that point I've already stopped caring). Nobody acts like that, outside of here. That's just a ridicalous level of overzealousness, and a lack of respect for some people's hard work of trying to make proper articles. -- Niemti ( talk) 04:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
There current organization of the pokemon navbox templates is a mess. Considering that there is Pokémon (video game series) and Pokémon (anime), i propose keeping anime/manga information separate from the video games by merging template:Pokémon spin-offs with template:Pokémon and splitting the anime/manga info into template:Pokémon anime and manga. Thoughts? Lucia Black ( talk) 09:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Never heard of such a title to such a user in this wiki project. Nonetheless Everyone can do navbox cleaning, but because this involves making more drastic changes and involving more than one navbox, i thought it would be best to ask the whole wikiproject before making the bold edits myself. Lucia Black ( talk) 10:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I created an article for Luke fon Fabre as I've been playing Abyss and found enough real world information about him. What surprised me is that this is the first Tales character article. There are lists but no articles. Still, I can't work in any other since I don't have much knowledge about the series. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 21:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I made a Google doc listing all of the characters that may or may not need help improving their notability. I left off some that were rather obvious (and included some that were rather obvious), and I think that interested content creators should assist in the effort and take a break from creating new content like I am going to do. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
-- Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 22:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
PlayStation Universe, YouTube, Tekken fansites, Gaming Front, Screw Attack, Joystick Division, Blistered Thumbs. Trust me Niemti, you're on way too high of a horse considering how many flaws existed in articles that you've put so much effort into. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:08, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Anyway, since I suspect that Niemti will seek to destroy any attempt at conversation on the subject, @ Tezero:, @ Czar:, and @ Gabriel Yuji:, I'd like to at the very least work with you all at tightening up the articles. Especially considering how many bad sources exist on a number of these articles. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
@ New Age Retro Hippie: I'll help if you want, but I'm going on Wikibreak (albeit a somewhat short one) as soon as all the discussions and candidacies pertaining to articles I've worked on close, which could be in a few days. Tezero ( talk) 17:11, 21 May 2014 (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.
User:Niemti has recently gotten into a dispute with me over the validity of certain sources. Instead of attempting to have them listed on the video games reliable sources page, he has declined to even defend them on their own merits. This, on top of Niemti's characteristic bad attitude and behaviour, strikes as Niemti yet again doing the things that got him in trouble in the first place. I'd like to open a discussion on the user and what to do about the behaviour. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Niemti#Mileena This thread is pretty hilarious. My favourite parts is how my rhetorical proposal to delete almost all Amiga references was taken seriously like if it was a proper thing to do, and how Ada Wong's article from 2010 (with "no" fansite sources! nope, no sir!) was GA-worthy stuff but then I came and "made the article poorly". -- Niemti ( talk) 20:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
At over three and a half million words, this Super Smash Bros. Brawl fanfic is the longest of its medium ever written and surpasses numerous works of "real" literature well-esteemed for their loquacious nature. I'm thinking of creating an article for it, but I can only find four sources that look like they could be reliable - they're all (except the last) rather in-depth, though:
The only one of those I know for sure will be reliable is Kotaku... Perhaps there's more out there I just haven't been patient enough to come across. Tezero ( talk) 03:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Here's a link. Per suggestions, it's on a new subpage of the project's talk page so no one has to dirty their eyes. Tezero ( talk) 03:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm biased because I'm a fan, and I definitely do not want my name involved with this to avoid revenge by the fandom. Please take action as needed, probably an PROD, followed by an AfD with a "not a vote" banner. If you delete/nominate this, please make sure to have your user and talk page semi-protected for a month, and hopefully your Wikipedia account isn't linked to anything off-site. Siglemic's fans are currently posting this in chat (guess how I found out about it?), whatever happend to it WILL be noticed. Take care! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:02, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I was digging around in the WTVG archives for another discussion and I came upon this discussion about a WPVG content creation competition, which sounded interesting but didn't get off the ground for want of organization. Would anyone be interested in something similar? Or a summer ("Q2", for X201 ho ho) competition? I was thinking something like restoring demoted FAs and GAs instead of something full blown like a GameCup, but I wanted to take a temperature read. Thoughts? czar ♔ 05:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Does Anna maree manciet pass GNG? I don't know what sufficient coverage is for a gamer, but Icepheonix5 is creating the page on behalf of her and it has been CSDed per A7. Thanks. Jamesx 12345 08:58, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
You can find her website here http://www.annamaree.com/ Icepheonix5 ( talk) 09:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to request feedback from the quorum at the TFD for Infobox StarCraft character and the TFD for Infobox Metal Gear character. They are modules used only in video game articles. A TFD for a similar template, Infobox Sonic character, closed as delete. -- Izno ( talk) 17:53, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Is anyone still using Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion? I think it's being maintained for no one since article alerts supplant its helpfulness, and AA are automatic. Any opposition to marking it as historical? czar ♔ 17:36, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
It looks like GameSpot might have enabled robots.txt. Hopefully a false alarm. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 19:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
# New additions. April 3, 2014.
# Too many bots, being bad.
☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I realize I may have given the wrong impression when I talked about Wikipedia's policy. I was referring to the policy against linking to direct image scans of copyrighted sites rather than its policy in favor of web archives. Tezero ( talk) 20:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm late to this, since I've been horrible at checking discussions these days, but does adding robot.txt actually wipe the archive or just make them unviewable? Similar instances to this have led me to wonder if the Wayback Machine could change their implementation to only disallow archives from the point after robots.txt was first encountered, unless of course this is their intended behavior. At least in this instance it's the same website, but this behavior seems particularly wrong when a domain name completely changes its owner and focus. — Ost ( talk) 17:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Archive site | Bookmarklet |
---|---|
Archive.org | javascript:void(window.open('https://web.archive.org/save/'+location.href))
|
WebCite | javascript:void(window.open('http://www.webcitation.org/archive?url='+escape(location.href)+'&email=YourEmailAddress@Here.com'))
|
Similarly, I'm having trouble archiving http://www.1up.com/reviews/saints-row-the-third-pc-ps3-xbox360 and [23]. Any ideas? czar ♔ 02:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Although I can't see any update to Gamespot's robots.txt, the Internet Archive is displaying Gamespot's archive up to and including today. https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.gamespot.com I have no idea whether this is a bug or by design, so if you are relying on any Gamespot references, send them through WebCite even if they're already archived. - hahnch e n 13:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, looking for some opinions. There is currently no article for Half-Life 3, likely almost entirely because of WP:CRYSTAL; there is no official announcement from Valve that the game is coming out or even being worked on. That said, there is a huge amount of reliable source coverage of the potential game, with every speculation, interview, and rumour getting a story on sites like IGN, Kotaku, and PC Gamer. After a fresh rumour of the game being worked on I thought I'd try writing an article to see how it went. The result of my efforts is here and I wanted to get some thoughts on it. Though I definitely haven't written everything that could be, do you think it's sufficient as an article considering the large amount of reliable source coverage, or is it all too speculative? Sam Walton ( talk) 20:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Not all the content is useless, there are plenty of sources discussing the lack of official word on the game. I also just found an 'official' confirmation from Valve from 2006 that the game would be released, by the way: [24] Sam Walton ( talk) 10:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make it a standalone article, make it at Development of Half-Life 3. That way, it does not imply that it is a confirmed existence. We have been working at the Film project on this idea, for high-profile films that have substantial info out, but have yet to enter production. Just a possible idea if going the article route. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 22:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Is it worth starting an RfC for this? It seems to me that there are arguments to be made on both sides and a more formal process for this discussion might help, along with outside editor's input. Sam Walton ( talk) 15:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
There's no reason to have an individual article on HL3. Not including speculation, what can you tell me about it? Nothing, but because there is no known information known about it, which Draft:Half-Life 3 pretty much is. Before having an WP:RFC, try getting WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOTNEWS removed first which removes any chance of this article existing right now.-- Vaypertrail ( talk) 19:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
gr360
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).grps3
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).mc360
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).mcps3
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).DESreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).EDGEreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).EGreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).FAMreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).OPMreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).GIreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).GSreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).IGNreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).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 100 | ← | Archive 103 | Archive 104 | Archive 105 | Archive 106 | Archive 107 | → | Archive 110 |
Aggregator | Score |
---|---|
GameRankings | X360 - 70.47% (# reviews)
[1] PS3 – 66.15% (#reviews) [2] |
Metacritic | X360 - 69/100 (# reviews)
[3] PS3 - 66/100 (# reviews) [4] |
Publication | Score |
---|---|
Destructoid | 7.5/10 [5] |
Edge | 6/10 [6] |
Eurogamer | 8/10 [7] |
Famitsu | 37/40 [8] |
Game Informer | 7/10 [10] |
GameSpot | 5/10 [11] |
IGN | 7/10 [12] |
PlayStation Official Magazine – UK | 6/10 [9] |
I want to see what you guys think about a possible mass edit.
“ | The first thing we did was go on Wikipedia to the Alpha Centauri webpage, and it has the books that Brian Reynolds and his team read, so we read those, and that was our starting point. | ” |
— PC Gamer interview |
Good work guys. - hahnch e n 16:36, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Now a DYK nominee: Did you know ... that the team developing Civilization: Beyond Earth, a spiritual successor to Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, visited that game's Wikipedia article to find inspiration? Sven Manguard Wha? 20:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know how one would go about citing a magazine coverdisc? In my case, I need to cite the coverdisc of PC Gamer UK issue 193, which contains a "making of" video relevant to a fan expansion of Thief II: The Metal Age. The making of is available online, but it's fan-made and unpublished. The coverdisc version is the only notable one. Any advice would be appreciated. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 20:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I've been wondering, do we really need Reception charts for multiple consoles? Because someone called 86.138.44.2 has gone and changed the multiple-console Reception charts! I've seen the changes in Oni, Enter the Matrix and The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. He is changing the Reception charts for that matter. But do we really need them? -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 16:26, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I am by no means trying to end the discussion above, but many, such as @ Czar:, @ Favre1fan93:, and myself, also are interested in the specific order the scores should be listed. I have always done it alphabetically. I am going to open a poll to find out which you guys think is better. Remember though that polling is NOT a substitute for discussion. Along with these options, feel free to add your own. These are just the three most prominent I have seen. Also, a few raised the question above as to whether the console should be in parenthesis. I think because the (# reviews) will be in parentheses, the console name should not (see infobox example). Rilech ( talk) 15:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
(added option D - Thibbs ( talk) 15:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC))
Nope, because that gets us back to the reason stated at the top of this discussion. - X201 ( talk) 16:11, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Creating another poll based on the short discussion in Option E above. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 16:37, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I managed to expand the article Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Survivor 2, cited almost everything but the development section is still bare bones. I couldn't find any English interview about the making of the game. Is there somebody skilled in regards to finding Japanese interviews? It could be of great help. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Sorry this has taken a while. - I've finally made the request for a Bot to move the redundant fields from the 11,000+ articles that need it. The request is here. Not sure if they'll be able to take it on, but we'll find out. - X201 ( talk) 08:20, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Update No news basically. Wikipedia Bot request suggested asking at WikiData BotReq. WikiData BotReq haven't replied after request being up for a week. I'm going to start deleting defunct code next month, with the massively improved AWB code that Wikipedia Bot request created for us. - X201 ( talk) 13:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
A few days ago I created the article and subsequent DYK suggestion for Armello, and upcoming indie game that, while totally notable, hasn't gotten a lot of attention (less than 200 hits since the 14th). It's just one of those projects I'd like to see succeed, especially since it has a Kickstarter going, and if anyone wanted to give the DYK a look or suggest a better hook that'd be great. If not, that's fine too, this is just really more for my benefit of knowing I did everything I could to help it out, even if its just a one-day main page plug. (This message is in no way endorsed by League of Geeks. They aren't even paying me in Vegemite for this.) Nall ( talk) 05:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
A user, Come on body, is unhappy with the new format of the list (just as a refresher, the old list was several lists, separated by platform; the new list is a table sorted by name with all the platforms the game was released on). I discussed it here before changing it to the new format. He keeps reverting it to the old list. I can't keep reverting it (because of the 3 revert rule). The current version of the list is his last revert, here. He doesn't seem willing to talk about it. Since I don't think the list is heavily watched, I'm escalating it here. Any ideas on what should be done next? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I would appreciate any help at the Stubcheck Project where we are currently reassessing the Start-Class articles under this WikiProject's scope. Let's move towards our project goal of maintaining a C+ rating on 20% of our articles! Jucchan ( talk) 21:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
While adding some details of PC Gamer UK copies I own to the library today, I discovered that many (not sure if all, but it's certainly not just the major ones) PC Gamer UK reviews and previews back to 12 December 2006 have been imported to the CVG website here. Not sure if this is common knowledge already, but it doesn't seem to be included in the reference library. If it's useful, where would I include it? The Online Resources section that seems most appropriate for PCG articles seems to only deal with Internet Archive links. — Vanderdecken∴ ∫ ξ φ 22:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Could this be a viable topic for an article? They've gotten a good deal of coverage from the gaming media, some mainstream journalists, and in some cases even the creators of the original games PETA's satirize, but this attention tends to be short-lived for each game. Tezero ( talk) 18:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Nah. Try to just add a section to the Peta article on them. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 20:16, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pokémon Channel/archive1
Ian Rose has told me that more support is necessary if the FAC is to escape archival. Come on, WP:VG, I know you can do this. Or if you oppose for some reason, say that. The FAC is just... it's so close but, per how much support is needed, not quite there. Tezero ( talk) 23:36, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Is anybody available to conduct an image review of Grand Theft Auto V's non free content for its FAC? A delegate is requesting an image review done (presumably as a last spot-check before closing). Thanks. CR4ZE ( t • c) 13:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
After two empty Peer Reviews and an FAC which received no supports or opposes before it was closed, I've opened a third Peer Review and would love comments from you with the aim of starting another FAC afterwards. Thanks, Sam Walton ( talk) 16:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
There is some discussion occurring on this article's talk page about some of the sources used to reference the game's release date. In particular, the section closer to the top titled "Wrong release date" and the section about POV and source overkill at the bottom. If anyone else would like to comment there, it would be appreciated. — Tourchiest talk edits 05:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Czar edited an article I had written, taking the GameRankings score from four digits to two, and leaving the comment "Please only use two digits of precision, per Template:Video game reviews/doc#Guidelines".
I disagree with this guideline, because the logic behind it is flawed. It argues that because review scores give two digits, anything after two digits in an aggregate score is extraneous. Aggregate scores, however, aren't review scores; they're a reflection of the review scores. While there isn't a terribly large difference between 91.02 and 91.52, there is still a difference. If GameRankings feels that it is worth expressing the average in four digits, I don't think that we should overrule that. I would like to amend the linked guideline to remove the restriction on digits.
Thoughts? Sven Manguard Wha? 18:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
I have recently created the article Electronic Entertainment Expo 2014. Feel free to add and help me improve it. Thanks for the help! Chambr ( talk) 21:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Well, this is it. hahnchen has placed the dreaded Oppose vote at the FAC page because he considers the inclusion of the table at all to be in violation of WP:GAMEGUIDE. Seeing as he's not going to be the only one to bring that up, I'd like to form some kind of consensus here about what's to be done with the table. Ideally, me posting this will get the issue resolved more quickly, so I'll have more time to address other complaints at the FAC. (Particularly relevant since he isn't the most active editor around.) I mentioned it once here and at the PR, but without any kind of resultant consensus. Time to give it one more shot.
Anyway, these are the general categories of plans of action I can think of:
To everyone considering voting at the FAC, which would you prefer and why? (Per Wikipedia guidelines, anyway. I'd prefer a giant, blatantly copyvio'd picture of all of the Wisps with the text "ANYONE WHO DOESN'T LIKE SONIC COLORS IS A SQUARE" superimposed in giant, hot-pink Comic Sans, but that ain't happening.) Tezero ( talk) 05:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Also worth noting is that indopug has also opposed over the use of primary sources. I believe that, per WP:VG conventions, they're appropriate in context, but if she (?)'s right, I need to know, and if not, I'd like someone to help me convince her and, more importantly, the FAC coordinators, that it isn't a viable reason for opposition. Tezero ( talk) 15:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, the table's pretty much gone. Hop over if you have a chance, everyone. Tezero ( talk) 00:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Is this developer really notable? Bearian ( talk) 20:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
The above article is currently a FA but someone appointed problems. As I know nothing about it to help, I'm wondering if someone can opine at Talk:Ninja Gaiden (Nintendo Entertainment System)#Issues with sources in development and release sections. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 21:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow has been scheduled to go on the main page on May 6th. I've given the article a go over a few times to prepare it for the main page. Would anyone else be willing to look it over to ensure that there are no more outstanding issues? -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 02:47, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
The article Battlefield 5 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Chambr (
talk) 17:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
I've detailed a few problems with this article on its talk page, and am planning to nominate it for an FAR before too long. If anyone's interested in fixing the issues or telling me why I should screw off, please head over there. Tezero ( talk) 21:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
CalvinK has questioned the use of quote citations in Wisp (Sonic), as a tangent to indopug's (IMO unjustified, but lingering) oppose vote based on the use of primary sources. This has been brought up numerous times, including at some of my past GANs and FACs, and we've reached no clear consensus on when and how, if ever, citing game quotes is necessary. If possible, I'd like us to create some kind of standard we can reference in the future rather than having to argue everything longhand. There are only a handful of game characters at the FA level, so this discussion will probably have to rely a fair bit on non-game FA characters' articles. Tezero ( talk) 18:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
This may sound like devil's advocacy, but i believe that all "appearances" should be cited. Yes, plot related information doesn't need to be cited, but that should only apply when presenting the plot, not highlighting when a character appeared. So if there's a "plot" section in media article, it wouldn't be necessary because its based entirely off of a single media which is what the article is about. However, if the same information provided to support the fact that a character appeared in specific media, it would be better to cite sources, even if they are first-party sources.
Keep in mind, we have to target all readers, not people who have played the game. Lucia Black ( talk) 14:33, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a consensus is forming that Appearances sections for game characters should use quotes sparingly, for unexpected or controversial details, and cite the rest to the game itself, if I'm understanding right. Again, this should be a precedent whose influence extends beyond this article and those of other Sonic characters. To other editors, though, please chime in; even if you add no additional arguments, I want to confirm that this actually represents a number of editors' views. (We'll also need a name for it. Hmm. How about Wisps' Law?) Tezero ( talk) 17:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
This has gotten to something of a standstill. Further positions, anyone? Tezero ( talk) 18:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and created a guideline/essay page at Wikipedia:Wisps' Law. Make or discuss changes as necessary, such as if the consensus changes. Tezero ( talk) 02:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Someone has been vandalizing the article with no apparent end in sight, so I'd appreciate it if an admin could deal with it. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 08:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Is anyone else having trouble accessing Gamespot pages on web.archive.org? I've been going through and updating dead links in some articles, and I can't get ANY Gamespot pages to come up, even one's that I personally retrieved when updating in the past. Here's an example from just now when I was trying to update the Super Mario 64 article. But it's throwing the same error for archive urls of Gamespot articles already used in Wikipedia articles. Is anyone else having this problem, or is it maybe on my end? -- chrisFjordson (talk) 22:36, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I just made an archive of a GameSpot page with WebCite, and it worked for me. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 06:16, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, there's a few templates up for discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 March 30#Bohemia Interactive templates which could use some further input. Sam Walton ( talk) 10:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Requesting comments on the topic of adding expansion packs to the list of best-selling PC games. -- Mika1h ( talk) 18:50, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Midtown Madness for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tezero ( talk) 19:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
I seem to be having a disagreement with a couple of editors over Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare. I have maintained that the only confirmed platforms at this time are 360 and XB1. Could use some additional input. CR4ZE ( t • c) 11:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
I've been tracing some leads to get better magazine coverage for us. Does anyone live in the Oakland, CA Bay Area? I have a few mega-collector contacts there that may let visitors borrow/scan magazines, but I first wanted to check if any of the WTVG regulars actually would actually be interested. czar ♔ 21:01, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if anyone could help track down examples of the quote in other works. It's proving to be a lot harder than I expected, mostly because the custom Google search is filled to the brim with examples of authors using it as a clever title, drowning out actual examples of its use. I'll have to actually manually examine every single website in our RS list to find examples. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 11:41, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
I wonder if there'd be a justification for actually utilizing those titles, perhaps "The phrase has frequently been appropriated for the titles of video game-related articles, such as..." Tezero ( talk) 15:03, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm also 99% positive I remember the King of Dotnia saying it in 3D Dot Game Heroes. - Thibbs ( talk) 15:40, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Hey good memory! I didn't remember that at all. It gave me the idea to check Mariowiki as well, though, and they claim there's a reference to the line in Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D. Then I decided to check the wikia circuit generally and found a claim for the line in a Spiral Knights ad as well as a claim that it appears in Borderlands 2. So OK. This is what I'm seeing for pop culture refs so far:
And that's just kind of a brief looking about online. To me this list is a bit much. Fun looking for 3rd party shout outs, but it seems like it starts to fall afoul of WP:TRIVIA if we list too many... - Thibbs ( talk) 22:54, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Of that list, I think Another Code would be too vague. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 09:37, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm considering writing an article about the infamous "Robbing the Cradle" mission from Thief: Deadly Shadows, whose contents, development and reception have quite a few third-party sources. It's just too much to fit in the Deadly Shadows article. The only problem is that I know of no other articles on video game levels that I could base this on. I looked up Call of Duty's No Russian and Mario's World 1-1, but no luck. Is there any precedent for this kind of article, or am I on my own? I would really appreciate any advice. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 01:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
It's not mentioned once by name in the game's article as it is. I'd start there and build it out summary style if necessary. czar ♔ 02:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Now I wanna try making the Dam (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) article. :P - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 02:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I think the new "Robbing the Cradle" article could serve as a model for future level articles. (I agree with Hahnchen that "No Russian" would be an obvious level article, and there are a few others I can think of that would be pretty noncontroversial.) Given that apart from this new one we don't really have any articles on individual levels yet, I think the appropriate model for us should have been to analogize from the way WP:TV handles its episode articles. And that's basically exactly how it turned out. Just looking at today's Featured Article, we can see that the structure used is 1 - Plot; 2 - Production; 3 - Reception; 4 - References; 5 - External links. That's closely tracked by "Robbing the Cradle"'s 1 - Overview; 2 - Development; 3 - Reception and legacy; 4 - Notes. So it looks like a good model to me. - Thibbs ( talk) 19:37, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
( ←) I'm with Serge on this. I'm not as confident that these article topics meet the GNG. Sure, we can cobble together articles on anything that has recurred enough, but topics that haven't been targeted in-depth by even a single feature are going to appear piecemeal and possibly be a target for AfD later down the line. You're welcome to try, but I'd keep this in mind before sinking tons of time. czar ♔ 15:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
We got another image up for Featured Picture candidacy. It's on a gameplay still for the video game Charlie Murder. Go Support or Oppose on the nomination here if you're into that. GamerPro64 03:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello gentle folk. Quick question. Does anyone have any ideas where one might obtain reliable global sales figures for PS2 games? I know VG Chartz is not considered reliable. I've checked the Sources page here at the project, but there's nothing there of much use. I've worked on several PS2 articles of late, and getting sales figures is blind luck; I came across a GameSpot article with rough figures for Cold Fear for example, and some articles have references to Famitsu. But would anyone have any hints on somewhere I could use consistently? Cheers. Bertaut ( talk) 16:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at WIkimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk) 16:52, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
With Fanfest currently going on I have been updating the Eve Online and Expansions of Eve Online articles as they are very much out of date. One thing I noted was that the page Expansions of Eve Online is going to start to fill up rapidly, very soon.
At Fanfest 2014, CCP Seagull announced the the move from a two expansions per year development cycle to ten expansions per year on a rapid release cycle of six weeks per expansion. This is roughly the same speed at which Firefox updates are released.
Because of this I am wondering if the Expansions of Eve Online page should be updated to be similar to Firefox release history or Android version history. In order to keep it clean.
That being said, a lot of the material on EVE Online is out of date or not cited properly. Am I able to take it on myself to update and cite anything I want? The Eve Online page itself is in need of a major rewrite rather than just additions and I would be happy to work on it but I am just wondering how you go about doing something that large.
Astrel ( talk) 07:30, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
The PS1 game Jumping Flash! is currently at the GAN and the only thing standing in the way is its development section. I've been searching the web for hours and I can't find anything on its early development, I'm wondering if anyone has any information they would like to find/give me on its early development? If anyone can help it would be very much appreciated, thanks! ☠ Jag uar ☠ 13:37, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
A quick note, I had to change the header for this section to remove the Wikilink to the game. Something was causing it to break the edit links on this section and all of the ones following it. Might be a bug worth reporting but I'm not sure specifically where to report it. BcRIPster ( talk) 17:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Finally got around to creating this. I realized something during the process, though: PETA's made other browser games that didn't happen to satirize existing ones, but still with an animal rights focus, as expected. These have received little to no press coverage, however, only appearing on PETA's website. How, if at all, should I work them into this article?
(Also, weird thing happened today: New Age Retro Hippie and I both created pages for Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire unbeknownst to each other. I merged mine into his after realizing, and there's an unrelated discussion on the talk page about information speculation that might be worth checking out.) Tezero ( talk) 00:38, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Basically, I tried using the standard Reception box format for multiple consoles in X-Men Legends and The Da Vinci Code, but some guys reverted it back to multiple console reception box formats (like this one for example)! 86.138.44.2 claims that "this is why other video game articles have the standard reception box format rather than the multiple console reception box format because it saves the trouble of having duplicates and misleads to which console is which, like for instance a PS2 score link in an Xbox score, which really is troubling for people as it doesn't really link to the same console score." But Teancum claims, "Don't see why the multi-console review table cannot be used. Stretching it out so tall ruins the flow of the article anyway." Which of these claims is correct, and which Reception box format is the best in reviewing multiple consoles? Please help me! -- Angeldeb82 ( talk) 19:14, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Over at the Admin noticeboard there is a discussion ongoing about the Archive.is blacklist. Input is appreciated. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 05:46, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
So, we have as one of our goals to get "20% of articles C-Class or better: 54.4% complete". I'm quite impressed with a statistic Sergecross73 mentioned a few sections ago: that the Square Enix project has 71% of its articles at that standard. That level of completion isn't realistic for us right now, but would anyone want to start a task force or other organized initiative to attain our 20% aspiration? Tezero ( talk) 21:24, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I've been cleaning up Yakuza (video game) and I've been wondering. Should the characters section be kept? I also have some doubts but better leave it to the peer review. Tintor2 ( talk) 15:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Wikiproject Video Games. I started heavily working on this article Good Game a while back, but unfortunately I often struggle with the copyediting side of things. I'm good at collecting sources and doing info dumps, but I just find it hard to get rid of any information once it's in there. I know it is a bit of a mess so I was wondering if anyone would mind going through it and helping me fix it up. I would be really grateful. This is a show I am really passionate for, so as well as Wikipedia having awesome information on a TV show, it would be a personal win as well. :)-- Coin945 ( talk) 19:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm looking for a final review (or two) on the Deathrow FAC, if you can take a moment this Sunday. It's a quick read (maybe even fun?) and doesn't have any boring minutiae. czar ♔ 13:17, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Could either of these two be useful for the Sonic: After the Sequel article? I've never heard of either site, and neither is listed anywhere on WP:VG/RS. The first one's author, Mat Growcott, "has been a long-time member of the gaming press"... according to Mat Growcott, presumably. The second author, Casey Scheld, also looks to have done a decent number of reviews. Not sure if either of these sites is recognized much by its peers, though. I wouldn't be using them for factual information, only to bolster points about the critical consensus regarding the game, similar to how Cheat Code Central was accepted for Big the Cat's article. Tezero ( talk) 03:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
For the same article, I'm aware that forum posts are tolerated if they're deemed reliable, and these are from the developer of the game himself, but this thread details fixing various glitches and things... is that likely to be anything above trivial? Tezero ( talk) 01:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, this is about a videogame developer called "Bplus" with a less than stellar track record: Its past games have not been reviewed well, with typical metacritic scores between 44 and 52: [14], [15], [16], [17].
Now this company has released a new game called "Bit Boy!! Arcade", where there aren't yet enough reviews to warrant a metacritic rating, but it's not looking good either: [18].
This videogame creator has its own promotional page on the web where it seem oblivious to its track record, featuring lots of positive reviews from pages that I have never heard of: [19]. Which is fine, of course they can do whatever they wish on their own website.
But please take a look at this article: Bit Boy!! Arcade. In the section "Reception", the same pattern of only featuring overly positive reviews is present. ("received almost only positive reviews", quickly followed by "universal praisal").
Now I've asked several of the big videogame review sites to review this game. All of them declined. So there are only reviews from small review sites. And these small review websites are all conspicuously positive. So this is a question about "not enough good data". There is data, but it might be tainted, or obscure.
My question: Are there inclusion guidelines how notable a review website must be to be included in a reception section?
Or my question In other words: can I create a videogame that is so obscure as not to be reviewed by the big boys, get a few positive nods from unknown review websites, and then write on my wikipedia article that I've "received almost only positive reviews" and "universal praisal"?
Thanks. Srezz ( talk) 19:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
I like how we have 8 FACs and only 3 GANs. Tezero ( talk) 01:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Speaking of FACs, from oldest to newest:
Please drop by one or more of these, even if it's just for an image/source review- the oldest three especially could use some love, as no one wants to see articles set there for months only to have to take another run at it. -- Pres N 17:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Wisps is in a weird place: it's kept both of its opposes from the beginning (hahnchen still thinks it's not notable and indopug just isn't interested in coming back), but has gone from zero to four five supports. I really wish there was an easy way to clear this up.
Tezero (
talk) 18:24, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm in ur sections, updatin ur FAC lists. I've also added a VG FLC. Incidentally, I saw a confirmation from FAC director Ian Rose as to what exactly you need (generally) to get an FAC promoted- 3 substantive (non-driveby) reviews with supports (usually 4, though), no un-addressed actionable opposes, and source/image reviews. This is similar to FLC, by the way- there it's 3 or 4 supports, no un-addressed actionable opposes, and the FLC director who promotes it has to agree that it's good enough. -- Pres N 18:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
They've affirmed that the site in New Mexico holds the old ET and other Atari carts - it would nice to get some (Free) pictures from the event. -- MASEM ( t) 19:29, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Voilà: commons:Category:Atari video game burial czar ♔ 19:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I just added that I have copies of the books Chrono Trigger and Earthbound from Boss Fight Books ( [20]) to the book section of the reference library and thought I'd post here to 1) let people know if they want information from them (mainly the new interviews are the new information) and 2) remind people that the video game reference library is a thing that exists, and if you have or want bits from physical/digital books/magazines, you should totally post them there/ask people there for them. -- Pres N 21:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Fourth generation video game consoles for instance. All eight of them have had their names changed with no consensus that I can find. They've all had the "s" removed from the end of the title, and I feel like this is not accurately representative of the articles content.-- Sexy Kick 18:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
I have been reviewing this users past some. It seems like he does a lot of blasting through, changing things as he sees fit on pages, not following conventions, etc... when he feels the current versions don't make sense to him and generally upsetting people along the way. I was a bit frustrated to see him fishing for support and in my eyes, miss-characterizing what he's been doing in his message on Smuckola's Talk page. I've invited him both through his and Smuckola's Talk pages to swing over here and engage the community on the subject. I guess we'll see what happens next. BcRIPster ( talk) 22:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
help Can someone help unravel
all these template changes he made?
BcRIPster ( talk) 23:02, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
I find this rather irritating. I've given InternetMeme 2 formal, stern warnings against changing these very article titles unless he discusses and finds consensus first. He should absolutely know better. Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I changed VG History to correct the reverted links. Video game development looks like it as a test stub he built, them merged to VG Industry. The VG Industry changes seem innocuous but should of had some kind of discussion. I left that one alone though for now but honestly it probably needs revisited. On a secondary note, has anyone looked at all of his WP:EASTEREGG edits? I read a dozen or so and it's no wonder he's getting heat from other editors. I've never run into something like this before and I'm not really convinced he's really making valid choices with this sweep he's doing and he's push back on people who revert his changes. I hate being this way, but someone probably needs to escalate this for review by a higher power. I'm going to sit on this overnight and may write up a complaint to WP:ANI for review but I'm really interested in hearing from everyone else. Anyone else have thoughts here? BcRIPster ( talk) 04:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
So why aren't these sitting at "History of video game consoles (x generation)" again? They shouldn't have been moved without consensus czar ♔ 20:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI http://io9.com/ibms-watson-can-now-debate-its-opponents-1571837847 czar ♔ 07:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Some background first: The page List of commercial failures in video gaming has been around forever starting out as a battleground where people commonly posted failure entries for whatever systems and software they wanted to bash (eg, Microsoft vs Sony and everything from Nintendo was a failure, sigh). Given that many of us felt is was a truly viable topic for expansion, there was a significant clean up that also introduced a scope statement to constrain the hardware section of the list. Since then, the hardware part of the page has been pretty stable but ten years later, the software section still doesn't have a similar scope statement.
In light of the recent discussion that was triggered on the talk page on the subject, we've had a couple of opinions, initiated by a complaint from an IP user that did nothing more than post the complaint (sigh). In the ensuing conversation the concept of comparing this to a list of movie failures set me to thinking and I went over to see what the comparable movie pages look like (eg, Box office bomb / List of box office bombs ).
I know we don't have the same level of raw financial data as easily on hand for video games as the movie guys seem to have but I'm inspired by how they've tackled the topic. So, if you're inclined, please stop by and join the discussion. I'm not suggesting some super star go build out a comparable set of pages. I'm just looking for a larger input pool to see where this goes and if we can improve the page quality. Thanks for your patience in reading through this and I'm eager to read everyone's thoughts. BcRIPster ( talk) 19:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Would anyone have any reliable sources to add to this about Cathryn Mataga (born and most often credited as William Mataga) who worked as a video game programmer for more than 20 years for Broderbund, SSI, and more? BOZ ( talk) 17:24, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi everyone. An RfC has been started a couple of weeks ago regarding the possible merger of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sailor Moon. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#RfC. Your input on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 06:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Future are reorganising their web properties, C&VG faces closure. [21] We have around 3000 links to the site. - hahnch e n 18:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
In considering an extreme case such as the present Telltale episodic games (like The Walking Dead: Season Two) where there are multiple episodes and multiple platforms (and arguably multiple regions, NA + EU), I really would like to see if we can find a way to limit how much we have about release dates in the infobox in favor of pushing as much of the excessive (but still verifiable) data to the article's Development section even if this means carving out a table for the most complex cases. TWD may be atypical, but even for a normal multiplatform game, you've got 2 axes: the platform and the region, that can create anywhere from 4 to 12 different release dates, depeneding.
I'm personally one of those that feels that a release "window" is how the industry considers dates - that a game that releases within the same week though not necessarily on the same day across multiple platforms/regions is still being released, for all purposes, "simultaneously", which as such should simply things as they work in the infobox. Rarely is the difference by a day or so going to make a big difference (and where it does, this can be highlighted via sourcing elsewhere). But how to define this to be simpler in the infobox with a set of consistent rules-of-thumb is where I can't easily draw a line. If I had my optimal way, I'd consider the first day of release on any platform in each region to be the primary dates to present, with all other dates summarized later. For remakes (like the resent number of HD ones) that would be appropriate to mark as a separate date step, but things like Apsyr ports of PC games to Mac (as one example) would not be.
The reason is two fold - first, to simply the data in the infobox in the first place. Second, this is to avoid having release date inline references flooding the infobox (look at the source for TWDS2 and you'll see what I mean). Lead sections - including infoboxes - don't need sourcing as long as the sourcing exists elsehwere, and we should always be mentioning the release dates in the Development section, so the sourcing can be offloaded there. -- MASEM ( t) 14:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
L Final Fantasy Dimensions uses the initial release on the infobox, while Final Fantasy IV: The After Years uses the first and last. Both however use a table to list every single episode release. Perhaps that could be a happy medium. Lucia Black ( talk) 16:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
I have created a
new discussion on whether to merge several Pokémon to their respective List of Pokémon articles. I understand that some people may feel reluctant to participate since we just finished the Sonic characters discussion, but I think that this is the optimal time to discuss these articles that come up time and time again in notability discussions.
Jucchan (
talk) 21:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello all. There is currently a discussion at Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters regarding the notability of individual Sonic the Hedgehog characters, and whether or not certain articles should be merged. The thread is " Notability". Best, Mz7 ( talk) 20:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
If people from outside here were invited to participate in this discussion, you can bet they would tell you're being absurd with your memetic misunderstanding of Wikipedia and the articles are perfectly okay. Go and see some average non-VG character article on Wikipedia, randomly. For example, when I purged Bond characters (there used to be like over 100 of the articles there), I wasn't even allowed to do it with Le Chiffre because reasons (the tags are mine, and one article that I created instead of merging is Wai Lin for a comparison) and a quite typical reaction looks like that (but at that point I've already stopped caring). Nobody acts like that, outside of here. That's just a ridicalous level of overzealousness, and a lack of respect for some people's hard work of trying to make proper articles. -- Niemti ( talk) 04:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
There current organization of the pokemon navbox templates is a mess. Considering that there is Pokémon (video game series) and Pokémon (anime), i propose keeping anime/manga information separate from the video games by merging template:Pokémon spin-offs with template:Pokémon and splitting the anime/manga info into template:Pokémon anime and manga. Thoughts? Lucia Black ( talk) 09:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Never heard of such a title to such a user in this wiki project. Nonetheless Everyone can do navbox cleaning, but because this involves making more drastic changes and involving more than one navbox, i thought it would be best to ask the whole wikiproject before making the bold edits myself. Lucia Black ( talk) 10:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I created an article for Luke fon Fabre as I've been playing Abyss and found enough real world information about him. What surprised me is that this is the first Tales character article. There are lists but no articles. Still, I can't work in any other since I don't have much knowledge about the series. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 21:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I made a Google doc listing all of the characters that may or may not need help improving their notability. I left off some that were rather obvious (and included some that were rather obvious), and I think that interested content creators should assist in the effort and take a break from creating new content like I am going to do. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
-- Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 22:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
PlayStation Universe, YouTube, Tekken fansites, Gaming Front, Screw Attack, Joystick Division, Blistered Thumbs. Trust me Niemti, you're on way too high of a horse considering how many flaws existed in articles that you've put so much effort into. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:08, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Anyway, since I suspect that Niemti will seek to destroy any attempt at conversation on the subject, @ Tezero:, @ Czar:, and @ Gabriel Yuji:, I'd like to at the very least work with you all at tightening up the articles. Especially considering how many bad sources exist on a number of these articles. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
@ New Age Retro Hippie: I'll help if you want, but I'm going on Wikibreak (albeit a somewhat short one) as soon as all the discussions and candidacies pertaining to articles I've worked on close, which could be in a few days. Tezero ( talk) 17:11, 21 May 2014 (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.
User:Niemti has recently gotten into a dispute with me over the validity of certain sources. Instead of attempting to have them listed on the video games reliable sources page, he has declined to even defend them on their own merits. This, on top of Niemti's characteristic bad attitude and behaviour, strikes as Niemti yet again doing the things that got him in trouble in the first place. I'd like to open a discussion on the user and what to do about the behaviour. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Niemti#Mileena This thread is pretty hilarious. My favourite parts is how my rhetorical proposal to delete almost all Amiga references was taken seriously like if it was a proper thing to do, and how Ada Wong's article from 2010 (with "no" fansite sources! nope, no sir!) was GA-worthy stuff but then I came and "made the article poorly". -- Niemti ( talk) 20:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
At over three and a half million words, this Super Smash Bros. Brawl fanfic is the longest of its medium ever written and surpasses numerous works of "real" literature well-esteemed for their loquacious nature. I'm thinking of creating an article for it, but I can only find four sources that look like they could be reliable - they're all (except the last) rather in-depth, though:
The only one of those I know for sure will be reliable is Kotaku... Perhaps there's more out there I just haven't been patient enough to come across. Tezero ( talk) 03:53, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Here's a link. Per suggestions, it's on a new subpage of the project's talk page so no one has to dirty their eyes. Tezero ( talk) 03:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm biased because I'm a fan, and I definitely do not want my name involved with this to avoid revenge by the fandom. Please take action as needed, probably an PROD, followed by an AfD with a "not a vote" banner. If you delete/nominate this, please make sure to have your user and talk page semi-protected for a month, and hopefully your Wikipedia account isn't linked to anything off-site. Siglemic's fans are currently posting this in chat (guess how I found out about it?), whatever happend to it WILL be noticed. Take care! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:02, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
I was digging around in the WTVG archives for another discussion and I came upon this discussion about a WPVG content creation competition, which sounded interesting but didn't get off the ground for want of organization. Would anyone be interested in something similar? Or a summer ("Q2", for X201 ho ho) competition? I was thinking something like restoring demoted FAs and GAs instead of something full blown like a GameCup, but I wanted to take a temperature read. Thoughts? czar ♔ 05:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Does Anna maree manciet pass GNG? I don't know what sufficient coverage is for a gamer, but Icepheonix5 is creating the page on behalf of her and it has been CSDed per A7. Thanks. Jamesx 12345 08:58, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
You can find her website here http://www.annamaree.com/ Icepheonix5 ( talk) 09:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to request feedback from the quorum at the TFD for Infobox StarCraft character and the TFD for Infobox Metal Gear character. They are modules used only in video game articles. A TFD for a similar template, Infobox Sonic character, closed as delete. -- Izno ( talk) 17:53, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Is anyone still using Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion? I think it's being maintained for no one since article alerts supplant its helpfulness, and AA are automatic. Any opposition to marking it as historical? czar ♔ 17:36, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
It looks like GameSpot might have enabled robots.txt. Hopefully a false alarm. JimmyBlackwing ( talk) 19:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
# New additions. April 3, 2014.
# Too many bots, being bad.
☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I realize I may have given the wrong impression when I talked about Wikipedia's policy. I was referring to the policy against linking to direct image scans of copyrighted sites rather than its policy in favor of web archives. Tezero ( talk) 20:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm late to this, since I've been horrible at checking discussions these days, but does adding robot.txt actually wipe the archive or just make them unviewable? Similar instances to this have led me to wonder if the Wayback Machine could change their implementation to only disallow archives from the point after robots.txt was first encountered, unless of course this is their intended behavior. At least in this instance it's the same website, but this behavior seems particularly wrong when a domain name completely changes its owner and focus. — Ost ( talk) 17:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Archive site | Bookmarklet |
---|---|
Archive.org | javascript:void(window.open('https://web.archive.org/save/'+location.href))
|
WebCite | javascript:void(window.open('http://www.webcitation.org/archive?url='+escape(location.href)+'&email=YourEmailAddress@Here.com'))
|
Similarly, I'm having trouble archiving http://www.1up.com/reviews/saints-row-the-third-pc-ps3-xbox360 and [23]. Any ideas? czar ♔ 02:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Although I can't see any update to Gamespot's robots.txt, the Internet Archive is displaying Gamespot's archive up to and including today. https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.gamespot.com I have no idea whether this is a bug or by design, so if you are relying on any Gamespot references, send them through WebCite even if they're already archived. - hahnch e n 13:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, looking for some opinions. There is currently no article for Half-Life 3, likely almost entirely because of WP:CRYSTAL; there is no official announcement from Valve that the game is coming out or even being worked on. That said, there is a huge amount of reliable source coverage of the potential game, with every speculation, interview, and rumour getting a story on sites like IGN, Kotaku, and PC Gamer. After a fresh rumour of the game being worked on I thought I'd try writing an article to see how it went. The result of my efforts is here and I wanted to get some thoughts on it. Though I definitely haven't written everything that could be, do you think it's sufficient as an article considering the large amount of reliable source coverage, or is it all too speculative? Sam Walton ( talk) 20:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Not all the content is useless, there are plenty of sources discussing the lack of official word on the game. I also just found an 'official' confirmation from Valve from 2006 that the game would be released, by the way: [24] Sam Walton ( talk) 10:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make it a standalone article, make it at Development of Half-Life 3. That way, it does not imply that it is a confirmed existence. We have been working at the Film project on this idea, for high-profile films that have substantial info out, but have yet to enter production. Just a possible idea if going the article route. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 22:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Is it worth starting an RfC for this? It seems to me that there are arguments to be made on both sides and a more formal process for this discussion might help, along with outside editor's input. Sam Walton ( talk) 15:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
There's no reason to have an individual article on HL3. Not including speculation, what can you tell me about it? Nothing, but because there is no known information known about it, which Draft:Half-Life 3 pretty much is. Before having an WP:RFC, try getting WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOTNEWS removed first which removes any chance of this article existing right now.-- Vaypertrail ( talk) 19:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
gr360
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).grps3
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).mc360
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).mcps3
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).DESreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).EDGEreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).EGreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).FAMreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).OPMreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).GIreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).GSreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).IGNreview
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).