Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 26

message: If any of you know of Playstation 1 games that need screenshots, please leave me a message so I can see if I own the game. If I do I'll get a screenshot of the game and put it into the article. Xtreme racer 03:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Can provide assistance

message: FYI, there's a mini edit war on Dreamcast between myself and Asim18 over which Dreamcast logo should be used for the article's picture - between the orange swirl logo and the blue one. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, I wouldn't say an "edit war" - edit war is when both parties are repeatedly reverting.  He switched, you reverted; nothing else has happened yet. hbdragon88 00:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BOLD, revert, discuss. My understanding is that this is exactly how it should be. Nifboy 01:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war on [[Dreamcast]] 

message: If there's anyone at all notable within the e-sports community, not for being a player, then it's Angel Munoz, founder of the CPL.  This article, that has been around since February 2005 was speedily deleted under the reasoning that it was an advertisement and vanity, it is apparently backed up by an OTRS complaint (see User_talk:Centrx#Angel_Munoz).  This is just a note to say it has been undeleted and stubbed for the time being, anyone into competitive gaming should expand the thing. - hahnchen 17:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that it?  Can't we just redierct the article to the Cyberathelete league article as this person has no notability outside of being the founder?  Has he won any prizes from there or anything? hbdragon88 22:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is still president/figurehead of the CPL and appears regularly in interviews.  If you take a look at an old version of the article, you'll find that there is a decent framework to work with. - hahnchen 00:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Angel Munoz]] expansion

message: Template:Chrono Trigger and Template:Chrono Cross have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Chrono Trigger and Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Chrono Cross. Thank you. — Kariteh 14:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:Chrono Trigger and Template:Chrono Cross 

message: Should retail prices of particular games and even the conversion of such amounts (from one currency to another) be listed in articles? These are quite unencyclopedic and unable to help improve the article overall, which I've never seen in good or featured articles, but that does not spare a few articles from citing such statistics. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 22:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have to say that the inclusion is warrented. I first saw it in the Shuffle! GA article which I then adapted to other soon-to-be (at the time) GA articles Kanon and Air (visual novel) and not once was the issue ever brought up during the GA process or during numerous peer reviews for each of those articles (along with a class A assessment for the latter two and an FA candidacy for Kanon). I believe it should be up to the editor's choice to include the information or not and should not be completely removed from all articles. One good thing it does is tells the reader of an article a difference between limited and regular editions, which visual novels usually put out with the limited edition being more expensive; thus, the $US conversion is there to tell the reader how much it is in a currency they are probably familiar with or can make an easier conversion then say Japanese yen.--十八 22:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Retail prices are wholly unencyclopedic and are such statistics that can be easily derived from other sources, say Amazon.com or other shopping sites, rather than an encyclopedia (see WP:NOT, where it clearly states: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information of statistics). I don't see how a conversion rate to US$ would even be relevant, let alone encyclopedic, for a game released exclusively in Japan or another country, and not released in the United States (which would account for all the games you have mentioned, I believe). For the sake of argument, why not use say another currency, such as the GBP£? Even then, it would not be even close to being relevant to the article's subject. Listing these prices is therefore not encyclopedic and as stated in WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. ···巌流? · Talk to Ganryuu 22:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're just interpreting that WP:NOT clause to follow your agrument; I could easily say that from my point of view this information is not an indiscriminant colletion of information and is not wholly unencylcopedic as I believe if it was blatently so as you suggest, then it would have come up in the numerous peer reviews that each of those aricles had, but it never did, so it would seem your opinion is rather localized. As I said, if just the prices are taken into account, a conversion is warrented to give the reader and idea of how much it costs; $US are many more times common than Japanse yen or British pounds, even when on the English Wikipedia it encompasses all English-speaking countries. And as I brought up, these games are almost always sold many times over years and prices change due to different versions; the price changes are the easiest change to be seen with the different versions and can be just one of many aspects that can be listed between the different versions.--十八 23:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Given that most games of the same platform cost the same upon release, only a notable exception to this rule of thumb should be listed. --User:Krator (t c) 23:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per that suggestion, I believe it to be a notable exception that prices change even for visual novels released on the same platform, such as with the first released of Kanon and later the all-ages versions and Standard Editions released also for the PC but the prices had lowered for those versions.--十八 23:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Price data is a part of the product's history, just as much as make and model or color. The whole reason these games are made is to make a profit. Lets say you want to research the success of a video game that sold a few years back, and you want to compare it's debut price compared to whatever the norm was for that time. There's a lot that can be said with this information. -- Ned Scott 03:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, retail prices shouldn't be listed. It's bad enough that people wont accept that Wii Points aren't encyclopedic. On the lists for Virtual Console games: all the games have the amount of points (needed to buy the game) listed. Wikipedia shouldn't become a price guide, period. RobJ1981 05:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wii Points ARE encyclopedic, you are just bitter because you were the only one who thought otherwise (the vote was 10-1 just a few weeks ago). TJ Spyke 21:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the key is that prices shouldn't be listed, i.e. without any further explanation. If it's relevant, it'll be mentioned in prose, alongside whatever other information is necessary to justify mentioning the price. Nifboy 05:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think price should be included either. So far the only argument I could see for including prices is that someone wants to. I'd need a much more compelling reason as to why we need to include prices before I'd accept this. DarkSaber2k 08:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What about Wii Points (and other point systems for downloads)? People argued in the past that it's encyclopedic because the point system remains the same for each game. But the fact of the matter: Wii Points are a price, and Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a price guide. I think this is a matter of people liking the points listed, so it remains on the articles. RobJ1981 20:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, by that argument, should we list score values enemies give you in old coin-op arcade games? They are still the same. I don't see how that's any different to this really. (Excuse my analogy, I'm tired). I agree that the only argument we seems to be getting is WP:ILIKEIT. DarkSaber2k 22:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By retail price, do you mean the MSRP? A game will have 1 MSRP, but stores can vary on the actual price (Circuit City had the new Pokemon games for $28 instead of $35, for example). Also, retail prices and Wii Points are two different things, and a there was a vote 10-1 to KEEP Wii Points (although Rob is still complaining since he was the only one against them and he is pissed off that nobody agreed with him). TJ Spyke 21:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but the discussion here is proving that your 10 man 'consensus' is not the be all and end all of this debate. Wikipedia is not a democracy. Wii points are a currency, you have to trade real world currency into virtual currenct, just as you would change a dollar to a pound. You then exchange that currency for a product (I.E. You give your Wii points in exchange for a game, just as you exchange your dollars for a game in a high street retailer, the only difference is the medium through which this is conducted.) DarkSaber2k 22:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing retail prices 

message: I have been bold, I was tired of getting list in video Role playing games article, so i created a new nav box at :template:Video RPG. It has no categories yet. I also suggest that the article Role-playing game (video games) is turned into an article instead of a disambig. Best regards and happy editing. Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 08:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Video RPG template

message: Recently I've noticed that Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual novels removes the general WP:VG template from talk pages that they put their own on, under the justification that as a subproject of WP:VG, having both templates is redundant.  As far as I know, they are the only subproject which does this.  I've never actually seen a formal rule about this, so what are everyone else's thoughts?  --PresN 15:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:MILHIST (which has a bajillion task forces and keeps tally of individual workforce totals) uses both (for example, check out the catlist on Talk:World_War_II). It also removes article counts both from us and WP:ANIME. I'd rather use  or something similar. Nifboy 16:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would removing article count be a bad thing? The point of sub-projects and task forces is to divide up focused chunks of work, reducing the burden on the parent project. Even then, we can easily have the count updated to show sub-project counts as well. -- Ned Scott 18:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather not see any project's purview become "what hasn't already been taken"; it seems to make parent projects lose whatever focus they had. WP:COUNCIL is probably a better place to ask this question anyway. Nifboy 20:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:TV and WP:ANIME have done this before, and it seems to work out fine. As long as the child project is linking back to the parent project when they can, then it should work out. -- Ned Scott 18:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subprojects and talk page templates 

message: I've started a discussion about moving Template:Future game to Template:Future video game.  If you're interested, please have your say at Template talk:Future game#Requested move. Percy Snoodle 11:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving [[Template:Future game]] 

message: I've put an extra column on the project page in the Task Forces section to stop the second column of the task force crashing into the category box on the right hand side of the screen. I know peoples screens are set to various resolutions and changes like this have various effects, if this change has an massively adverse affect then drop a line here and we'll try and find a solution that suits everyone. - X201 09:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it fixes the problem I was having on my widescreen monitor with the boxes, thank you!  --PresN 16:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Extra Column

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Not a sales catalogue or price guide, and add your opinions there. Thanks. Carcharoth 12:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related discussion at WP:NOT 

message: The Tekken articles is not what I'm editing currently, but i'm noticing that nearly all of them have trivia sections. Since the Tekken series article is high priority, I'm was assuming there would be something done with the trivia sections in all articles. Someone needs to intergrate the trivia sections. I would do them myself, but I have too much to do.  THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 16:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Tekken articles 

message: User:Dolnk-jp keeps adding Ikegami as a developer to the infobox on the Donkey Kong (video game) article. He or she has only cited this webpage as a source (and I'm not sure why we should trust it as reliable). None of the sources used to write the article mentions Ikegami at all, let alone as the game's developer. However, I'm hesitant to revert Dolnk-jp again unilaterally. Can anyone shed any light on this subject? If Dolnk-jp is out of line, can folks keep an eye on the article and revert his or her changes? Thanks, — Brian (talk) 12:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this page. There is the following text actually in the ROM chips of one of the Japanese versions. "CONGRATULATION !IF YOU ANALYSE DIFFICULT THIS PROGRAM,WE WOULD TEACH YOU.*****TEL.TOKYO-JAPAN 044(244)2151 EXTENTION 304 SYSTEM DESIGN IKEGAMI CO. LIM." So if they have their name in the ROM chips I'd say that puts them at the scene of the crime, although it doesn't make clear how much of the crime they committed. - X201 12:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That Ikegami provided some code for Donkey Kong doesn't give them a slot into the Developer section in the infobox.  Nintendo could have subcontracted out some work or used a codebase to build upon from Ikegami, that doesn't make them a developer.  Many games use an iteration of the Unreal engine, but that doesn't mean we list epic as a developer do we.  Unless we get some source explaining how much or little Ikegami input, then leave it out, the hidden ROM message is meaningless. - hahnchen 14:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: If the above is true (that Ikegami actually did the entire of the coding) then I think that the article's developoment should be expanded to include that.  It could really do with someone else who is fluent in Japanese and English looking through the sources though. - hahnchen 14:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; it would have to rely on the Japanese-language sources, since, as I said, none of the English-language sources mention Ikegami. If I could get my hands on a copy of the article Dolnk-jp has mentioned, I could set about getting a translation. Any pointers on how to track it down would be appreciated, though (I am in Japan). — Brian (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  this] is the book that contains the article Dolnk-jp mentions, by the way. — Brian (talk) 06:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ikegami developed ''Donkey Kong''? 

message: Do you think it's a good idea for us to have a separate article for the Nintendo DS of Theme Park, separate from the main article?
Please contribute to the discussion at Talk:Theme Park (video game). (I believe this probably follows the same principle as other computer games, but would appreciate input). Thanks! Fourohfour 20:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate article for Nintendo DS remake of theme park? 

message: If someone has the time, Wild Arms (series) and Mana (series) have been listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review since late March with no comments. Pagrashtak 00:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video game peer reviews needed 

message: As there is nothing in the VG guidelines regarding linking to external sites, I wish to raise an issue covered in this brief discussion. I would be interested in hearing comments from other project members and possibly include a clause in the guidelines that addresses this point. --Scottie_theNerd 14:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Read over the guidelines at WP:EL. Do these links meet those guidelines? -- MisterHand 14:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Under WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided, linking to open wikis is not advised unless it contains a large number of contributors and is proven to be stable. Whether or not SW is stable is up to debate. I have little experience with SW, but my understanding is that there is no authoritative source on what SW puts up. --Scottie_theNerd 14:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: That is not the purpose of External links. We link to StrategyWiki and other game Wikis from WP:VG. Should be link to every article on SW, considering that SW lacks the coverage that other sites have? --Scottie_theNerd 14:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know the purpose of external links. One such purpose is "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail". My comment was not necessarily geared toward StrategyWiki, but Wikias in general. For instance, an article on Star Wars vehicles can have an external link to the Vehicles category at Wookieepedia; Wikipedia should not have individual entires for each vehicle, so an external link to the place that covers such information in greater detail should be provided. As for StrategyWiki, I think it should only be used if it is has a database larger than any Wikia on the topic. — Deckiller 16:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to StrategyWiki from game articles 

message: I wasn't sure whether or not to put this under "New Articles," since it's not a new article, although if you check the history, it wasn't much of an article before I edited it today. So I won't put it there for now. Also, I'd appreciate any help I could get on this article, especially as the game has essentially been forgotten... --Temporarily Insane (talk) 21:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Star Command: Revolution]] 

message: I have been working on disambiguating links pointing to PC and was wondering how it should be handled on video games. Should they point to Personal_computer, IBM_PC_compatible or Windows. I think Windows is the best option, but wanted get some feedback. -- pb30<c.t> 16:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on the game. Some games described as running on PCs run on MS-DOS, for example. Nifboy 18:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PC 

message: What is the appropriate infobox image for an article on a game that began life as an arcade game? Specifically, I'm asking about Doney Kong. User:Salavat seems to prefer the NES box art, but that seems misleading to me, since the game was originally an arcade title and has been ported all over the place since. I've replaced the box art there with the arcade title screen a couple of times already (since that's what's been in the article for a very long time), offering my explanations in the edit summaries, but I'm wary about doing so again without some outside input. What's the best practice in this situation? Thanks, — Brian (talk) 03:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the game is primarily an arcade game, the title screen is appropriate. Pagrashtak 04:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree. Arcade game so title screen is the norm. - X201 13:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Donkey Kong'' infobox image 

message: *Ultimate Brain Games (Game Boy Advance)
*Ultimate Card Games (Game Boy Advance)
*Ultimate Card Games (Nintendo DS)
*Ultimate Brain Games (Nintendo DS)
I have no knowledge of the games. - A Link to the Past (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you not think it would be more intuitive to move the DS titles to Ultimate Card Games DS and Ultimate Brain Games DS respectively?  And place the GBA games in Ultimate Card Games and Ultimate Brain Games?  Note that I know absolutely nothing about the games. - hahnchen 14:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't believe that those are the titles, though. There's also a PlayStation version, so we couldn't give the GBA games the main articles. Anyway, I know about as much as you about how they play. I only know little details, like that the DS games are supposedly online and that they've been delayed time after time after time. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Could be some scope for merging articles here, so I've placed merge tags on the respective articles. --Oscarthecat 21:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Update - Ultimate Brain Games article now contains merged articles, covering DS+GBA. --Oscarthecat 07:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Update - Ultimate Card Games article now contains merged articles, covering DS+GBA. --Oscarthecat 07:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand, please. 

message: I'm looking for some info on a UK PlayStation magazine called STATION. I can't find any info about it anywhere (except for the editors own web page - and I want an unbiased source). Did anyone here buy it? In actual fact has anyone here EVEN seen a copy of it? Did it really exist? For a magazine that the editor claims had the highest ABC figures of any PlayStation magazine it's presence is conspicuous by it's absence. - X201 22:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never heard of it, the only source I can find is at Dave Perry's site which I'm guess you're alluding to above.  But the Playstation era is 10 years back, and people have very short memories in regards to the magazine industry.  A google found that it did exist, here's one on eBay. - hahnchen 22:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: A couple of issues are for sale on RetroTrader, see issues here and here. --Oscarthecat 09:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For more magazine editor/former games show personality self-aggrandising, see Martin Mathers. - hahnchen 19:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Looking at the ebay link, I actually owned several Station magazines at some point in time. Can't remember what happened to them... --Mika1h 20:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  STATION Magazine 

message: Should we have spoiler warnings in articles or not? Discussion on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning. -- Ned Scott 04:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Further discussion at the provided link, but...  I don't understand why anyone would want to delete a tag whose only purpose is to try and prevent the user from inadvertently ruining their experience of a given fictional work.  Of course, I never cease to be surprised by how lame Wikipedia policy can be. -- Slordak 14:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The rationale is that since Wikipedia is not censored (see autofellatio for a very NSFW example, although it now has partial censorship in the form of the photograph being collapsed) it does not make sense for less contentious information (i.e. spoilers) to be "censored" via the large warnings. GarrettTalk 23:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: First off, good news, it has been moved to WP:RfC. Secondly - "The censorship argument is nonsense, as it isn't removing the data from view, just warning people what's up ahead" - it's not nonsense. It's the primary argument as to why users are not warned about nudity, profanity, violence, and anything else people might find objectionable (except plot details and magic tricks... heh). --Teggles 04:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. Well, in that context (no warning for nudity and such), that makes sense. hbdragon88 06:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler warnings up for deletion 

message: :Category:Speedruns and it's only article: Quake done Quick. How exactly is an article talking about speedruns of Quake notable? I can understand the Speedrun article being kept, but articles talking about/listing speedruns for a certain game, don't seem worthy for a Wikipedia article. As for the category: as I read the speedrun article, there is a few other related speedrun articles, but not alot. So I'm not sure if the category is worth keeping for a few things. There is :Category:Competitive video gaming, which the speedrun articles could go into I guess. RobJ1981 05:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirely sure you could put that into competitive gaming, but I do feel that both the "Speedrun" category and "Quake done Quick" should be deleted.  ♣ Klptyzm  Chat wit' me  §  Contributions ♣ 05:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedruns

message: This was recently kept: and I was never even informed that my nomination was done in error. I think that's wrong. It was listed at several deletion lists: but not everyone always checks those (or should have to). People from the original vote should've been notified about a new one. So a new vote happened: and everyone almost voted to keep this garbage. This is proof the AFD process fails at times here on Wikipedia. In June or July this needs to be re-nominated with everyone actually knowing about the debate this time. Listcruft (much of which is unsourced, and I see no attempts by anyone to source it) articles don't belong: imagine if a DVD collector/limited edition list happened; it would be even worse I bet.  RobJ1981 18:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was listed on WP:CVG/D, which is good reading for any member of the CVG project. hbdragon88 00:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey Rob, yeah you WERE informed. Directly. By me. On your own talk page! So you had your chance to have your say and YOU failed your own cause, not Wikipedia process. And stop being so idiotic with comparisons to other imaginary lists that this one is not.  "IMAGINE THIS IS A LIST OF ANTS LIVING IN MY BACKYARD IT WOULD BE WORSE" - Great Rob, but that does not matter because this ISNT a list of that! Your arguments are terrible and full of fallacies, and between them and your failure to tag the AfD, makes me wonder if you even understand the AfD "process" much less value it. Both times the article was tagged properly (and process was in check) the article was voted overwhelmingly to be kept. The only time it failed was when YOU disregarded process. It should be clear that users feel it should stay so leave it alone and find some other article to crusade against. Deusfaux 04:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just saw it now, so I missed it before. Telling me to "stop being idiotic" is just rude, and not needed. All the other editors that voted keep before: should've been notified about the new afd (and I somehow bet they weren't). I don't have to "leave it alone" as you put it. In a month's time or so, I have every right to nominate it, and actually notify people that a new vote is going to take place. RobJ1981 04:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I retract "stop being so idiotic with..." and replace it with "stop providing illogical and invalid arguments with..." And I removed your tag from the article.  Seriously, find something productive to do if you are capable. Deusfaux 08:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Stop being uncivil, Seriously, find something productive to do if you are capable wasn't needed. I have every right to my own opinion, just because you don't agree with it, doesn't give you the right to attack me and/or be rude about it. RobJ1981 17:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It's all been noted by now, I learned things there like how Rob shouldnt have opened things by insulting the work of other editors! yippee! Deusfaux 17:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of computer and video game collector and limited editions]]