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 65 | ← | Archive 68 | Archive 69 | Archive 70 | Archive 71 | Archive 72 | → | Archive 75 |
Wow that was a mouthful...anyway the problem is with The Final Fantasy Legend. The game received a quick revision after it's first Japanese release to fix bugs, but the only pages I've found to note this are rom sites, the game's own serial number, or websites that wouldn't pass a FAC. Does anyone know of a good source for such information? I'm *really* trying to avoid the "just don't cover it" route but I'd rather have coverage be as thorough as possible. Would citing the game's serial number even work in the worst case?-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 23:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I am suggesting the merge of Dragon Ball Z: Burst Limit to Dragon Ball Z: Budokai (series). The discussion can be found here. Please join in the discussion so that concensus on the matter can be reached. DBZROCKS Its over 9000!!! 20:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
By the way, Dragon Ball Z: Infinite World was merged into the same article but there was some disagreement since Infinite World was well sourced and had both reception and development sections. The discussion was here. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Theres a mention of the game on PSP in the article , but it doesnt mention an enhanced port of the game which was a bonus in that version as well. Can someone help me integrate this information without sounding like im repeating words such as "another" and "and" etc if you get my drift. JasonHockeyGuy ( talk) 00:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
There's really not a provision to tackle three related articles at once, so this seemed a better forum.
Two of these have notes on things to fix in the articles from last year, and none of them even look like they GA worthy but two of them were promoted this year. Can we go ahead and just downgrade them on the grounds they've obviously Start-class or does anyone object?--
Kung Fu Man (
talk) 23:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
With E3 happening this week, (even today), there's a lot of sequel news coming out and people seem eager to want to create a full article based on the minimal information gleaned from the announcement. (see, for example Crackdown 2 or Left 4 Dead 2). Note, these are sequels no one was expected as opposed to titles well described (ala The Beatles: Rock Band). Again, personally, I urge restraint until there's enough to write a good section on plot or gameplay from more than a couple sources, salting a redirect to the appropriate prequel articles until such time is needed. Anyone elses' thoughts on the matter .-- MASEM ( t) 18:47, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
WP:HAMMER has some relevant advice. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire - past ops) 20:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
[1] IGN/Gamespy is closing down their Classicgaming sites by Aug 31 (so we have time).
Anyone know of a way to get a bot or AWB-like tool to list pages that have links to these sites to figure out how much work we need to update references and/or check archive.org? (and in cases where these have been determines to be RS, to add new locations as exceptions) -- MASEM ( t) 23:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Do more developed non-stub articles on just announced games with certain interesting traits qualify for DYK even though unreleased? I'm wondering about nominating Tales of Monkey Island now I've got it up, but I've never dealt with a DYK before. The point about Telltale and LucasArts collaborating together despite Telltale being formed by LucasArts employees disillusioned with the company's direction in 2004 could be decent DYK material. -- Sabre ( talk) 12:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for AHS Centaur, 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 [talk] [pf] 13:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure where the decision came from to only show systems of the same generation in the bar at the bottom, but I don't like it. It removes the context for the existence of the system, and makes wikipedia articles about video game systems that much less easy to navigate.
I often get the response that I am free to change things about wikipedia, and I am aware of this. I just want to know if the way things are is they way wikipedians want things, so that I'm not making trouble if I do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.43.215 ( talk) 03:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I just finished up Q*bert and was hoping I could get a fresh pair of eyes to look it over. I wrote half of it over a month ago and the rest this past week. I also tried adding some more reception about remakes and sequels, and would like an opinion about how it flows/looks. Because of those reasons, I'm afraid there are more errors in there I'm missing. Any help would be appreciated. ( Guyinblack25 talk 16:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC))
Giving a shout about it because it's one of the project's top priority articles, but I nominated Link for featured article review because of it's current quality. If people could take a look and offer input or improve the article that'd help greatly.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 18:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I have done a GA Reassessment of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion as part of the GA Sweeps project. The article is certainly GA quality except for several dead links in the reference section. I would like to keep this article at GA but not without these links being fixed. My review is here. I am notifying the interested projects and editors in the hopes that someone will address this so that it can remain GA (actually A class now). If you have questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles ( talk) 22:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Should Final Fantasy XI and Final Fantasy XIV be renamed Final Fantasy XI Online and Final Fantasy XIV Online? All these names are official, but I'm not sure which ones are the most commonly-used. Milkedslime ( talk) 13:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Random Raul pick (I did not request it, so I hope it doesn't screw up anyone's attempts for a front page VG article), but Okami will be the Main Page article on June 10th. Usual vandal watches requested. -- MASEM ( t) 03:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Is there any consensus on how to judge the notability of a video game?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Neon white ( talk • contribs) 13:45, 1 June 2009
The softening scores bit has been brought up before. I think it might be more to do with companies that are owned by them or heavily advertise with them that the problem exists. 陣 内 Jinnai 17:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Anyone dealing with games with "meaning" may want to see what they can add from this CC-distributed book: Well Played 1.0. -- MASEM ( t) 05:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I've just created an AfD for Castlevania Next-Gen, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castlevania Next-Gen, thinking it's too early for an article. -- Oscarthecat ( talk) 07:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Winooo ( talk · contribs) has been changing occurrences of " Microsoft Windows" to " PC". Although pretty sure that this is incorrect, I just want to confirm it with the project. — LOL T/ C 16:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Macs and Windows are both PCs, but games that work on one don't work on the other unless they're specially designed to. So I'd say that "Windows" is usually preferable over "PC", since PC is a much wider range of operating systems. It would be like listing "Console", rather than "PS3" or "Wii"... it's just not specific enough. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 19:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I got a question. Is Characters in Devil May Cry considered a list? Because if it is, it automaticly fails Good Article. GamerPro64 ( talk) 22:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Good question. Maybe we should. GamerPro64 ( talk) 22:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Good idea. And besides, CD-i games from The Legend of Zelda series isn't really a list. And you might be on to changing Characters of Final Fantasy VIII and Characters of Kingdom Hearts to FL. GamerPro64 ( talk) 23:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, List of characters in Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow is a FL. So Characters of Final Fantasy VIII and Characters of Kingdom Hearts should be FL also. GamerPro64 ( talk) 23:49, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Somewhat related, but since there seems to be a consensus that these are articles and not lists you might take a gander here, where they're apparently trying to pass off an article on Bulbasaur's evolutionary line as a list.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 00:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Good Game is a national TV show on TV here in oz which discusses video games, and has a website with much old material archived - hopefully useful for some article expansion. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 00:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on an article for the MissingNo. glitch, and a literary source cited a particular piece of fan art when discussing the impact of the glitch and game communities attempting to depict it as a "real" character in the game. My question is what's the best approach to this for FAR? Citing it as a derivative work and noting it's citation in the book seems the best move but I wanted to see if there were any other guidelines involved, as this is a rather unique case for this sort of thing.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I know we usually remove them from video game articles, but I'm trying to remember - what's the exact policy and/or guideline against having them? -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 14:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
After this (older) discussion, I think that we should categorize articles by task force... e.g., Category:The Sims task force video game articles. This will: A) Allow the number of articles within a project to be tracked, and B) Let User:Mr.Z-bot create "popularity statisitics" for each project separately. I can't really see any reason not to do this. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Someone has tagged for deletion an image on which I put a FUR. The tag reason is "alternative free miages avaialbe". I duspute that. See conversation at my Talk page. I have other things to do (article building, reviewing), but not to do wirth video games. So it doesn't affect any of my surrent activities, and I'm not spending further time on it. However you might want to look at the case in case its the thin end of a wedge. -- Philcha ( talk) 19:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I spent some time to expand this article as to provide a home for such games that are on the edge of notability (such as the current Trino that's up for deletion). This is just to let anyone that thinks they know of such games and know they couldn't write a full article, here's a place to put info about it. -- MASEM ( t) 21:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
For those of you using {{ cite manual}} in you articles, a quick shout about it but I've added the missing page parameter to it (it'll work with page or pages, giving p. or pp. accordingly), and made an in-line version on the notes page for it. Should help some.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 07:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
series=
parameter that is useful for providing page headers or section titles, myself. --
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (
talk) 22:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
series
parameter is meant for a series of books, like the
Chicken Soup for the Soul series,
The Lord of the Rings series, and an encyclopedia series comprised of volumes. Aside from that, not really sure what the difference is. {{
Cite manual}} looks to have fewer parameters and might be more user friendly. (
Guyinblack25
talk 23:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC))
Was just reviewing some core policies and was reminded that we're currently giving pricing information about such topics as Virtual Console, Wii Shop Channel, Xbox Live Arcade, etc. I just thought I'd bring this up to see if there's significant notability to the pricing details we're listing for the individual titles and services across the project, given that we have both WP policy and our own guidelines that state that we shouldn't put pricing info in articles unless there's something significant about those prices. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 22:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:NOTDIR: "Wikipedia is not a price guide to be used to compare the prices of competing products" and that's really all there is to it. A lot of budget 8-bit games had fixed pricing here in the UK, budget houses had different ranges at different prices (often printed on the inlay), so why aren't contributors crawling over themselves to stick prices into articles like Skool Daze? Nope, this is about price comparison of current games, which unambiguously breaks policy. As stated by the same policy and repeated above, if pricing has any relevancy to the subject at hand then contributors are free to say as much as is warranted in the article. It's time to stop turning a blind eye and just get on with it. Someone another 10:35, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
A while ago I was working on the Resident Evil (video game) article privately in a sandbox on my profile. I have since lost interest and moved onto other projects. Is anybody interested in adopting the article and improving it? I would rather inform project members about this instead of pasting the current work version, having it whittle away into a fan crusted embarrassment, and ultimately have wasted my time. Significant work has been performed on the Development section. Some work has been done on Gameaplay and Story. So, any takers? -- Noj r ( talk) 04:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Video Games/BioWare ...so this happened. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 12:44, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Wanted to throw this out there to see what members think about it. A few WikiProjects have a Reference Library subpage ( Anime and manga, Japan, and Scouting), similar to a magazine archive. The difference is that it focuses solely on books. I know some members use google books, but since many on there only provide limited previews, having more access to the books could be very helpful. I also think a listing of books to look for will help guide editors in their research.
Any thoughts about creating such a page? ( Guyinblack25 talk 19:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC))
Ah, I didn't think about the multiplatform issue, so I like the alphabetical idea. And how about the originally suggested title of "Reference library"? - sesuPRIME talk • contribs 02:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
FYI- Added some free online books to the page as well: the Well Player book Masem found and Halcyon Days. ( Guyinblack25 talk 16:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC))
I've updated the project stats shown on the main project page. Here are the individual pages:
I also submitted a newsletter item on the subject:
SharkD ( talk) 06:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The "Unknown-importance video game articles" has become loaded with articles, over 2000 in fact. However when you look at the list, you see some oddballs in there, such as Operation C or Demon's Crest. I took a look and found the assessor had rated them "no" importance instead of Low.
Can we get a quick bot to go through and change them en masse to low? There has to be some faster means than doing it manually.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 08:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Supreme Commander 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. - Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 15:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
When I created the Xbox Live Indie Games (was Community Games) the goal there was to provide a logical home to list such games that have received some attention but would likely never achieve enough to be a full article (based on the Trino (video game) AFD.) Reasonable solution there.
So I got to thinking about the same for Flash/browser-based games. For example, a recent game "Little Wheel" has a handful of sources that critically comment on it, not enough to encourage me to make a new article but that I feel should have some coverage somewhere. I'm sure there's many more people can list.
I note there is a List of browser games, recently recreated, but only points to games with articles, and mostly fully complete articles. I'm thinking of expanding that to be a list of browser games that have achieved some metric of notability (2 RS, neither being a "game of the day" pick that some sites do). It would still catalog the games listed, but provide 1 to 2 paragraphs and a quick infobox for each game lists. Should this get long, it can be expanded by alpha. This would be in the same manner as List of internet phenomena is maintained, requiring key sources to be included instead of "Oh, I think this should".
Any comments, suggestions? -- MASEM ( t) 14:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't support merging non-notables to parent or umbrella articles/lists, at all, and because of the nature of these games it seems even less desirable. If readers want a splurge of browser games then they can hit Kongregate, Newgrounds or Armor Games; there's no point trying to swim against the tide when the things are released on a daily basis and readers can get the same info on the hop from game descriptions. Nothing's going to stop non-notable games of all types getting articles created for them so I'm not enthused with the idea of bloating the list to try and stop it. Someone another 21:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Initial discussion here. What is the Project's opinion on placing 'fan version numbers' alongside official version information in an infobox? DP76764 ( Talk) 15:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Is this necessary? I think this leans towards trivial, and just listcruft at best. Alternate controls are a somewhat important feature, but a whole list of them doesn't seem very necessary to me. This seems like content better suited for a video game website/wiki. RobJ1981 ( talk) 18:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
^The prior statement by Izno is untrue. From my experience, only a small sample of Wii games use the Gamecube controller.
Also, this article has a mandate after the category was deleted Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_January_8#Category:Wii_games_that_use_the_Gamecube_controller
Deletion of this article is uncalled for. This discussion hasn't even lasted a day, nor were anyone outside of WikiProject Video games consulted and all of a sudden RobJ1981 cleared the article. There wasn't even an AfD template placed on the page.
Really if this article is "trivia" and should be deleted, then shouldn't List of Wii games using Miis, List of Wii games using WiiConnect24, and List of Wii Wi-Fi Connection games be too Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 05:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
^that is not true. User:RobJ1981 used this dicussion as an excuse to convert the page into a redirect [ [2]] Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 06:10, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
BTW (just a general question) how is stripping a page of content and turning it into a redirect significantly different from deleting it? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 06:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
OK good point, anyways, I have notified the two other editors who have edited the page (the bulk of the page was built by me and then rest was done by bots and IPs and two editors) and User:Stepheng3 (who proposed the creation of this page when the category was deleted) of this discussion. Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 06:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
One man's trivia is another's treasure. The list is extensively referenced, and no argument so far presented has shown that it violates any of the five pillars or detracts from the encyclopedia in any way. People who want to delete lists can surely find better candidates than this one. -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 06:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Really there is no necessity for an AfD. No one has present reasonable arguments against the page. Izno's reasoning for opposing the article is dead wrong (most Wii games are programmed for use with the Wii Remote, not with the GameCube controller) and GamePro64 provided absolutely no reasoning for their position. PresN never made a position for or against. There is no consensus to take this to AfD. 3 "for"s + 2 "oppose"s = No consensus
Also, If these game lists should be deleted, so should List of Wii games using Miis, List of Wii games using WiiConnect24, and List of Wii Wi-Fi Connection games. If this goes to AfD, I will personally put (or attempt to put) all these other articles up for AfD to highlight the absurdity of this deletion attempt. Side note: In a few cases, (based on the references from the page) the GameCube controller is NOT an alternate gameplay method but a primary gameplay method Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 07:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
There isn't a logical way to merge this article. Merging was not the position of RobJ1981, who was essentially trying to delete this page by turning it into a redirect to List of Wii games. This has been an all or nothing since RobJ1981 put it up and no actually solid arguments have been given by those who want to see the page gone.
Keep in mind RobJ1981 also was the one to try to delete the category that the article evolved out of. The CfD conclusion was what called on the creation of this article (though I didn't get around to creating the article for several months, but that is besides the point). This started as a category, turned into an article, now you want it to go back to a category? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 07:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Wait, are you talking about the article in question ( List of Wii games that use the Nintendo GameCube controller) or the articles I threatened to AfD? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 02:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Note: The deletion discussion for this article can be found here. Greg Tyler ( t • c) 15:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
WP:VG needs to produce a consistent approach across the board:
I suspect it will take a while to agree a standard approach, and suggest WP:VG should turn up to request a re-list in say 3 month's time, so it can develop a policy - and to support a deletion review if the article is deleted or merged before WP:VG has had time to agree a standard approach. I advise Thegreyanomaly to make a copy of the article at a sub-page of his/her User page as soon as possible.
BTW I think the idea of merging with / redirecting to List of Wii games needs more thought before action is taken. Doing this for multiple platform-related lists or categories of Wii games would probably make List of Wii games very unwieldy. -- Philcha ( talk) 14:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC) -- Philcha ( talk) 14:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
A relatively new template, {{ italictitle}} is currently being used to change the article titles on various pages that have the scientific name of an organism. There is currently a bot request to mass-update these articles. I just wanted to bring up a discussion here regarding the use of this template in other article titles where it may be useful.
Throughout many articles, including Halo 3, the title is italicized when used within the article, but not in the actual title. All input is welcome to decide whether or not to implement this new feature in films, video games, and book titles.
Discussions on the use of this italicized title feature for use in organism articles can be seen here and here. -- Spotty 11222 20:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Problem with this is there is no real easy way to distinqush elements like song titles, which are not italicized, but come may come under our scope if they relate solely to video games, from the video game itself. Nor are there waves to determine that other elements like Ivalice is actually talking about a world and not a game. 陣 内 Jinnai 03:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Would it be simpler just to add it to {{ Infobox VG}} rather than adding another line of unintelligable code to twenty thousand articles (assuming we actually want it, and I'm not sure I do)? Nifboy ( talk) 13:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I think that these italic titles look pretty ugly. They don't represent the actual article title, it doesn't show as italicized in edit mode, and (to my knowledge) no print encyclopedia (and very few websites of any kind) do this kind of thing. I'm thinking of starting a full RFC about this, because it seems to have be done without wide consensus beyond the one WikiProject, and would be a major change to Wikipedia if books, games, and movies were all italicized. My feeling is that we should hold off on making any more titles italic until there is a more clear consensus. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I've started on RFC on whether or not this template should be used here. All comments are welcome. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
There are a few print reviews that I'd really like to use, but they aren't listed at WP:VG/M. I was wondering if anyone might have them, but just not listed there. The game I'm interested in is Neverwinter Nights 2: Mysteries of Westgate, a current GAN, and the magazines that there should be reviews in are: PC Gamer May 2008 and November 2008 issues and Games for Windows April/May 2008 issue. All help with this would be much appreciated. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 19:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Is the site ztgamedomain.com a reliable source? I checked the source guide and it doesn't say if it is or isn't, unless I missed something.-- Will C 02:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey. Two editors are going back and forth on the FF13 talk page about the inclusion of an image of the game's main characters, and it seems to have no end in sight. Can someone go over there and help the two editors out? I've issued WP:3RR warnings to both of them, so hopefully that will keep things calm for now, but a great deal of consensus is needed over there, I think. Thanks! — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ottava Rima ( talk) 22:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Came across this template earlier: {{ Game & Watch games}}. Now I understand the importance of the G&W as much as the next guy but...do many of these need individual articles? Were any of the stand-alone games even reviewed? It just seems like a group better suited for a list.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 04:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd appreciate a few extra eyes from this project over at this merge discussion concerning the episode articles for Sam & Max Save the World. While the parent article is a GA, the episode articles currently consist of little other than plot details and trivia. There's been some concerns raised over the eligibility and actual usefulness of these episode articles, but they have sources available (if not in the articles) that can be used either to enhance the parent article or assist in rewriting the episode articles, so it will be handy if we can knock out a decent consensus for how to proceed with them. -- Sabre ( talk) 10:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
In this case these really are shards of a whole rather than separates that are linked. With the parent article so sparkly-clean and no development info turning up for individual episodes, I'd say go for it but ensure that each episode is given its due in the reception section of the parent. The individual episodes are reviewed in terms of their individual plots and characters. Good work on these, they're an important part of adventure gaming's return to the mainstream. Someone another 11:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for 45th Infantry Division (United States), 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 [talk] [pf] 13:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Should templates on video game series be included in their own series category, or just in the Category:Video game templates by series category? Either way, someone should get a bot to categorize or uncategorize all of them.-- ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 21:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
A user recently placed lots of Satellaview games into the List of Kirby media featured list. I've searched for all of the games on Google, and the only other site that lists them as we do is this place (ignoring sites that run a copy of our page). Cited as a source for the games in the article itself however, is this text page. Kirby Pinball uses a different source, which is this blog post.
I'm pretty sure they existed, but I have no reliable sources to show their significance and or their existence. The only game that has any reliable sources is BS Kirby no Omotya Bako Baseball which was previously listed and correctly cited. Should I remove the other Satellaview games that are sourced with blogs or a text file? -- Nomader ( Talk) 03:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Anyone feel like casting an eye over ToeJam & Earl? It's at FAC at the moment and the main sticking point is the quality of the prose. bridies ( talk) 08:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I started this draft for a "List of Space Invaders games" about a year ago and am very close to finishing it. Given the amount of info and the fact I wrote large chunks at very different times, I was hoping someone could take a look at it. Not really concerned about the lead, I'll rewrite once I'm done with the list. I'm concerned about style consistency, but also about where the line should be drawn for what to include. Specifically:
Would these be better in Space Invaders' Legacy section? I think it would make a good DYK? candidate and easily pass FLC once the lead is fleshed out. So any comments, suggestions would be appreciated as I'd really like to cross this year-long project off my list. ( Guyinblack25 talk 19:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC))
Quick question- I've never started a new article from a sandbox before. Is it common practice to do a cut and paste or a move? ( Guyinblack25 talk 17:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC))
Few years ago, there was a debate about what article name should be used for the game that is known as Trace Memory in North America (the last region where it was released) and as Another Code: Two Memories/Futatsu no Kioku in Japan, Europe and Australasia. Users moved the page around so often that they caused a move protection. Currently, the North American title is used.
I'm not that much into this naming issue, but wasn't the name Mega Drive preferred over Genesis because Mega Drive is both the original name and a name used in parts of the English-speaking world? The same would go for Another Code. Well, I'm not sure about that, but I guess articles such as Yoshi's Universal Gravitation, Dark Chronicle and Picopict prefer the European/PAL region titles for similar reasons.
Independent of that, it is confusing that one article uses the American name of the Another Code/Trace Memory franchise and the article on the sequel ( Another Code R: A Journey Into Lost Memories, has yet to be confirmed for North America) uses the name from other English-speaking regions and Japan.
Is there a policy for such special cases? -- Grandy02 ( talk) 21:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your answers. Since the article is still move-protected, is there any option to solve this problem? -- Grandy02 ( talk) 14:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
This is a somewhat delicate matter, but one that would probably require the full support of the VG project. An editor, User:Dr90s, has been found to have used numerous sockpuppets when editing a number of video game related articles. I'm not entirely sure what Dr90s' agenda is, but after dealing with him a bit myself I can say he can be aggressive and unresponsive in discussions.
User:Thibbs has had a number of run ins with Dr90s, and identified many of the sock puppets. Thibbs has requested an admin ( User:Tanthalas39) act as a point person in reporting further sock puppets. (See Admin noticeboard for details.) To make Thibbs' life a bit easier, I suggested posting here so editors can help identify suspicious activity. I've asked him to post details of what to look for and on what type of articles.
I know we all try to be mature editors, but I think it's better safe than sorry to stress that we need to be careful how we approach this. Flat out accusing other editors of sock puppetry is generally frowned upon and does not assume good faith. If you are engaged in a heated discussion with someone that matches Thibbs' description of Dr90s (should be posted here later), please do not jump to conclusions. Calmly inform Thibbs of your suspicions for him to investigate further. If the editor confronts you about your action to inform Thibbs, simply tell them it is nothing personal and you were asked to do so; go ahead and point them to this thread for good measure. It probably wouldn't hurt to apologize to help diffuse the situation.
It's possible this could be a long term issue, so please keep this in the back of your minds as you do your normal editing. Again, this is a delicate matter that could easily be blown out of proportion in handled without good judgment. Help would be appreciated in keeping this under control. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC))
Bump ( Guyinblack25 talk 19:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC))
This discussion was never resolved. Should I go ahead and implement it? I can't see any possible harm as coming from it. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 18:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
For those unaware, those are the review aggregators as defined by Template:VG Reviews. Defcon (video game)'s review table uses Metacritic, GameRankings, GameStats and Game Ration. Grand Theft Auto IV has MobyGames and TopTenReviews in its lead (although that was added by User:Dr90s).
By having them predefined in the VG Reviews table, we are legitimizing their use. Regardless of the impartiality of Game Ratio or any others, they clearly do not have the reach, audience, or influence of Metacritic. There are many articles on Metacritic, studios may pay bonuses based on it, and when review aggregators are discussed (for video games at least) - it is always Metacritic at the forefront.
Why is it that we bother listing more than one aggregator in reception sections anyway? What does GameRankings add to current FAC Halo Wars, or FA Halo 3 other than redundancy? I can understand why users would choose GameRankings for older games, but when does anyone ever need to link to MobyGames, TopTenReviews et al?
Aggregator listings should be considered and limited on all VG articles. The use of aggregator links on Template:VG Reviews should be reviewed - I would personally like to see all, bar Metacritic and GameRankings removed. But because of the way the template is constructed, this may break hundreds of articles. Your thoughts are welcome. - hahnch e n 17:56, 25 June 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 65 | ← | Archive 68 | Archive 69 | Archive 70 | Archive 71 | Archive 72 | → | Archive 75 |
Wow that was a mouthful...anyway the problem is with The Final Fantasy Legend. The game received a quick revision after it's first Japanese release to fix bugs, but the only pages I've found to note this are rom sites, the game's own serial number, or websites that wouldn't pass a FAC. Does anyone know of a good source for such information? I'm *really* trying to avoid the "just don't cover it" route but I'd rather have coverage be as thorough as possible. Would citing the game's serial number even work in the worst case?-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 23:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I am suggesting the merge of Dragon Ball Z: Burst Limit to Dragon Ball Z: Budokai (series). The discussion can be found here. Please join in the discussion so that concensus on the matter can be reached. DBZROCKS Its over 9000!!! 20:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
By the way, Dragon Ball Z: Infinite World was merged into the same article but there was some disagreement since Infinite World was well sourced and had both reception and development sections. The discussion was here. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Theres a mention of the game on PSP in the article , but it doesnt mention an enhanced port of the game which was a bonus in that version as well. Can someone help me integrate this information without sounding like im repeating words such as "another" and "and" etc if you get my drift. JasonHockeyGuy ( talk) 00:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
There's really not a provision to tackle three related articles at once, so this seemed a better forum.
Two of these have notes on things to fix in the articles from last year, and none of them even look like they GA worthy but two of them were promoted this year. Can we go ahead and just downgrade them on the grounds they've obviously Start-class or does anyone object?--
Kung Fu Man (
talk) 23:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
With E3 happening this week, (even today), there's a lot of sequel news coming out and people seem eager to want to create a full article based on the minimal information gleaned from the announcement. (see, for example Crackdown 2 or Left 4 Dead 2). Note, these are sequels no one was expected as opposed to titles well described (ala The Beatles: Rock Band). Again, personally, I urge restraint until there's enough to write a good section on plot or gameplay from more than a couple sources, salting a redirect to the appropriate prequel articles until such time is needed. Anyone elses' thoughts on the matter .-- MASEM ( t) 18:47, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
WP:HAMMER has some relevant advice. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire - past ops) 20:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
[1] IGN/Gamespy is closing down their Classicgaming sites by Aug 31 (so we have time).
Anyone know of a way to get a bot or AWB-like tool to list pages that have links to these sites to figure out how much work we need to update references and/or check archive.org? (and in cases where these have been determines to be RS, to add new locations as exceptions) -- MASEM ( t) 23:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Do more developed non-stub articles on just announced games with certain interesting traits qualify for DYK even though unreleased? I'm wondering about nominating Tales of Monkey Island now I've got it up, but I've never dealt with a DYK before. The point about Telltale and LucasArts collaborating together despite Telltale being formed by LucasArts employees disillusioned with the company's direction in 2004 could be decent DYK material. -- Sabre ( talk) 12:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for AHS Centaur, 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 [talk] [pf] 13:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure where the decision came from to only show systems of the same generation in the bar at the bottom, but I don't like it. It removes the context for the existence of the system, and makes wikipedia articles about video game systems that much less easy to navigate.
I often get the response that I am free to change things about wikipedia, and I am aware of this. I just want to know if the way things are is they way wikipedians want things, so that I'm not making trouble if I do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.43.215 ( talk) 03:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I just finished up Q*bert and was hoping I could get a fresh pair of eyes to look it over. I wrote half of it over a month ago and the rest this past week. I also tried adding some more reception about remakes and sequels, and would like an opinion about how it flows/looks. Because of those reasons, I'm afraid there are more errors in there I'm missing. Any help would be appreciated. ( Guyinblack25 talk 16:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC))
Giving a shout about it because it's one of the project's top priority articles, but I nominated Link for featured article review because of it's current quality. If people could take a look and offer input or improve the article that'd help greatly.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 18:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I have done a GA Reassessment of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion as part of the GA Sweeps project. The article is certainly GA quality except for several dead links in the reference section. I would like to keep this article at GA but not without these links being fixed. My review is here. I am notifying the interested projects and editors in the hopes that someone will address this so that it can remain GA (actually A class now). If you have questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles ( talk) 22:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Should Final Fantasy XI and Final Fantasy XIV be renamed Final Fantasy XI Online and Final Fantasy XIV Online? All these names are official, but I'm not sure which ones are the most commonly-used. Milkedslime ( talk) 13:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Random Raul pick (I did not request it, so I hope it doesn't screw up anyone's attempts for a front page VG article), but Okami will be the Main Page article on June 10th. Usual vandal watches requested. -- MASEM ( t) 03:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Is there any consensus on how to judge the notability of a video game?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Neon white ( talk • contribs) 13:45, 1 June 2009
The softening scores bit has been brought up before. I think it might be more to do with companies that are owned by them or heavily advertise with them that the problem exists. 陣 内 Jinnai 17:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Anyone dealing with games with "meaning" may want to see what they can add from this CC-distributed book: Well Played 1.0. -- MASEM ( t) 05:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I've just created an AfD for Castlevania Next-Gen, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castlevania Next-Gen, thinking it's too early for an article. -- Oscarthecat ( talk) 07:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Winooo ( talk · contribs) has been changing occurrences of " Microsoft Windows" to " PC". Although pretty sure that this is incorrect, I just want to confirm it with the project. — LOL T/ C 16:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Macs and Windows are both PCs, but games that work on one don't work on the other unless they're specially designed to. So I'd say that "Windows" is usually preferable over "PC", since PC is a much wider range of operating systems. It would be like listing "Console", rather than "PS3" or "Wii"... it's just not specific enough. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 19:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I got a question. Is Characters in Devil May Cry considered a list? Because if it is, it automaticly fails Good Article. GamerPro64 ( talk) 22:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Good question. Maybe we should. GamerPro64 ( talk) 22:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Good idea. And besides, CD-i games from The Legend of Zelda series isn't really a list. And you might be on to changing Characters of Final Fantasy VIII and Characters of Kingdom Hearts to FL. GamerPro64 ( talk) 23:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, List of characters in Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow is a FL. So Characters of Final Fantasy VIII and Characters of Kingdom Hearts should be FL also. GamerPro64 ( talk) 23:49, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Somewhat related, but since there seems to be a consensus that these are articles and not lists you might take a gander here, where they're apparently trying to pass off an article on Bulbasaur's evolutionary line as a list.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 00:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Good Game is a national TV show on TV here in oz which discusses video games, and has a website with much old material archived - hopefully useful for some article expansion. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 00:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on an article for the MissingNo. glitch, and a literary source cited a particular piece of fan art when discussing the impact of the glitch and game communities attempting to depict it as a "real" character in the game. My question is what's the best approach to this for FAR? Citing it as a derivative work and noting it's citation in the book seems the best move but I wanted to see if there were any other guidelines involved, as this is a rather unique case for this sort of thing.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 22:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I know we usually remove them from video game articles, but I'm trying to remember - what's the exact policy and/or guideline against having them? -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 14:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
After this (older) discussion, I think that we should categorize articles by task force... e.g., Category:The Sims task force video game articles. This will: A) Allow the number of articles within a project to be tracked, and B) Let User:Mr.Z-bot create "popularity statisitics" for each project separately. I can't really see any reason not to do this. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Someone has tagged for deletion an image on which I put a FUR. The tag reason is "alternative free miages avaialbe". I duspute that. See conversation at my Talk page. I have other things to do (article building, reviewing), but not to do wirth video games. So it doesn't affect any of my surrent activities, and I'm not spending further time on it. However you might want to look at the case in case its the thin end of a wedge. -- Philcha ( talk) 19:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I spent some time to expand this article as to provide a home for such games that are on the edge of notability (such as the current Trino that's up for deletion). This is just to let anyone that thinks they know of such games and know they couldn't write a full article, here's a place to put info about it. -- MASEM ( t) 21:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
For those of you using {{ cite manual}} in you articles, a quick shout about it but I've added the missing page parameter to it (it'll work with page or pages, giving p. or pp. accordingly), and made an in-line version on the notes page for it. Should help some.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 07:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
series=
parameter that is useful for providing page headers or section titles, myself. --
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (
talk) 22:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
series
parameter is meant for a series of books, like the
Chicken Soup for the Soul series,
The Lord of the Rings series, and an encyclopedia series comprised of volumes. Aside from that, not really sure what the difference is. {{
Cite manual}} looks to have fewer parameters and might be more user friendly. (
Guyinblack25
talk 23:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC))
Was just reviewing some core policies and was reminded that we're currently giving pricing information about such topics as Virtual Console, Wii Shop Channel, Xbox Live Arcade, etc. I just thought I'd bring this up to see if there's significant notability to the pricing details we're listing for the individual titles and services across the project, given that we have both WP policy and our own guidelines that state that we shouldn't put pricing info in articles unless there's something significant about those prices. — KieferSkunk ( talk) — 22:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:NOTDIR: "Wikipedia is not a price guide to be used to compare the prices of competing products" and that's really all there is to it. A lot of budget 8-bit games had fixed pricing here in the UK, budget houses had different ranges at different prices (often printed on the inlay), so why aren't contributors crawling over themselves to stick prices into articles like Skool Daze? Nope, this is about price comparison of current games, which unambiguously breaks policy. As stated by the same policy and repeated above, if pricing has any relevancy to the subject at hand then contributors are free to say as much as is warranted in the article. It's time to stop turning a blind eye and just get on with it. Someone another 10:35, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
A while ago I was working on the Resident Evil (video game) article privately in a sandbox on my profile. I have since lost interest and moved onto other projects. Is anybody interested in adopting the article and improving it? I would rather inform project members about this instead of pasting the current work version, having it whittle away into a fan crusted embarrassment, and ultimately have wasted my time. Significant work has been performed on the Development section. Some work has been done on Gameaplay and Story. So, any takers? -- Noj r ( talk) 04:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Video Games/BioWare ...so this happened. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 12:44, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Wanted to throw this out there to see what members think about it. A few WikiProjects have a Reference Library subpage ( Anime and manga, Japan, and Scouting), similar to a magazine archive. The difference is that it focuses solely on books. I know some members use google books, but since many on there only provide limited previews, having more access to the books could be very helpful. I also think a listing of books to look for will help guide editors in their research.
Any thoughts about creating such a page? ( Guyinblack25 talk 19:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC))
Ah, I didn't think about the multiplatform issue, so I like the alphabetical idea. And how about the originally suggested title of "Reference library"? - sesuPRIME talk • contribs 02:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
FYI- Added some free online books to the page as well: the Well Player book Masem found and Halcyon Days. ( Guyinblack25 talk 16:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC))
I've updated the project stats shown on the main project page. Here are the individual pages:
I also submitted a newsletter item on the subject:
SharkD ( talk) 06:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The "Unknown-importance video game articles" has become loaded with articles, over 2000 in fact. However when you look at the list, you see some oddballs in there, such as Operation C or Demon's Crest. I took a look and found the assessor had rated them "no" importance instead of Low.
Can we get a quick bot to go through and change them en masse to low? There has to be some faster means than doing it manually.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 08:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Supreme Commander 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. - Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 15:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
When I created the Xbox Live Indie Games (was Community Games) the goal there was to provide a logical home to list such games that have received some attention but would likely never achieve enough to be a full article (based on the Trino (video game) AFD.) Reasonable solution there.
So I got to thinking about the same for Flash/browser-based games. For example, a recent game "Little Wheel" has a handful of sources that critically comment on it, not enough to encourage me to make a new article but that I feel should have some coverage somewhere. I'm sure there's many more people can list.
I note there is a List of browser games, recently recreated, but only points to games with articles, and mostly fully complete articles. I'm thinking of expanding that to be a list of browser games that have achieved some metric of notability (2 RS, neither being a "game of the day" pick that some sites do). It would still catalog the games listed, but provide 1 to 2 paragraphs and a quick infobox for each game lists. Should this get long, it can be expanded by alpha. This would be in the same manner as List of internet phenomena is maintained, requiring key sources to be included instead of "Oh, I think this should".
Any comments, suggestions? -- MASEM ( t) 14:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't support merging non-notables to parent or umbrella articles/lists, at all, and because of the nature of these games it seems even less desirable. If readers want a splurge of browser games then they can hit Kongregate, Newgrounds or Armor Games; there's no point trying to swim against the tide when the things are released on a daily basis and readers can get the same info on the hop from game descriptions. Nothing's going to stop non-notable games of all types getting articles created for them so I'm not enthused with the idea of bloating the list to try and stop it. Someone another 21:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Initial discussion here. What is the Project's opinion on placing 'fan version numbers' alongside official version information in an infobox? DP76764 ( Talk) 15:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Is this necessary? I think this leans towards trivial, and just listcruft at best. Alternate controls are a somewhat important feature, but a whole list of them doesn't seem very necessary to me. This seems like content better suited for a video game website/wiki. RobJ1981 ( talk) 18:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
^The prior statement by Izno is untrue. From my experience, only a small sample of Wii games use the Gamecube controller.
Also, this article has a mandate after the category was deleted Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_January_8#Category:Wii_games_that_use_the_Gamecube_controller
Deletion of this article is uncalled for. This discussion hasn't even lasted a day, nor were anyone outside of WikiProject Video games consulted and all of a sudden RobJ1981 cleared the article. There wasn't even an AfD template placed on the page.
Really if this article is "trivia" and should be deleted, then shouldn't List of Wii games using Miis, List of Wii games using WiiConnect24, and List of Wii Wi-Fi Connection games be too Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 05:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
^that is not true. User:RobJ1981 used this dicussion as an excuse to convert the page into a redirect [ [2]] Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 06:10, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
BTW (just a general question) how is stripping a page of content and turning it into a redirect significantly different from deleting it? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 06:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
OK good point, anyways, I have notified the two other editors who have edited the page (the bulk of the page was built by me and then rest was done by bots and IPs and two editors) and User:Stepheng3 (who proposed the creation of this page when the category was deleted) of this discussion. Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 06:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
One man's trivia is another's treasure. The list is extensively referenced, and no argument so far presented has shown that it violates any of the five pillars or detracts from the encyclopedia in any way. People who want to delete lists can surely find better candidates than this one. -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 06:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Really there is no necessity for an AfD. No one has present reasonable arguments against the page. Izno's reasoning for opposing the article is dead wrong (most Wii games are programmed for use with the Wii Remote, not with the GameCube controller) and GamePro64 provided absolutely no reasoning for their position. PresN never made a position for or against. There is no consensus to take this to AfD. 3 "for"s + 2 "oppose"s = No consensus
Also, If these game lists should be deleted, so should List of Wii games using Miis, List of Wii games using WiiConnect24, and List of Wii Wi-Fi Connection games. If this goes to AfD, I will personally put (or attempt to put) all these other articles up for AfD to highlight the absurdity of this deletion attempt. Side note: In a few cases, (based on the references from the page) the GameCube controller is NOT an alternate gameplay method but a primary gameplay method Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 07:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
There isn't a logical way to merge this article. Merging was not the position of RobJ1981, who was essentially trying to delete this page by turning it into a redirect to List of Wii games. This has been an all or nothing since RobJ1981 put it up and no actually solid arguments have been given by those who want to see the page gone.
Keep in mind RobJ1981 also was the one to try to delete the category that the article evolved out of. The CfD conclusion was what called on the creation of this article (though I didn't get around to creating the article for several months, but that is besides the point). This started as a category, turned into an article, now you want it to go back to a category? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 07:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Wait, are you talking about the article in question ( List of Wii games that use the Nintendo GameCube controller) or the articles I threatened to AfD? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 02:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Note: The deletion discussion for this article can be found here. Greg Tyler ( t • c) 15:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
WP:VG needs to produce a consistent approach across the board:
I suspect it will take a while to agree a standard approach, and suggest WP:VG should turn up to request a re-list in say 3 month's time, so it can develop a policy - and to support a deletion review if the article is deleted or merged before WP:VG has had time to agree a standard approach. I advise Thegreyanomaly to make a copy of the article at a sub-page of his/her User page as soon as possible.
BTW I think the idea of merging with / redirecting to List of Wii games needs more thought before action is taken. Doing this for multiple platform-related lists or categories of Wii games would probably make List of Wii games very unwieldy. -- Philcha ( talk) 14:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC) -- Philcha ( talk) 14:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
A relatively new template, {{ italictitle}} is currently being used to change the article titles on various pages that have the scientific name of an organism. There is currently a bot request to mass-update these articles. I just wanted to bring up a discussion here regarding the use of this template in other article titles where it may be useful.
Throughout many articles, including Halo 3, the title is italicized when used within the article, but not in the actual title. All input is welcome to decide whether or not to implement this new feature in films, video games, and book titles.
Discussions on the use of this italicized title feature for use in organism articles can be seen here and here. -- Spotty 11222 20:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Problem with this is there is no real easy way to distinqush elements like song titles, which are not italicized, but come may come under our scope if they relate solely to video games, from the video game itself. Nor are there waves to determine that other elements like Ivalice is actually talking about a world and not a game. 陣 内 Jinnai 03:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Would it be simpler just to add it to {{ Infobox VG}} rather than adding another line of unintelligable code to twenty thousand articles (assuming we actually want it, and I'm not sure I do)? Nifboy ( talk) 13:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I think that these italic titles look pretty ugly. They don't represent the actual article title, it doesn't show as italicized in edit mode, and (to my knowledge) no print encyclopedia (and very few websites of any kind) do this kind of thing. I'm thinking of starting a full RFC about this, because it seems to have be done without wide consensus beyond the one WikiProject, and would be a major change to Wikipedia if books, games, and movies were all italicized. My feeling is that we should hold off on making any more titles italic until there is a more clear consensus. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I've started on RFC on whether or not this template should be used here. All comments are welcome. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 16:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
There are a few print reviews that I'd really like to use, but they aren't listed at WP:VG/M. I was wondering if anyone might have them, but just not listed there. The game I'm interested in is Neverwinter Nights 2: Mysteries of Westgate, a current GAN, and the magazines that there should be reviews in are: PC Gamer May 2008 and November 2008 issues and Games for Windows April/May 2008 issue. All help with this would be much appreciated. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 19:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Is the site ztgamedomain.com a reliable source? I checked the source guide and it doesn't say if it is or isn't, unless I missed something.-- Will C 02:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey. Two editors are going back and forth on the FF13 talk page about the inclusion of an image of the game's main characters, and it seems to have no end in sight. Can someone go over there and help the two editors out? I've issued WP:3RR warnings to both of them, so hopefully that will keep things calm for now, but a great deal of consensus is needed over there, I think. Thanks! — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ottava Rima ( talk) 22:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Came across this template earlier: {{ Game & Watch games}}. Now I understand the importance of the G&W as much as the next guy but...do many of these need individual articles? Were any of the stand-alone games even reviewed? It just seems like a group better suited for a list.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 04:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd appreciate a few extra eyes from this project over at this merge discussion concerning the episode articles for Sam & Max Save the World. While the parent article is a GA, the episode articles currently consist of little other than plot details and trivia. There's been some concerns raised over the eligibility and actual usefulness of these episode articles, but they have sources available (if not in the articles) that can be used either to enhance the parent article or assist in rewriting the episode articles, so it will be handy if we can knock out a decent consensus for how to proceed with them. -- Sabre ( talk) 10:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
In this case these really are shards of a whole rather than separates that are linked. With the parent article so sparkly-clean and no development info turning up for individual episodes, I'd say go for it but ensure that each episode is given its due in the reception section of the parent. The individual episodes are reviewed in terms of their individual plots and characters. Good work on these, they're an important part of adventure gaming's return to the mainstream. Someone another 11:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
The peer review for 45th Infantry Division (United States), 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 [talk] [pf] 13:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Should templates on video game series be included in their own series category, or just in the Category:Video game templates by series category? Either way, someone should get a bot to categorize or uncategorize all of them.-- ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 21:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
A user recently placed lots of Satellaview games into the List of Kirby media featured list. I've searched for all of the games on Google, and the only other site that lists them as we do is this place (ignoring sites that run a copy of our page). Cited as a source for the games in the article itself however, is this text page. Kirby Pinball uses a different source, which is this blog post.
I'm pretty sure they existed, but I have no reliable sources to show their significance and or their existence. The only game that has any reliable sources is BS Kirby no Omotya Bako Baseball which was previously listed and correctly cited. Should I remove the other Satellaview games that are sourced with blogs or a text file? -- Nomader ( Talk) 03:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Anyone feel like casting an eye over ToeJam & Earl? It's at FAC at the moment and the main sticking point is the quality of the prose. bridies ( talk) 08:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I started this draft for a "List of Space Invaders games" about a year ago and am very close to finishing it. Given the amount of info and the fact I wrote large chunks at very different times, I was hoping someone could take a look at it. Not really concerned about the lead, I'll rewrite once I'm done with the list. I'm concerned about style consistency, but also about where the line should be drawn for what to include. Specifically:
Would these be better in Space Invaders' Legacy section? I think it would make a good DYK? candidate and easily pass FLC once the lead is fleshed out. So any comments, suggestions would be appreciated as I'd really like to cross this year-long project off my list. ( Guyinblack25 talk 19:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC))
Quick question- I've never started a new article from a sandbox before. Is it common practice to do a cut and paste or a move? ( Guyinblack25 talk 17:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC))
Few years ago, there was a debate about what article name should be used for the game that is known as Trace Memory in North America (the last region where it was released) and as Another Code: Two Memories/Futatsu no Kioku in Japan, Europe and Australasia. Users moved the page around so often that they caused a move protection. Currently, the North American title is used.
I'm not that much into this naming issue, but wasn't the name Mega Drive preferred over Genesis because Mega Drive is both the original name and a name used in parts of the English-speaking world? The same would go for Another Code. Well, I'm not sure about that, but I guess articles such as Yoshi's Universal Gravitation, Dark Chronicle and Picopict prefer the European/PAL region titles for similar reasons.
Independent of that, it is confusing that one article uses the American name of the Another Code/Trace Memory franchise and the article on the sequel ( Another Code R: A Journey Into Lost Memories, has yet to be confirmed for North America) uses the name from other English-speaking regions and Japan.
Is there a policy for such special cases? -- Grandy02 ( talk) 21:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your answers. Since the article is still move-protected, is there any option to solve this problem? -- Grandy02 ( talk) 14:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
This is a somewhat delicate matter, but one that would probably require the full support of the VG project. An editor, User:Dr90s, has been found to have used numerous sockpuppets when editing a number of video game related articles. I'm not entirely sure what Dr90s' agenda is, but after dealing with him a bit myself I can say he can be aggressive and unresponsive in discussions.
User:Thibbs has had a number of run ins with Dr90s, and identified many of the sock puppets. Thibbs has requested an admin ( User:Tanthalas39) act as a point person in reporting further sock puppets. (See Admin noticeboard for details.) To make Thibbs' life a bit easier, I suggested posting here so editors can help identify suspicious activity. I've asked him to post details of what to look for and on what type of articles.
I know we all try to be mature editors, but I think it's better safe than sorry to stress that we need to be careful how we approach this. Flat out accusing other editors of sock puppetry is generally frowned upon and does not assume good faith. If you are engaged in a heated discussion with someone that matches Thibbs' description of Dr90s (should be posted here later), please do not jump to conclusions. Calmly inform Thibbs of your suspicions for him to investigate further. If the editor confronts you about your action to inform Thibbs, simply tell them it is nothing personal and you were asked to do so; go ahead and point them to this thread for good measure. It probably wouldn't hurt to apologize to help diffuse the situation.
It's possible this could be a long term issue, so please keep this in the back of your minds as you do your normal editing. Again, this is a delicate matter that could easily be blown out of proportion in handled without good judgment. Help would be appreciated in keeping this under control. ( Guyinblack25 talk 22:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC))
Bump ( Guyinblack25 talk 19:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC))
This discussion was never resolved. Should I go ahead and implement it? I can't see any possible harm as coming from it. – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 18:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
For those unaware, those are the review aggregators as defined by Template:VG Reviews. Defcon (video game)'s review table uses Metacritic, GameRankings, GameStats and Game Ration. Grand Theft Auto IV has MobyGames and TopTenReviews in its lead (although that was added by User:Dr90s).
By having them predefined in the VG Reviews table, we are legitimizing their use. Regardless of the impartiality of Game Ratio or any others, they clearly do not have the reach, audience, or influence of Metacritic. There are many articles on Metacritic, studios may pay bonuses based on it, and when review aggregators are discussed (for video games at least) - it is always Metacritic at the forefront.
Why is it that we bother listing more than one aggregator in reception sections anyway? What does GameRankings add to current FAC Halo Wars, or FA Halo 3 other than redundancy? I can understand why users would choose GameRankings for older games, but when does anyone ever need to link to MobyGames, TopTenReviews et al?
Aggregator listings should be considered and limited on all VG articles. The use of aggregator links on Template:VG Reviews should be reviewed - I would personally like to see all, bar Metacritic and GameRankings removed. But because of the way the template is constructed, this may break hundreds of articles. Your thoughts are welcome. - hahnch e n 17:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)