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 60 | ← | Archive 65 | Archive 66 | Archive 67 | Archive 68 | Archive 69 | Archive 70 |
I have a hunch a merge discussion would go unnoticed on the related pages, so I'll ask here: what are the thoughts on reducing the Asteroids Deluxe article to a paragraph included under the legacy section, given how close it is to the original game?-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 06:44, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for Territorial and Reserve Forces Act 1907, an article within the scope of the Military history WikiProject, is now open. The Military history WikiProject is currently partnering with our project to share peer reviews, so all editors are cordially invited to participate, and any input there would be very appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [pf] 02:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:50, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Someone, anyone, please do something to clean up List of characters in the Xenosaga series. It's on its way to becoming one of those "world's longest articles" made fun of at gaming sites. It has woefully few references, and enough plot summary to make the game creators scared. And now that KOS-MOS has been merged there, it's sure to get even more attention. I'm not a fan, so I wouldn't really be able to clean it up well. But it needs attention soon. Parts could possibly be transwikied to Wikia, including the other character articles linked there.-- ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 06:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
I think I have found a free image of Satoshi Tajiri, of which I want to add to the article Pokémon Red and Blue. The image is located here on Bulbapedia, and it says it's in the public domain. So would I allowed to upload the image to the commons? If so, what licensing should I give? Thanks, Artichoker talk 19:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
It looks like various departments could use some help. New editors that are looking for things to do are encouraged to help out with one or more of the processes below. There are plenty of experienced editors to help you learn the ropes if you are afraid of making mistakes. And call it karma if you want, but I've always felt that you're more likely to get help in the future if you've helped others in the past. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC))
After cleaning the Assessment page, we've got 5 articles with editors pursuing promotion to A-class:
The last one just needs a second editor to vote on it's talk page.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 05:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
In addition to the assessment backlog, the requests page has requests still waiting from 2007 and frequently gets sprayed with numerous unsuitable requests. I'm happy to keep plugging away, removing the dreck and providing sources for realistic candidates, but I'm beginning to look like the grumpy old git of the project. If you have a minute, please drop by and sniff out any unsuitable requests if nothing else, it gives the other requests a chance. Thanks. Someone another 21:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
(remove indent) First and foremost I look for sources, if I find them then I add them to the request to help interested editors start the article. Although I don't have access to university databases etc. it's the same for most editors, but games for certain systems (particularly the Amiga and Spectrum) have dedicated magazine archives online to use. If there are no sources or unsufficient sources I look at what type of subject the request is, some types of games or other articles are much more difficult to source (perhaps impossible) or likely to be non-notable or are completely unrealistic. For instance:
If something does have at least some claim to being notable, or is from one of the source 'black-holes' (pre-internet magazine reviews, for instance many PS1 games and older PC titles) then I leave it in regardless. If a request involves a totally unrealistic amount of legwork just to check whether or not there's a hope in hell of an article then I just remove it (Guitar Hero youtubers). Someone spending seconds typing in a request doesn't trump someone spending minutes or hours researching and/or constructing an article that would be deleted the moment it was noticed. The page isn't much used and won't be used at all if it's allowed to become clogged with guff. I think there also needs to be a much stronger message that requesters are expected to provide sources, the lack of such a message encourages folks to make a few keystrokes and waltz off, expecting someone else to snap their fingers and make it happen. Someone another 23:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I've commented on each of the '07 requests, most of which I don't think need a separate article, but the only one I removed outright was propagame, which wouldn't pass WP:NEO. The rest are mostly "Here's an existing article that either a) already discusses this or b) should". Nifboy ( talk) 01:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup has come to halt as well. A small number of editors were helping, but after a while the lack of active voices made it feel more like strong arming rather than consensus building. I think this has been a big help in bringing active editors together to work on their respective articles. There's still a good number on the page's todo list, but I think it would be worthwhile pursuing it. If there are still interested editors (maybe 4–6), we can start the process up again. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC))
Since we're listing everything that's going to hell and a handbasket around here anyhow, just a heads-up. If you ever want to guilt another editor into helping you, the best way to do it is help them, surprisingly! There's a large number of articles up for review at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Peer_review. If one of those doesn't interest you, pop over to WP:MILHIST, review something there, and plead with them to review our video game articles. -- Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ( talk) 00:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Update – All VG peer reviews have been reviewed by at least one person, while List of commercial failures in video gaming could use a fine-tooth-comb review from a "grammar nazi" ;-) MuZemike 16:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
We currently have four articles that are under going reviews of their FA/GA status. Editors familiar with the topics are encouraged to help address concerns and issues brought up on their respective pages.
These articles were promoted a long time ago and do not meet the current quality standards. Any help in improving them would be appreciated. ( Guyinblack25 talk 16:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC))
Hi,
I'd like to find out if the following are acceptable as credible secondary sources for demonstrating article notability? If they are, then they could certainly be used on many wikipedia articles.
The biography lists Dr. Barton as "an assistant professor of English at St. Cloud State in Minnesota". Thanks.— RJH ( talk) 21:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Are List of Mega Man cast members and List of Metal Gear cast members better off as just as categories? Both were listified, and both were prodded and contested. The deprodder suggested at least a discussion about this. IMO both lists seem fairly indiscriminate. Thoughts? MuZemike 02:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed that the Kempston Micro Electronics and Kempston Interface articles are written as though their joystick interfaces were only available for the Spectrum. This is not the case: for one thing, I have the one I used to use (with a Fourth Dimension "Rapier" joystick) to play Head Over Heels on my Amstrad PCW(!) sitting in front of me now. ( Here's a photo I took, via TinyPic) However, the only text on the thing is "Kempston Joystick Interface"; there's nothing to prove it's a PCW version. Sadly I no longer have its documentation or my PCW magazines, and finding something on the web that's actually a good enough source is proving tricky. If someone could find a Wikipedia-compatible (ie both reliable and verifiable) reference for the PCW interface actually existing, I'd be very grateful! Loganberry ( Talk) 17:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Just trying to attract some feedback rather than wait around for people to stumble across the discussion. Similar to the Asteroids merge discussion above, I've started a discussion about merging Robotron X and Robotron 64 to Robotron: 2084. Any input/comments would be appreciated. ( Guyinblack25 talk 20:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC))
There's not exactly a great deal of quality flash game articles to compare notes with, so should the number of plays logged at numerous websites be mentioned in the reception section or not? FPA World 2 is listed as the fifth most played flash game of 2008 under the Mochi ads scheme according to this source, which seems a lot more relevant, particularly as the vast majority of flash games seem to use Mochi. Opinions please? Someone another 15:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Images of Japanese boxart will be used as alternate covers for VG articles when there are covers for US releases which are used as main images. These images of Japanese covers will be remained to show its origins, but will be considered alternate covers.
Using Japanese boxarts as alternate covers in addition to the English boxarts has more meaning for me. Sure album articles may have alternate covers (like Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned and We Started Nothing), but I care. You can still continue to use the English boxarts.
I find alternate covers for myself comparing with the English boxarts I find in VG articles (like Mega Man X8, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Heavenly Sword, Luminous Arc, and Sonic and the Black Knight; it would have more meaning having alternate covers...).
Could we at least keep temporary Japanese boxart as alternate covers on VG articles?
I care, because it adds more meaning for me.
We apologise for any inconvenience.
SolanaRanger ( talk) 02:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Speaking of NFCC, has anyone noticed the ongoing RFC about bots resizing images? I know most of our images are low res, but some (such as those on Pong) are above the .1 megapixel mark being discussed. It may be worth weighing in on the discussion or later updating our templates to be able to direct the bots to skip over images. — Ost ( talk) 15:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I noticed this was created recently..and it seems like game guide content at best. Weapons are a big part of Hitman, but I'm not so sure an article here is suitable. Even if the page was cleaned up, just talking about the weapons in general would be better covered on the Hitman series page (if one exists). Thoughts? RobJ1981 ( talk) 19:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I am attempting to merge the Guitar Hero : On Tour games into a single series article (with a second list for the soundtracks); this was determine to be an appropriate action as, at least with the first sequel, there's not a lot of information about the development of the game beyond a few sentences, and the reception from typical review sources basically built on the first game's reception; we know the third title in the series also has the same type of gameplay and expect no variation in this.
I am looking for advise on a structuring aspect. My current draft is User:Masem/Guitar Hero: On Tour Series, and what I'm struggling on is on providing a section that can be a good target for the game redirects. Because I've grouped development and gameplay, there's no clear target for where, say "Guitar Hero On Tour: Decades" should slot in. I don't think full infoboxes for each game is necessary but I feel there needs to be a clear section to quickly establish that specific game. Of course, the other option is to simply redirect to the page with no specific section in mind.
Also, even though I'm pretty sure about my own answer to this, what would people think of multiple covers from the series on the same page?
There's also an option of putting the soundtracks on this page too, since they aren't long and cannot expand faster, then this would be like List of Rock Band Track Packs and redirect targets would make sense. -- MASEM ( t) 18:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This is the wrong direction. Leave the On Tour articles separate, they're analogous to albums. Keep the set list and reception together, since they are immeasurably tied together given that gameplay is already a given. - hahnch e n 14:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
What's the policy on citing an interview published in a not-reliable source? Specifically I want to use this interview with Kenta Cho (aka ABA Games) in his article; its Cho's comments I want to cite, not the interviewer's commentary. Is it the same as citing self-published material by the subject (i.e. acceptable as long as its not overly self-serving)? Or not? bridies ( talk) 18:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This has bugged me for quite some time but currently, the game boy Tetris game is under the handheld disambig. But that seems a bit of a vague misnomer because there are several handheld Tetris games of various shapes and sizes, and the one in the article is only about, well, that particular game and why it was important in direct relation to the Game Boy. If memory serves in the past User:A Link to the Past was the only one heavily pushing this front.
Is there any real compelling reason for it not to be under Tetris (Game Boy) in the long run?
I noticed that the redirect on this article has been undone, contrary to the AFD result back in September. I am not sure as what to do here as I am not well-versed in System Shock. MuZemike 21:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Just curious- I have a general idea of what WP:OTRS is and the purpose it serves, but the WP and Meta pages didn't really tell me much. I understand we have a few members that participate in it. Could they give some extra information about how we can use it to improve articles? ( Guyinblack25 talk 15:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC))
I think the following article need to be created
Paper Mario (Series) 3 games so far, be like mario kart series and mario party series articles and other series articles, i know there was an article previous but something happened to it. Either way i think its only fair that the trilogy as a whole gets a seperate article.
Maybe also: Mario & Luigi (Series).
More series information can be found here: List_of_Mario_games_by_genre
IAmTheCoinMan ( talk) 15:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you guys, but having to deal with an anon on Rufus (Street Fighter) who's insisting the subject can't be notable enough for discussion and additionally insists "actors don't need references", citing other articles such as Indiana Jones and a bunch of other sub-GA-class articles. As for the notability issue, I told him up front I contested the tag and the article was still being worked on, and that if he felt that the article didn't satisfy notability, he should just nominate it for AfD (his main argument being that the sources "don't count", even though there's more dev and reception info for him than a majority of the series' characters). That went nowhere.
The discussion's on the talk page if anyone wants to take a look. :\-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi guys, I don't know if you already talked about this here or already tried. But if don't what do you think about asking permission to use screenshots, fan arts, cosplays, promotional pictures from products (action figures, video game console and son on). You guys may ask why I don't try. Actually I did, but I only got answer from Nintendo. A copied pre-made letter; envelope, letter pt1, letter pt2. I think they didn't take me seriously. But I think if some of you guys try too maybe they start thinking it's not a prank and grant us a permission. If somebody will try don't forget mentioning Ubisoft. It will be gret for us gamers to use these pics without restriction. Don't you think? Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 ( talk) 02:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
To the best of my knowledge, Wikipedia uses all images under either free license (where available) or Fair Use, depending on the nature of the image in question. So for screenshots and promotional pictures, where the copyright belongs to the original company (Nintendo, et al), images are posted under Fair Use, and require a rationale to be included in articles. Third-party items, like "cosplays" and "fan arts", are usually free images since they aren't owned by the original companies (though this is often questioned because the properties that are being represented are still copyrighted). This is usually less of an issue for WP, though, because such images don't usually have a place on Wikipedia in general, unless they're being used to illustrate a relevant article (example: Tron Guy).
Please take a look at the Image Use and Non-Free Content policies for more information. Thanks. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 17:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Adding to this subject I contacted Greg Horn awhile back regarding permission and received an email response that he had no problem whatsoever as long as he was credited as the artist. Just been sitting on the email all this time though because I've never been sure where to send it to. Along the same lines though I've been meaning to contact Namco on the subject of the Soulcalibur artwork and see where that goes as well.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:18, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Um... just out of curiosity, what's the purpose of posting this exhaustive list of addresses below? What's wrong with the current policies and the way the images are currently being used? — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 05:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I have had success with gaining free use images from developers. In my case these can be seen in Ballistics (video game) as well as the associated commons category. I contacted Bo Andersson at GRIN, and Ernest Yale at Triotech Amusement to get screenshots and photos released with a free use license. There is an explicit benefit, by uploading images to commons grants free-use only projects access to them, and the images can be used in tangential articles - File:Ballistics Arcade - IAAPA.jpg is used in zh-yue:機鋪 and de:Arcade-Spiel.
There are a few things you have to be wary of though. It's extremely unlikely that a major publisher would offer you anything free-use in regards to their biggest mascots. If you ask for a free-use image of Mario, you're only going to be ignored, because the image and likeness is worth so much to them. I'm surprised that Ubisoft screenshots are still free-use, even though I've argued for keeping the template, I have been suspicious of its accuracy. You also have to bear in mind who actually owns the IPs, not just who develops them. Ensemble is listed below, but even prior to their dissolution, did they really own any of their work? Or was it always Microsoft? I think it is worth contacting companies to try and obtain free-use imagery, especially for abandonware titles, where their commercial worth is minimal. - hahnch e n 16:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't really know much about the various copyright policies we have, but I do wonder whether it isn't worth trying to get some kind of permission in between no-permission-but-fair-use and "free use". Having permission to put copyrighted images within specific articles might temper some of the paranoia around the use of fair-use images. Though perhaps not worth the hassle to obtain them, I dunno. bridies ( talk) 17:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you may already be aware of it, but just in case : GSC Game World now allows usermade screenshots under GFDL. Though I do not have any information about who managed this and how.
I may add that I could not agree more with David Fuchs. For us on fr.wikipedia, Free Use or Fair Use makes all the difference, as it is double or nothing. We are a far smaller VG project, with a dozen people or so. Yet we try to illustrate articles the best we can (to give an example I worked on, Star Wing, or any other in Wikipédia:Sélection/Jeu vidéo), also because reviewers for FAC are way more demanding on fr: than here, as far as I can tell. Ubisoft permission is a really great thing for us, with articles such as Beyond Good & Evil, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time or Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles. The ″explicit benefit" of this is also free content. Commons is as an important project as Wikipedia, in my opinion. Jean-Frédéric ( talk) 23:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Capcom U.S.A., Inc. Capcom Entertainment, Inc. 800 Concar Drive, Suite 300 San Mateo, CA 94402-2649
KOEI Corporation 1818 Gilbreth Road, Suite 235 Burlingame, CA 94010
NAMCO HOMETEK INC. P.O. Box 5309 Novato, CA 94948-5309
SNK NEOGEO USA CONSUMER CORP. PO Box 1140 Wall, NJ 07719-1140
hello@arcsy.co.jp
Electronic Arts Ltda, R. Fidêncio Ramos, 195 4° andar, Conjs 41, 43 ,45, São Paulo 04551-010 Brazil Registered Number: 02.184.024/0001-73
www@ravensoft.com
Atlus U.S.A., Inc. 199 Technology Driv
pr@HudsonEnt.com
monolith@monolithsoft.co.jp
919 & 989 East Hillsdale Boulevard Foster City CA, 94404
Square Enix Limited, PO BOX 60257, London, EC2P 2BU
info@tecmoinc.com
Tecmo, Inc. 21213-B Hawthorne Boulevard, #5553, Torrance, CA 90503 U.S.A.
storesupport@konami.com
Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc. 2381 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200, El Segundo, CA 90245
Midway Games Inc. Corporate Headquarters 2704 West Roscoe Street Chicago, IL 60618
Marvel Entertainment, Inc. 417 5th Avenue New York, NY 10016
publicity@dccomics.com
Nintendo Of America Inc., P.O. Box 957, Redmond, WA 98073-0957 - U.S.A.
Activision, Incorporated 3100, Ocean Park Boulevard Santa Monica, California 90405
Blizzard Entertainment P.O. Box 18979 Irvine, CA 92623
Corporate Mailing Address: Ensemble Studios/Microsoft 10440 N. Central Expressway Suite 1600 Dallas, TX 75231
webmaster@ensemblestudios.com
SEGA America, 350 Rhode Island Street, Suite 400,San Francisco, CA 94103,U.S.A;
Does this page fall under our scope? MrKIA11 ( talk) 14:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
After the discussion at this MFD, WikiProject Phoenix Wright has been moved to be a task force of this project. I'm sure the creator would appreciate anyone lending a hand to integrate the task force into this project. Cheers,-- Aervanath ( talk) 05:12, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Resident Evil 5#PC version .28or lack thereof.29 and reliable sources and comment. Regards, – xeno ( talk) 17:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been seeing this editor a lot lately for some time and am noticing recent activity that has been less than helpful. For starters, a random redirect (which I undid), and now an obscure page move. I have brought up this matter here since it is video game-related. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 03:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with boldly redirecting an unreferenced stub consisting entirely of in-game information. bridies ( talk) 03:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Heads up: Template:Vgrationale has been nominated for Deletion ( Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 March 23#Template:Vgrationale). I already added a Keep vote to it, but please go over and weigh in as well. This template has been helping us take care of images that have needed fair-use rationales for quite a while now, but apparently the person who deleted it (and several other possibly redundant rationale templates) believes it encourages "extraneous use" of non-free content. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 19:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Mortal Kombat#Complete rewrite about rewriting the page. However, there is a little argument concerning trivia sections. It would be good to have an experienced entering in the discussion. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
An anon user added http://www.kofxii.com/ as an external link in The King of Fighters XII. I cannot find anything about SNK in the forum. Is it an official forum? Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
There is an on-going slow edit war on MechWarrior (video games) concerning whether or not a fan mod should be included in the list. Can somebody please help solve this? -- Scaletail ( talk) 22:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
As Max Payne 3 was announced this morning, I think it might be a good idea to determine when a sequel game article should be created. (A new IP game is a bit different since there's usually no place to move information to).
For myself, as with the current Max Payne 3 article, an announcement of the game is not sufficient to create the sequel article (redirects and discussion in a series article, yes, however). I'm thinking that our boundary should be that two of the three sections of: Plot/Setting, Gameplay, and Development; can be given a reasonable paragraph of discussion, the rest to be filled in over time. For that to happen, you usually need more than just the announcement but also details such as a "first look", developer's comments in interviews, or the like. Anything less than that can be easily summarized in any series/previous game article within a paragraph (and thus not overload it) until more details are fleshed out. -- MASEM ( t) 14:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
My gut feeling says no, but I noticed someone add OnLive as a platform to BioShock today. Thoughts? – xeno ( talk) 04:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems like an apt time to throw Zeebo into the discussion as well. - X201 ( talk) 13:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
It's being pushed as a "console" isn't it? One can buy a box and use it with a TV... sounds like a console to me... At any rate I don't think we should be adding it to articles until it's actually released. bridies ( talk) 14:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Can an admin remove the protection of this redirect page: Pokemon Platinum so we can avoid a double redirect. Thanks Salavat ( talk) 15:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Aggregator | Score |
---|---|
Metacritic | 88% |
Publication | Score |
---|---|
1Up.com | 10/10 |
Edge | 7/10 |
When writing a reception section, I always lead with Metacritic or other such aggregation websites to give an impression on overall feedback. Yet our Template:VG Reviews (as displayed right) pushes these aggregated results to the bottom of the list, I do not think this is the right way to do it. I propose that aggregation websites be given the lead in Template:VG Reviews. - hahnch e n 21:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I still think these tables are ugly and unnecessary. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire - past ops) 03:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been removing direct mentions of scores in prose and moving them to the box, then making the reception section on actual reception. This seems to make sense, as it's less cluttered than "IGN gave it a 95%. 1up gave it a 90%." etc. I do think that it should be homogenized though...either you have the box or you don't. Personally I think that putting numbered reviews in there AT ALL is unnecessary. The overall Metacritic/Gamerankings score should be the only thing mentioned since it aggregates all the scores, and Wikipedia copying that would just be less accurate.-- ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 00:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
As you'll see in the example boxout, the change has been made, courtesy to User:SpecialWindler. Keep an eye out for mishandled templates, and we'll revisit this later. - hahnch e n 14:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
As you may or may not know, recently Home of the Underdogs lost its server, and went down permanently. Within short order, there were two sites that sprung up to try and replace it, and just now, apparently, a third one. None of them are by the original owner or anything, so this creates a problem of just how notable these copy sites are for WP purposes. Just thought I'd give a heads up and hope maybe someone can help figure out what to do with the page, as it seems a bit messy at the moment. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 11:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
We have been arguing back and forth over the layout of the Metal Gear Series page. The guy in charge insists on ONLY discussing the plot of the games. He has the series listed according to canon plot TWICE within the same article. My argument was that the series should ALSO be discussed from the game design perspective. You can see MY Suggestion at the bottom of the discussion page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Metal_Gear_(series)
I would like to ask for some assistance in the matter. There are 3 official documentaries that clearly label what was an original game and what was a spin-off, and it has nothing to do with plot. Even this weeks presentation by Hideo Kojima (series creater) at the GDC outlined the series evolution according to game design. I see no reason why gameplay and game design should not be included in the article about the series. Why do we need to have plot discussed twice within the same article? 63.161.203.11 ( talk) 15:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I need help with an mmorpg, I have a sub-page on my user page. If u would like to help please vist my page an you will see it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Setokira ( talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey all. I've got a GA nomination (for machinima) on hold, and the reviewer and I would appreciate an extra pair of eyes. I've self-copyedited (and spotted improvements in every paragraph), but I've been working on this article pretty much daily over the last eight weeks, so the effectiveness of that may be limited, especially in terms of spotting quirky or nonexistent sentence flow. If anyone's up for combing through ~4,600 words of prose, I'd be grateful. Thanks. — TKD:: {talk} 23:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
A few months back, I proposed a merge of List of Frontier Brains, as a list of non-notable characters. Without reliable third-party sources, it would even be suitable for deletion. But I went with a merge, just to get a sense of other people. No one has checked in. I'd appreciate it if a couple of other editors could look at the article, and check in with their opinion.
Feel free to post any other merge discussions that have stalled, and I'll help out by giving an honest assessment. Randomran ( talk) 16:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot guys. This had been on my list of things to do for a while. Randomran ( talk) 02:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Please read the arguments at CFD, input is appreciated. As the page was not tagged with the project template, it has not appeared on article alerts. - hahnch e n 13:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed like for Darkstalkers that all the individual character pages have been merged into a single list with many omitted details you can see obviously present. I am a bit confused about this, why do none of these characters with their long history not get an article but say, Eddy Gordo gets one? On what basis is this decided? Tyciol ( talk) 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Single user wikiproject, limited in scope. Should be task forcified if there is interest or deleted. – xeno ( talk) 19:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't this at WP:FT yet? Res Mar 14:10, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's how the entire Metroid series looks like:
Note that there is no Metroid Prime (series) article as of yet. MuZemike 16:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The third-person shooter article has been on my list of things to work on for a while. But right now it's completely unverified, with no clear way forward. A few web searches have revealed only a few trivial references. I'd really like to give it one last good effort before just giving up and merging this, with a summary "a third-person shooter is a shooter game with a third-person perspective". 3PS is such a commonplace term that it would seem weird to have an article on first-person shooters or real-time strategy and not this one.
Jump in with anything on third-person shooters that you can reference. Literally anything. Randomran ( talk) 02:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Selected donwload stats are available for some of the XNA community sales. I dunno how many of these even have articles, and some of the more popular ones may not be there, but it could be useful to someone. -- MASEM ( t) 18:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, everyone. I've taken two photographs; one is of a
Virtual Boy controller and the other of a
Pokémon mini system. I'm pretty sure they're considered free images despite the fact the Nintendo logo is prominently featured on both products. But, I want to make absolutely sure before I upload them to Wikimedia Commons. So, free images or not? -
sesuPRIME
talk •
contributions 20:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
PS: I know Commons already has pictures of these two, but mine are much better quality.
Help! I'm working on The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay due its sequel's release coming soon. But I'm having problems improving the article. Please, I would like to maybe make this my first GA, so please help me with this. GamerPro64 ( talk) 21:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- The game was well received by critics and highly praised for its eerie atmosphere and a deeply intriguing gothic story. The graphics in particular earned exceptional praise, and Soul Reaver was called "among the best that have ever been on the Playstation"[2]
Oooookay, I understand now. As for copyedit, I tried to apply some of it to the Setting section and trimmed off a bit. The Clawed One ( talk) 23:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Sony has revealed the number of PlayStation 2 consoles shipped worldwide. It is 136 million, as of 31 December 2008. Quote: "Since launching in 2000, PlayStation 2 has sold more than 136 million sell-in units worldwide", sell-in means sold to retailers. Numbers from this press release. Rhonin the wizard ( talk) 16:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently conducting a GA review of First-person shooter, and feel that the infobox might be better with a typical screenshot instead of the 'asteroids' logo. I think the article top looks a little untidy at present, with the infobox and then a screenshot.
I realise the template is used on quite a few articles; I wonder if the template could conditionally display an image/caption if one is specified, but otherwise remain as-is, to avoid problems with all those articles (until they could be updated with screenshots).
I'm not criticising the navigation sections; I've looked into the issue, and found that there are other examples of articles that use infobox more for navigation that information (FA example Canadian_charter_of_rights_and_freedoms. I can't think of any 'list of facts' that is appropriate to genres anyway.
If there's no big objection, I might try to modify that template myself, as described - ie to allow the option to show an image instead of the logo, if such an image is specified.
Looking forward to some input, -- Chzz ► 16:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Demo - I'd rather that the infobox for First person shooters looked more like User:Chzz/fps.
There's currently 15 pages that transclude {{VG Action}}. All of them have it at the top. Most don't have an image (e.g. Tactical shooter). Some ( Fighting game, Shoot 'em up and First person shooters - the one I'm working on) have a picture before the infobox.
Two possible ways to achieve this;
1. Make another template, called {{VG Action pic}}.
2. Change the existing template to have conditional code, that says "If an image is specified, show it, otherwise show that logo".
The thing about this is, it also needs to be considered in the wider field of the other VG templates - because they all work this way at present, and it does give more of a 'unified look'.
Personally, I don't like the style, because I don't think that 'asteroids' graphic adds any info to the article, and because it's a non-standard way of navigating through the articles.
So - perhaps this should raise the bigger issue of ALL the VG templates - would they be better if they displayed an image, instead of the cartoon logo used at present? Or, again, I guess they could be edited to 'default' to the logo if no pic is specified.
If we go the 'conditional picture' route, then I think I'll need help with this from somebody who knows about template syntax.
It might be an opportunity to sort the whole mess out, though. Should there really be a separate infobox style for Action, Adventure, Industry, history, bestsellers etc? One well-designed template with suitable optional fields, well-documented, would provide a good solution long-term.
-- Chzz ► 19:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
A related discussion is going on here. SharkD ( talk) 02:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) We don't need to use a "simplistic identifier of a subject matter at a glance"; our readers can read and the name and the other words there will give them that. I'm against dumbing down our project by using images like this. -- John ( talk) 04:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
(unindent)
The template VG Action be changed to show an optional screen of a game - if an image is not specified, it will remain as it is.
Please express brief consent or opposition below. -- Chzz ► 23:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I started adding Category: PlayStation 3 games to downloadable PS3 games articles as there was a lack of consistency and as I didn't feel that Category: PlayStation 3 Network games was a "distinguished category" from Category: PlayStation 3 games (under the Duplicate categorization rule) the articles should appear in both. This sparked a discussion between myself and Xeno but the only thing we could establish is that WP:SUBCAT is a particularly hard to understand piece of guidance! So we thought it would be best to raise it here. The result of this discussion should also be applied to Xbox 360/XBLA games.
Essentially, I think because there is no PlayStation 3 retail games category, they cannot be distinguished and downloadable games should appear in both categories. Others' interpretation of the definition of a "distinguished category" would be useful as well as thoughts on what ultimately makes the most sense? ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 19:25, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
We need to think about this as a user would. Currently there is one big category with all PS3 game articles in it. There is also a PSN subcat with games available via PSN. Should a user be able to come to WP and see a category with every PS3 article in it? Or should that user have to search around subcats to find the full list of articles? If anything, I think the PS3 category should work a bit like a
Venn diagram. The top cat PS3 Games should list all articles. Subcats called PSN and Bluray should contain PSN Games and Bluray Games as needed. So we would end up with a PSN game being in both the PS3 cat and the PSN subcat. Or a Bluray game being in the PS3 cat and the Bluray subcat. And games like
Gran Turismo 5 Prologue and
Burnout Paradise being in all three cats because they fit the requirements for membership of those cats.
EDIT: I've added te category tree so that we can see the current layout of the category. -
X201 (
talk) 11:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the category tree again it looks like a few of them need to be renamed:
Also, should Cancelled PlayStation 3 games be a subcat of PlayStation 3 games? Shouldn't PlayStation 3 games only contain games that actually exist or are going to exist? ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 12:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
On a separate tangent. Should PS2 games that are re-released via PSN be in a subcat of PS3 games? They're not PS3 games as such, its just that its possible to play them on a PS3. If every PS2 game were re released via PSN we could end up with a PS3 cat that is a duplicate of the PS2 cat with the addition of PS3 games. Perhaps their own PSN cat Backward compatible PSN games? - X201 ( talk) 11:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
The proposed transferral has been completed. The schedule for the replacement project can be found at the bottom of the page. This discussion can now come to an end. Comments on the project can be made in the respective section. Dylanlip ( talk) 20:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay everyone. Here's my proposal to replace the old {{ WikiProject Video games}} with {{ WP VG}}. This new template utilizes the new {{ WPBannerMeta}}, which is the current iteration of talk templates. The new features added/updated are described in length here. I have also tested out the template on some Video game articles to test out certain parameters.(Task forces, nesting, classes, priority, etc.) Those tests are here: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] I hope this all will help gain your support for this new template. Consensus is NEEDED before I can start doing massive replacements of the old template. Dylanlip ( talk) 14:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
WPBannerMeta}}
template, and I'm glad you able to put it into effect. Looks good.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 14:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC){{
WP VG}}
should redirect to {{
WikiProject Video games}}
as mentioned above, that way {{
WP VG}}
can be used as a shortcut, but {{
WikiProject Video games}}
is still the official name to stick with the common way of naming WikiProject templates. We can request a bot to populate a list of all the articles that have the old tf= parameter that we can manually go through and change.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 15:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Side question. Does either template support multiple Task Forces? - X201 ( talk) 15:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Everyone is saying that we shouldn't go through all of the articles to replace the templates. I'm fully capable and willing to undergo this arduous task. Yes, it CAN be done, but it should be done in phases.
Now, here is my list of reasons for why we should go through with this:
The list of phases and reasons explain themselves. Dylanlip ( talk) 21:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I whole heartily disagree. {{
WikiProject Video games}}
should be kept as the main name. If you feel like taking the time, doing all of the above would be great, just go down the list of pages that translude {{
WikiProject Video games}}
.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 23:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
request.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 15:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC){{
WPBannerMeta}}
, not the details, as is starting on the
talk page. There is no point in doing work multiple times.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 16:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)(Restarting subcomments) Then the transfer needs needs to be done ASAP. This needs to be started. Also, how do you know that the people agreeing to my original proposal weren't also agreeing to the code itself? If they were against a certain feature of the template, they would've stated it when giving their opinion. I'm going to place {{ editprotected}} on the template talk page to get an admin. Consensus was reached on to transfer and on what to transfer. End of story. Dylanlip ( talk) 16:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 60 | ← | Archive 65 | Archive 66 | Archive 67 | Archive 68 | Archive 69 | Archive 70 |
I have a hunch a merge discussion would go unnoticed on the related pages, so I'll ask here: what are the thoughts on reducing the Asteroids Deluxe article to a paragraph included under the legacy section, given how close it is to the original game?-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 06:44, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for Territorial and Reserve Forces Act 1907, an article within the scope of the Military history WikiProject, is now open. The Military history WikiProject is currently partnering with our project to share peer reviews, so all editors are cordially invited to participate, and any input there would be very appreciated! Thanks! Kirill [pf] 02:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:50, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Someone, anyone, please do something to clean up List of characters in the Xenosaga series. It's on its way to becoming one of those "world's longest articles" made fun of at gaming sites. It has woefully few references, and enough plot summary to make the game creators scared. And now that KOS-MOS has been merged there, it's sure to get even more attention. I'm not a fan, so I wouldn't really be able to clean it up well. But it needs attention soon. Parts could possibly be transwikied to Wikia, including the other character articles linked there.-- ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 06:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
I think I have found a free image of Satoshi Tajiri, of which I want to add to the article Pokémon Red and Blue. The image is located here on Bulbapedia, and it says it's in the public domain. So would I allowed to upload the image to the commons? If so, what licensing should I give? Thanks, Artichoker talk 19:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
It looks like various departments could use some help. New editors that are looking for things to do are encouraged to help out with one or more of the processes below. There are plenty of experienced editors to help you learn the ropes if you are afraid of making mistakes. And call it karma if you want, but I've always felt that you're more likely to get help in the future if you've helped others in the past. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC))
After cleaning the Assessment page, we've got 5 articles with editors pursuing promotion to A-class:
The last one just needs a second editor to vote on it's talk page.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 05:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
In addition to the assessment backlog, the requests page has requests still waiting from 2007 and frequently gets sprayed with numerous unsuitable requests. I'm happy to keep plugging away, removing the dreck and providing sources for realistic candidates, but I'm beginning to look like the grumpy old git of the project. If you have a minute, please drop by and sniff out any unsuitable requests if nothing else, it gives the other requests a chance. Thanks. Someone another 21:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
(remove indent) First and foremost I look for sources, if I find them then I add them to the request to help interested editors start the article. Although I don't have access to university databases etc. it's the same for most editors, but games for certain systems (particularly the Amiga and Spectrum) have dedicated magazine archives online to use. If there are no sources or unsufficient sources I look at what type of subject the request is, some types of games or other articles are much more difficult to source (perhaps impossible) or likely to be non-notable or are completely unrealistic. For instance:
If something does have at least some claim to being notable, or is from one of the source 'black-holes' (pre-internet magazine reviews, for instance many PS1 games and older PC titles) then I leave it in regardless. If a request involves a totally unrealistic amount of legwork just to check whether or not there's a hope in hell of an article then I just remove it (Guitar Hero youtubers). Someone spending seconds typing in a request doesn't trump someone spending minutes or hours researching and/or constructing an article that would be deleted the moment it was noticed. The page isn't much used and won't be used at all if it's allowed to become clogged with guff. I think there also needs to be a much stronger message that requesters are expected to provide sources, the lack of such a message encourages folks to make a few keystrokes and waltz off, expecting someone else to snap their fingers and make it happen. Someone another 23:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I've commented on each of the '07 requests, most of which I don't think need a separate article, but the only one I removed outright was propagame, which wouldn't pass WP:NEO. The rest are mostly "Here's an existing article that either a) already discusses this or b) should". Nifboy ( talk) 01:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup has come to halt as well. A small number of editors were helping, but after a while the lack of active voices made it feel more like strong arming rather than consensus building. I think this has been a big help in bringing active editors together to work on their respective articles. There's still a good number on the page's todo list, but I think it would be worthwhile pursuing it. If there are still interested editors (maybe 4–6), we can start the process up again. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC))
Since we're listing everything that's going to hell and a handbasket around here anyhow, just a heads-up. If you ever want to guilt another editor into helping you, the best way to do it is help them, surprisingly! There's a large number of articles up for review at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Peer_review. If one of those doesn't interest you, pop over to WP:MILHIST, review something there, and plead with them to review our video game articles. -- Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ( talk) 00:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Update – All VG peer reviews have been reviewed by at least one person, while List of commercial failures in video gaming could use a fine-tooth-comb review from a "grammar nazi" ;-) MuZemike 16:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
We currently have four articles that are under going reviews of their FA/GA status. Editors familiar with the topics are encouraged to help address concerns and issues brought up on their respective pages.
These articles were promoted a long time ago and do not meet the current quality standards. Any help in improving them would be appreciated. ( Guyinblack25 talk 16:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC))
Hi,
I'd like to find out if the following are acceptable as credible secondary sources for demonstrating article notability? If they are, then they could certainly be used on many wikipedia articles.
The biography lists Dr. Barton as "an assistant professor of English at St. Cloud State in Minnesota". Thanks.— RJH ( talk) 21:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Are List of Mega Man cast members and List of Metal Gear cast members better off as just as categories? Both were listified, and both were prodded and contested. The deprodder suggested at least a discussion about this. IMO both lists seem fairly indiscriminate. Thoughts? MuZemike 02:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed that the Kempston Micro Electronics and Kempston Interface articles are written as though their joystick interfaces were only available for the Spectrum. This is not the case: for one thing, I have the one I used to use (with a Fourth Dimension "Rapier" joystick) to play Head Over Heels on my Amstrad PCW(!) sitting in front of me now. ( Here's a photo I took, via TinyPic) However, the only text on the thing is "Kempston Joystick Interface"; there's nothing to prove it's a PCW version. Sadly I no longer have its documentation or my PCW magazines, and finding something on the web that's actually a good enough source is proving tricky. If someone could find a Wikipedia-compatible (ie both reliable and verifiable) reference for the PCW interface actually existing, I'd be very grateful! Loganberry ( Talk) 17:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Just trying to attract some feedback rather than wait around for people to stumble across the discussion. Similar to the Asteroids merge discussion above, I've started a discussion about merging Robotron X and Robotron 64 to Robotron: 2084. Any input/comments would be appreciated. ( Guyinblack25 talk 20:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC))
There's not exactly a great deal of quality flash game articles to compare notes with, so should the number of plays logged at numerous websites be mentioned in the reception section or not? FPA World 2 is listed as the fifth most played flash game of 2008 under the Mochi ads scheme according to this source, which seems a lot more relevant, particularly as the vast majority of flash games seem to use Mochi. Opinions please? Someone another 15:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Images of Japanese boxart will be used as alternate covers for VG articles when there are covers for US releases which are used as main images. These images of Japanese covers will be remained to show its origins, but will be considered alternate covers.
Using Japanese boxarts as alternate covers in addition to the English boxarts has more meaning for me. Sure album articles may have alternate covers (like Always Outnumbered, Never Outgunned and We Started Nothing), but I care. You can still continue to use the English boxarts.
I find alternate covers for myself comparing with the English boxarts I find in VG articles (like Mega Man X8, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Heavenly Sword, Luminous Arc, and Sonic and the Black Knight; it would have more meaning having alternate covers...).
Could we at least keep temporary Japanese boxart as alternate covers on VG articles?
I care, because it adds more meaning for me.
We apologise for any inconvenience.
SolanaRanger ( talk) 02:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Speaking of NFCC, has anyone noticed the ongoing RFC about bots resizing images? I know most of our images are low res, but some (such as those on Pong) are above the .1 megapixel mark being discussed. It may be worth weighing in on the discussion or later updating our templates to be able to direct the bots to skip over images. — Ost ( talk) 15:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I noticed this was created recently..and it seems like game guide content at best. Weapons are a big part of Hitman, but I'm not so sure an article here is suitable. Even if the page was cleaned up, just talking about the weapons in general would be better covered on the Hitman series page (if one exists). Thoughts? RobJ1981 ( talk) 19:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I am attempting to merge the Guitar Hero : On Tour games into a single series article (with a second list for the soundtracks); this was determine to be an appropriate action as, at least with the first sequel, there's not a lot of information about the development of the game beyond a few sentences, and the reception from typical review sources basically built on the first game's reception; we know the third title in the series also has the same type of gameplay and expect no variation in this.
I am looking for advise on a structuring aspect. My current draft is User:Masem/Guitar Hero: On Tour Series, and what I'm struggling on is on providing a section that can be a good target for the game redirects. Because I've grouped development and gameplay, there's no clear target for where, say "Guitar Hero On Tour: Decades" should slot in. I don't think full infoboxes for each game is necessary but I feel there needs to be a clear section to quickly establish that specific game. Of course, the other option is to simply redirect to the page with no specific section in mind.
Also, even though I'm pretty sure about my own answer to this, what would people think of multiple covers from the series on the same page?
There's also an option of putting the soundtracks on this page too, since they aren't long and cannot expand faster, then this would be like List of Rock Band Track Packs and redirect targets would make sense. -- MASEM ( t) 18:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This is the wrong direction. Leave the On Tour articles separate, they're analogous to albums. Keep the set list and reception together, since they are immeasurably tied together given that gameplay is already a given. - hahnch e n 14:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
What's the policy on citing an interview published in a not-reliable source? Specifically I want to use this interview with Kenta Cho (aka ABA Games) in his article; its Cho's comments I want to cite, not the interviewer's commentary. Is it the same as citing self-published material by the subject (i.e. acceptable as long as its not overly self-serving)? Or not? bridies ( talk) 18:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This has bugged me for quite some time but currently, the game boy Tetris game is under the handheld disambig. But that seems a bit of a vague misnomer because there are several handheld Tetris games of various shapes and sizes, and the one in the article is only about, well, that particular game and why it was important in direct relation to the Game Boy. If memory serves in the past User:A Link to the Past was the only one heavily pushing this front.
Is there any real compelling reason for it not to be under Tetris (Game Boy) in the long run?
I noticed that the redirect on this article has been undone, contrary to the AFD result back in September. I am not sure as what to do here as I am not well-versed in System Shock. MuZemike 21:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Just curious- I have a general idea of what WP:OTRS is and the purpose it serves, but the WP and Meta pages didn't really tell me much. I understand we have a few members that participate in it. Could they give some extra information about how we can use it to improve articles? ( Guyinblack25 talk 15:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC))
I think the following article need to be created
Paper Mario (Series) 3 games so far, be like mario kart series and mario party series articles and other series articles, i know there was an article previous but something happened to it. Either way i think its only fair that the trilogy as a whole gets a seperate article.
Maybe also: Mario & Luigi (Series).
More series information can be found here: List_of_Mario_games_by_genre
IAmTheCoinMan ( talk) 15:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you guys, but having to deal with an anon on Rufus (Street Fighter) who's insisting the subject can't be notable enough for discussion and additionally insists "actors don't need references", citing other articles such as Indiana Jones and a bunch of other sub-GA-class articles. As for the notability issue, I told him up front I contested the tag and the article was still being worked on, and that if he felt that the article didn't satisfy notability, he should just nominate it for AfD (his main argument being that the sources "don't count", even though there's more dev and reception info for him than a majority of the series' characters). That went nowhere.
The discussion's on the talk page if anyone wants to take a look. :\-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi guys, I don't know if you already talked about this here or already tried. But if don't what do you think about asking permission to use screenshots, fan arts, cosplays, promotional pictures from products (action figures, video game console and son on). You guys may ask why I don't try. Actually I did, but I only got answer from Nintendo. A copied pre-made letter; envelope, letter pt1, letter pt2. I think they didn't take me seriously. But I think if some of you guys try too maybe they start thinking it's not a prank and grant us a permission. If somebody will try don't forget mentioning Ubisoft. It will be gret for us gamers to use these pics without restriction. Don't you think? Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 ( talk) 02:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
To the best of my knowledge, Wikipedia uses all images under either free license (where available) or Fair Use, depending on the nature of the image in question. So for screenshots and promotional pictures, where the copyright belongs to the original company (Nintendo, et al), images are posted under Fair Use, and require a rationale to be included in articles. Third-party items, like "cosplays" and "fan arts", are usually free images since they aren't owned by the original companies (though this is often questioned because the properties that are being represented are still copyrighted). This is usually less of an issue for WP, though, because such images don't usually have a place on Wikipedia in general, unless they're being used to illustrate a relevant article (example: Tron Guy).
Please take a look at the Image Use and Non-Free Content policies for more information. Thanks. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 17:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Adding to this subject I contacted Greg Horn awhile back regarding permission and received an email response that he had no problem whatsoever as long as he was credited as the artist. Just been sitting on the email all this time though because I've never been sure where to send it to. Along the same lines though I've been meaning to contact Namco on the subject of the Soulcalibur artwork and see where that goes as well.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:18, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Um... just out of curiosity, what's the purpose of posting this exhaustive list of addresses below? What's wrong with the current policies and the way the images are currently being used? — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 05:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I have had success with gaining free use images from developers. In my case these can be seen in Ballistics (video game) as well as the associated commons category. I contacted Bo Andersson at GRIN, and Ernest Yale at Triotech Amusement to get screenshots and photos released with a free use license. There is an explicit benefit, by uploading images to commons grants free-use only projects access to them, and the images can be used in tangential articles - File:Ballistics Arcade - IAAPA.jpg is used in zh-yue:機鋪 and de:Arcade-Spiel.
There are a few things you have to be wary of though. It's extremely unlikely that a major publisher would offer you anything free-use in regards to their biggest mascots. If you ask for a free-use image of Mario, you're only going to be ignored, because the image and likeness is worth so much to them. I'm surprised that Ubisoft screenshots are still free-use, even though I've argued for keeping the template, I have been suspicious of its accuracy. You also have to bear in mind who actually owns the IPs, not just who develops them. Ensemble is listed below, but even prior to their dissolution, did they really own any of their work? Or was it always Microsoft? I think it is worth contacting companies to try and obtain free-use imagery, especially for abandonware titles, where their commercial worth is minimal. - hahnch e n 16:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't really know much about the various copyright policies we have, but I do wonder whether it isn't worth trying to get some kind of permission in between no-permission-but-fair-use and "free use". Having permission to put copyrighted images within specific articles might temper some of the paranoia around the use of fair-use images. Though perhaps not worth the hassle to obtain them, I dunno. bridies ( talk) 17:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you may already be aware of it, but just in case : GSC Game World now allows usermade screenshots under GFDL. Though I do not have any information about who managed this and how.
I may add that I could not agree more with David Fuchs. For us on fr.wikipedia, Free Use or Fair Use makes all the difference, as it is double or nothing. We are a far smaller VG project, with a dozen people or so. Yet we try to illustrate articles the best we can (to give an example I worked on, Star Wing, or any other in Wikipédia:Sélection/Jeu vidéo), also because reviewers for FAC are way more demanding on fr: than here, as far as I can tell. Ubisoft permission is a really great thing for us, with articles such as Beyond Good & Evil, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time or Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles. The ″explicit benefit" of this is also free content. Commons is as an important project as Wikipedia, in my opinion. Jean-Frédéric ( talk) 23:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Capcom U.S.A., Inc. Capcom Entertainment, Inc. 800 Concar Drive, Suite 300 San Mateo, CA 94402-2649
KOEI Corporation 1818 Gilbreth Road, Suite 235 Burlingame, CA 94010
NAMCO HOMETEK INC. P.O. Box 5309 Novato, CA 94948-5309
SNK NEOGEO USA CONSUMER CORP. PO Box 1140 Wall, NJ 07719-1140
hello@arcsy.co.jp
Electronic Arts Ltda, R. Fidêncio Ramos, 195 4° andar, Conjs 41, 43 ,45, São Paulo 04551-010 Brazil Registered Number: 02.184.024/0001-73
www@ravensoft.com
Atlus U.S.A., Inc. 199 Technology Driv
pr@HudsonEnt.com
monolith@monolithsoft.co.jp
919 & 989 East Hillsdale Boulevard Foster City CA, 94404
Square Enix Limited, PO BOX 60257, London, EC2P 2BU
info@tecmoinc.com
Tecmo, Inc. 21213-B Hawthorne Boulevard, #5553, Torrance, CA 90503 U.S.A.
storesupport@konami.com
Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc. 2381 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200, El Segundo, CA 90245
Midway Games Inc. Corporate Headquarters 2704 West Roscoe Street Chicago, IL 60618
Marvel Entertainment, Inc. 417 5th Avenue New York, NY 10016
publicity@dccomics.com
Nintendo Of America Inc., P.O. Box 957, Redmond, WA 98073-0957 - U.S.A.
Activision, Incorporated 3100, Ocean Park Boulevard Santa Monica, California 90405
Blizzard Entertainment P.O. Box 18979 Irvine, CA 92623
Corporate Mailing Address: Ensemble Studios/Microsoft 10440 N. Central Expressway Suite 1600 Dallas, TX 75231
webmaster@ensemblestudios.com
SEGA America, 350 Rhode Island Street, Suite 400,San Francisco, CA 94103,U.S.A;
Does this page fall under our scope? MrKIA11 ( talk) 14:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
After the discussion at this MFD, WikiProject Phoenix Wright has been moved to be a task force of this project. I'm sure the creator would appreciate anyone lending a hand to integrate the task force into this project. Cheers,-- Aervanath ( talk) 05:12, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Resident Evil 5#PC version .28or lack thereof.29 and reliable sources and comment. Regards, – xeno ( talk) 17:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been seeing this editor a lot lately for some time and am noticing recent activity that has been less than helpful. For starters, a random redirect (which I undid), and now an obscure page move. I have brought up this matter here since it is video game-related. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 03:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with boldly redirecting an unreferenced stub consisting entirely of in-game information. bridies ( talk) 03:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Heads up: Template:Vgrationale has been nominated for Deletion ( Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 March 23#Template:Vgrationale). I already added a Keep vote to it, but please go over and weigh in as well. This template has been helping us take care of images that have needed fair-use rationales for quite a while now, but apparently the person who deleted it (and several other possibly redundant rationale templates) believes it encourages "extraneous use" of non-free content. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 19:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Mortal Kombat#Complete rewrite about rewriting the page. However, there is a little argument concerning trivia sections. It would be good to have an experienced entering in the discussion. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
An anon user added http://www.kofxii.com/ as an external link in The King of Fighters XII. I cannot find anything about SNK in the forum. Is it an official forum? Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
There is an on-going slow edit war on MechWarrior (video games) concerning whether or not a fan mod should be included in the list. Can somebody please help solve this? -- Scaletail ( talk) 22:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
As Max Payne 3 was announced this morning, I think it might be a good idea to determine when a sequel game article should be created. (A new IP game is a bit different since there's usually no place to move information to).
For myself, as with the current Max Payne 3 article, an announcement of the game is not sufficient to create the sequel article (redirects and discussion in a series article, yes, however). I'm thinking that our boundary should be that two of the three sections of: Plot/Setting, Gameplay, and Development; can be given a reasonable paragraph of discussion, the rest to be filled in over time. For that to happen, you usually need more than just the announcement but also details such as a "first look", developer's comments in interviews, or the like. Anything less than that can be easily summarized in any series/previous game article within a paragraph (and thus not overload it) until more details are fleshed out. -- MASEM ( t) 14:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
My gut feeling says no, but I noticed someone add OnLive as a platform to BioShock today. Thoughts? – xeno ( talk) 04:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems like an apt time to throw Zeebo into the discussion as well. - X201 ( talk) 13:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
It's being pushed as a "console" isn't it? One can buy a box and use it with a TV... sounds like a console to me... At any rate I don't think we should be adding it to articles until it's actually released. bridies ( talk) 14:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Can an admin remove the protection of this redirect page: Pokemon Platinum so we can avoid a double redirect. Thanks Salavat ( talk) 15:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Aggregator | Score |
---|---|
Metacritic | 88% |
Publication | Score |
---|---|
1Up.com | 10/10 |
Edge | 7/10 |
When writing a reception section, I always lead with Metacritic or other such aggregation websites to give an impression on overall feedback. Yet our Template:VG Reviews (as displayed right) pushes these aggregated results to the bottom of the list, I do not think this is the right way to do it. I propose that aggregation websites be given the lead in Template:VG Reviews. - hahnch e n 21:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I still think these tables are ugly and unnecessary. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire - past ops) 03:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been removing direct mentions of scores in prose and moving them to the box, then making the reception section on actual reception. This seems to make sense, as it's less cluttered than "IGN gave it a 95%. 1up gave it a 90%." etc. I do think that it should be homogenized though...either you have the box or you don't. Personally I think that putting numbered reviews in there AT ALL is unnecessary. The overall Metacritic/Gamerankings score should be the only thing mentioned since it aggregates all the scores, and Wikipedia copying that would just be less accurate.-- ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 00:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
As you'll see in the example boxout, the change has been made, courtesy to User:SpecialWindler. Keep an eye out for mishandled templates, and we'll revisit this later. - hahnch e n 14:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
As you may or may not know, recently Home of the Underdogs lost its server, and went down permanently. Within short order, there were two sites that sprung up to try and replace it, and just now, apparently, a third one. None of them are by the original owner or anything, so this creates a problem of just how notable these copy sites are for WP purposes. Just thought I'd give a heads up and hope maybe someone can help figure out what to do with the page, as it seems a bit messy at the moment. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 11:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
We have been arguing back and forth over the layout of the Metal Gear Series page. The guy in charge insists on ONLY discussing the plot of the games. He has the series listed according to canon plot TWICE within the same article. My argument was that the series should ALSO be discussed from the game design perspective. You can see MY Suggestion at the bottom of the discussion page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Metal_Gear_(series)
I would like to ask for some assistance in the matter. There are 3 official documentaries that clearly label what was an original game and what was a spin-off, and it has nothing to do with plot. Even this weeks presentation by Hideo Kojima (series creater) at the GDC outlined the series evolution according to game design. I see no reason why gameplay and game design should not be included in the article about the series. Why do we need to have plot discussed twice within the same article? 63.161.203.11 ( talk) 15:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I need help with an mmorpg, I have a sub-page on my user page. If u would like to help please vist my page an you will see it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Setokira ( talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey all. I've got a GA nomination (for machinima) on hold, and the reviewer and I would appreciate an extra pair of eyes. I've self-copyedited (and spotted improvements in every paragraph), but I've been working on this article pretty much daily over the last eight weeks, so the effectiveness of that may be limited, especially in terms of spotting quirky or nonexistent sentence flow. If anyone's up for combing through ~4,600 words of prose, I'd be grateful. Thanks. — TKD:: {talk} 23:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
A few months back, I proposed a merge of List of Frontier Brains, as a list of non-notable characters. Without reliable third-party sources, it would even be suitable for deletion. But I went with a merge, just to get a sense of other people. No one has checked in. I'd appreciate it if a couple of other editors could look at the article, and check in with their opinion.
Feel free to post any other merge discussions that have stalled, and I'll help out by giving an honest assessment. Randomran ( talk) 16:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot guys. This had been on my list of things to do for a while. Randomran ( talk) 02:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Please read the arguments at CFD, input is appreciated. As the page was not tagged with the project template, it has not appeared on article alerts. - hahnch e n 13:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed like for Darkstalkers that all the individual character pages have been merged into a single list with many omitted details you can see obviously present. I am a bit confused about this, why do none of these characters with their long history not get an article but say, Eddy Gordo gets one? On what basis is this decided? Tyciol ( talk) 08:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Single user wikiproject, limited in scope. Should be task forcified if there is interest or deleted. – xeno ( talk) 19:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't this at WP:FT yet? Res Mar 14:10, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's how the entire Metroid series looks like:
Note that there is no Metroid Prime (series) article as of yet. MuZemike 16:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
The third-person shooter article has been on my list of things to work on for a while. But right now it's completely unverified, with no clear way forward. A few web searches have revealed only a few trivial references. I'd really like to give it one last good effort before just giving up and merging this, with a summary "a third-person shooter is a shooter game with a third-person perspective". 3PS is such a commonplace term that it would seem weird to have an article on first-person shooters or real-time strategy and not this one.
Jump in with anything on third-person shooters that you can reference. Literally anything. Randomran ( talk) 02:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Selected donwload stats are available for some of the XNA community sales. I dunno how many of these even have articles, and some of the more popular ones may not be there, but it could be useful to someone. -- MASEM ( t) 18:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, everyone. I've taken two photographs; one is of a
Virtual Boy controller and the other of a
Pokémon mini system. I'm pretty sure they're considered free images despite the fact the Nintendo logo is prominently featured on both products. But, I want to make absolutely sure before I upload them to Wikimedia Commons. So, free images or not? -
sesuPRIME
talk •
contributions 20:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
PS: I know Commons already has pictures of these two, but mine are much better quality.
Help! I'm working on The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay due its sequel's release coming soon. But I'm having problems improving the article. Please, I would like to maybe make this my first GA, so please help me with this. GamerPro64 ( talk) 21:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- The game was well received by critics and highly praised for its eerie atmosphere and a deeply intriguing gothic story. The graphics in particular earned exceptional praise, and Soul Reaver was called "among the best that have ever been on the Playstation"[2]
Oooookay, I understand now. As for copyedit, I tried to apply some of it to the Setting section and trimmed off a bit. The Clawed One ( talk) 23:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Sony has revealed the number of PlayStation 2 consoles shipped worldwide. It is 136 million, as of 31 December 2008. Quote: "Since launching in 2000, PlayStation 2 has sold more than 136 million sell-in units worldwide", sell-in means sold to retailers. Numbers from this press release. Rhonin the wizard ( talk) 16:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently conducting a GA review of First-person shooter, and feel that the infobox might be better with a typical screenshot instead of the 'asteroids' logo. I think the article top looks a little untidy at present, with the infobox and then a screenshot.
I realise the template is used on quite a few articles; I wonder if the template could conditionally display an image/caption if one is specified, but otherwise remain as-is, to avoid problems with all those articles (until they could be updated with screenshots).
I'm not criticising the navigation sections; I've looked into the issue, and found that there are other examples of articles that use infobox more for navigation that information (FA example Canadian_charter_of_rights_and_freedoms. I can't think of any 'list of facts' that is appropriate to genres anyway.
If there's no big objection, I might try to modify that template myself, as described - ie to allow the option to show an image instead of the logo, if such an image is specified.
Looking forward to some input, -- Chzz ► 16:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Demo - I'd rather that the infobox for First person shooters looked more like User:Chzz/fps.
There's currently 15 pages that transclude {{VG Action}}. All of them have it at the top. Most don't have an image (e.g. Tactical shooter). Some ( Fighting game, Shoot 'em up and First person shooters - the one I'm working on) have a picture before the infobox.
Two possible ways to achieve this;
1. Make another template, called {{VG Action pic}}.
2. Change the existing template to have conditional code, that says "If an image is specified, show it, otherwise show that logo".
The thing about this is, it also needs to be considered in the wider field of the other VG templates - because they all work this way at present, and it does give more of a 'unified look'.
Personally, I don't like the style, because I don't think that 'asteroids' graphic adds any info to the article, and because it's a non-standard way of navigating through the articles.
So - perhaps this should raise the bigger issue of ALL the VG templates - would they be better if they displayed an image, instead of the cartoon logo used at present? Or, again, I guess they could be edited to 'default' to the logo if no pic is specified.
If we go the 'conditional picture' route, then I think I'll need help with this from somebody who knows about template syntax.
It might be an opportunity to sort the whole mess out, though. Should there really be a separate infobox style for Action, Adventure, Industry, history, bestsellers etc? One well-designed template with suitable optional fields, well-documented, would provide a good solution long-term.
-- Chzz ► 19:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
A related discussion is going on here. SharkD ( talk) 02:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) We don't need to use a "simplistic identifier of a subject matter at a glance"; our readers can read and the name and the other words there will give them that. I'm against dumbing down our project by using images like this. -- John ( talk) 04:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
(unindent)
The template VG Action be changed to show an optional screen of a game - if an image is not specified, it will remain as it is.
Please express brief consent or opposition below. -- Chzz ► 23:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I started adding Category: PlayStation 3 games to downloadable PS3 games articles as there was a lack of consistency and as I didn't feel that Category: PlayStation 3 Network games was a "distinguished category" from Category: PlayStation 3 games (under the Duplicate categorization rule) the articles should appear in both. This sparked a discussion between myself and Xeno but the only thing we could establish is that WP:SUBCAT is a particularly hard to understand piece of guidance! So we thought it would be best to raise it here. The result of this discussion should also be applied to Xbox 360/XBLA games.
Essentially, I think because there is no PlayStation 3 retail games category, they cannot be distinguished and downloadable games should appear in both categories. Others' interpretation of the definition of a "distinguished category" would be useful as well as thoughts on what ultimately makes the most sense? ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 19:25, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
We need to think about this as a user would. Currently there is one big category with all PS3 game articles in it. There is also a PSN subcat with games available via PSN. Should a user be able to come to WP and see a category with every PS3 article in it? Or should that user have to search around subcats to find the full list of articles? If anything, I think the PS3 category should work a bit like a
Venn diagram. The top cat PS3 Games should list all articles. Subcats called PSN and Bluray should contain PSN Games and Bluray Games as needed. So we would end up with a PSN game being in both the PS3 cat and the PSN subcat. Or a Bluray game being in the PS3 cat and the Bluray subcat. And games like
Gran Turismo 5 Prologue and
Burnout Paradise being in all three cats because they fit the requirements for membership of those cats.
EDIT: I've added te category tree so that we can see the current layout of the category. -
X201 (
talk) 11:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the category tree again it looks like a few of them need to be renamed:
Also, should Cancelled PlayStation 3 games be a subcat of PlayStation 3 games? Shouldn't PlayStation 3 games only contain games that actually exist or are going to exist? ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 12:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
On a separate tangent. Should PS2 games that are re-released via PSN be in a subcat of PS3 games? They're not PS3 games as such, its just that its possible to play them on a PS3. If every PS2 game were re released via PSN we could end up with a PS3 cat that is a duplicate of the PS2 cat with the addition of PS3 games. Perhaps their own PSN cat Backward compatible PSN games? - X201 ( talk) 11:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
The proposed transferral has been completed. The schedule for the replacement project can be found at the bottom of the page. This discussion can now come to an end. Comments on the project can be made in the respective section. Dylanlip ( talk) 20:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay everyone. Here's my proposal to replace the old {{ WikiProject Video games}} with {{ WP VG}}. This new template utilizes the new {{ WPBannerMeta}}, which is the current iteration of talk templates. The new features added/updated are described in length here. I have also tested out the template on some Video game articles to test out certain parameters.(Task forces, nesting, classes, priority, etc.) Those tests are here: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] I hope this all will help gain your support for this new template. Consensus is NEEDED before I can start doing massive replacements of the old template. Dylanlip ( talk) 14:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
WPBannerMeta}}
template, and I'm glad you able to put it into effect. Looks good.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 14:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC){{
WP VG}}
should redirect to {{
WikiProject Video games}}
as mentioned above, that way {{
WP VG}}
can be used as a shortcut, but {{
WikiProject Video games}}
is still the official name to stick with the common way of naming WikiProject templates. We can request a bot to populate a list of all the articles that have the old tf= parameter that we can manually go through and change.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 15:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Side question. Does either template support multiple Task Forces? - X201 ( talk) 15:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Everyone is saying that we shouldn't go through all of the articles to replace the templates. I'm fully capable and willing to undergo this arduous task. Yes, it CAN be done, but it should be done in phases.
Now, here is my list of reasons for why we should go through with this:
The list of phases and reasons explain themselves. Dylanlip ( talk) 21:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I whole heartily disagree. {{
WikiProject Video games}}
should be kept as the main name. If you feel like taking the time, doing all of the above would be great, just go down the list of pages that translude {{
WikiProject Video games}}
.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 23:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
request.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 15:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC){{
WPBannerMeta}}
, not the details, as is starting on the
talk page. There is no point in doing work multiple times.
MrKIA11 (
talk) 16:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)(Restarting subcomments) Then the transfer needs needs to be done ASAP. This needs to be started. Also, how do you know that the people agreeing to my original proposal weren't also agreeing to the code itself? If they were against a certain feature of the template, they would've stated it when giving their opinion. I'm going to place {{ editprotected}} on the template talk page to get an admin. Consensus was reached on to transfer and on what to transfer. End of story. Dylanlip ( talk) 16:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)