Talk:Nintendo Magazine System (Australia)

message: Er... I suggest that this be moved back into the NOM article. Either that or we have seperate articles for NOM and ONM and perhaps even one for NMS: Australia. NMS became NOM which became ONM - they're simple evolutions of one product and not seperate products themselves. --Zooba 19:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NOM

message: While I agree wholeheartedly with the opinions expressed regarding the magazine's dip in quality and relevance after changing hands, it seems rather like an editorial.  I don't want to butcher the article too much, so I'd rather wait and see what my fellow editors think.. Thedangerouskitchen 11:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree, and was about to raise the issue. I mean no offense to whoever edited such information into the article - I mean, it reads great and all - but I dare say it's a tad... un-encyclopedic. We either need some references, perhaps even extracts from the magazine itself, or some of the more speculation-filled paragraphs will need to go. Quite a bit of the magazine is, unfortunately, personal opinion and, indeed, point-of-view. --Zooba 20:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Wrong article I know, but does anyone know what happened to the page on "N64 Gamer"? Any help would be appreciated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.102.217 (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: N64 Gamer

message: :Image:NMS Australia Issue 1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:NMS Australia Issue 1.jpg

message: :Image:NMS Australia issue 89.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:NMS Australia issue 89.jpg

message: "The magazine created a minor controversy[citation needed] when it awarded the N64 game Turok 2: Seeds of Evil a perfect score of 10 in Issue 68." I can't imagine why this would have caused a minor controversy, since Turok 2 was extremely well recieved and has an aggregated rating of 89% from Game Rankings. Seeing as how a citation has been requested for that statement since 2007 anyway I am removing it. Freikorp (talk) 03:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor controversy 

message: Can anybody tell me which issue of the magazine awarded the 1999 Superman video game 80%? Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 03:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superman 64 rating 

message: , I see that you've been edit warring over this article for some time. Everything on Wikipedia needs to be sourced (WP:V). Sourcing "controversies" to the magazine itself is also inappropriate because the event is only notable if external secondary sources say so. If you don't have sources for this content, it should be removed. There are other wikis that can host the list of covers and whatnot, but Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and doesn't keep records like that. This should be an encyclopedic overview. – czar 14:06, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely with Czar's change. I was going to revert back to that version myself, but I'll give Eddie a chance to reply first. Freikorp (talk) 04:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Sounds like a good idea. Good luck with it. Freikorp (talk) 11:22, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, but i may need help. Bringing the World Back Home (talk) 13:46, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced and original research