Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 28

message: Guys,
Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#MobyGames.2F_Flipkin. The issue with MobyGames is that about 5500 links of the 6500 links to this website seem to have been added by the sites founders and various sock accounts. Everyone is happy to accept your view that appropriate links to the site need to be kept but can we give some thought to the acceptability of this kind of large scale link insertion, substantial to currently empty pages, by people declared to have a conflict of interest? What should be done with all these spammed links? --BozMo talk 11:49, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Struck, I simply don't have time anytime soon, plus the non-alphabetical nature of the whatlinkshere list makes it a lot harder. Whatever happens will be up to the TfD's closing admin (Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 9#Template:Moby developer) --Quiddity 18:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The TfD was closed as "no consensus". I've left a proposed solution at the end of this thread: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#3 comments. Thanks. --Quiddity 17:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MobyGames and COI spammers 

message: I have now been through every instance of , checking that they were useful, and cleaning up or removing if needed. (~95% of them were just fine)
I would appreciate assistance doing the same thing for , over the next few days. I'll check off the letters that I've been through below, please feel free to help me :) --Quiddity 22:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Struck, I simply don't have time anytime soon, plus the non-alphabetical nature of the whatlinkshere list makes it a lot harder. Whatever happens will be up to the TfD's closing admin (Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 9#Template:Moby developer) --Quiddity 18:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The TfD was closed as "no consensus". I've left a proposed solution at the end of this thread: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#3 comments. Thanks. --Quiddity 17:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Checking assistance request

message: Apparently, the person with the above name shares it with a record producer and several others and we are getting emails about this at OTRS. So, I was wondering if you can change the links, mostly in Crash Bandicoot articles, to Brendan O'Brien (disambiguation) please. Thanks. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought we weren't supposed to link to disambiguation pages.  Don't we just de-link in this case? hbdragon88 01:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, until an article is made about this guy. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I usually redlink such cases to, in this case, Brendan O'Brien (actor) or something similar, rather than the disambiguation page. Nifboy 05:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever works best for yall, go ahead and do it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brendan O'Brien 

message: I've been working on Super Nintendo Entertainment System with the goal of eventually getting it up to FA status. Since I've run out of ideas to improve the article, I submitted it for peer review last weekend, and have yet to receive any response. Please take a look and give some feedback. Thanks. Anomie 20:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SNES peer review 

message: Witch name should be used for an article about a video game series? --MrStalker talk 19:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dunno, but see also this dead discussion which proposed that actual franchises be named franchises instead of series: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/archive/22#Final Fantasy (series) article. Kariteh 20:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe most just use (series). I haven't seen the other two used at all. TTN 20:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okey, I'll go for the "Example (series)" format then. --MrStalker talk 21:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is also a non gaming series of x object, then obviously you should go with the third option.  For example, for Pokemon you would go with Pokemon (video game series) and Pokemon (anime series) and so on.... (this has probably already been done and proved me wrong, but it's an example) -- G1ggy Talk/Contribs 23:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Example series" vs. "Example (series)" vs. "Example (video game series)" 

message: Due to the lack of concensus in the discussion on the merging of the "system-only games" subcats with their parents here: [1], and several users feeling that all-inclusion would be preferable, and indeed in line with WP:SUBCAT ("When an article is put into a subcategory based on an attribute that is not the first thing most people would think of to categorise it, it should be left in the parent category as well"), I have begun including all games in these sub-categories in their parent categories as well, and also adding any relevant titles I notice along the way to the "only" sub-cats also. If anyone has any reason for objecting, please note here or on my talk page. Thanks, Miremare 20:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think WP:CFD would be a better option. - hahnchen 16:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's pretty much as a result of the last CFD, but WP:SUBCAT#Secondary categorization rule states this is the correct way, so I didn't really see there being any point of a further CFD. There are also literally hundreds of precedents in categories all over Wikipedia, e.g. Manchester United is listed (in ascending order) in the related categories: "Cat:Manchester United F.C." > "Cat:FA Premier League Clubs" > "Cat:FA Premier League", and "Cat:English Football Clubs". These game-related categories have simply not been handled properly. Miremare 16:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't spot that.  But those -only categories are really poor, such an obvious hack.  If only Wikipedia incorporated meta data or something to that effect which would make it easier to apply different rules to browse data. - hahnchen 18:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "system-only games" subcats and their parents 

message: If anyone cares to wander on down to the bottom of the main VG project page, there are a few FACs up currently that could really use people's comments/!votes, as no one is really voting.  Please do read the articles first though, and vote as you see fit, as pile-on supports do no one any good.  --PresN 12:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I commented on one of the Agatha Criste FACs. hbdragon88 18:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FACs 

message: I placed it there earlier, as it's been inactive for months. Perhaps it could be made into a taskforce (if there is enough interest). The link to the MFD: Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Kirby.27s_Dream_Land. Comment if you want. RobJ1981 00:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kirby project is up for deletion

message: Hi, I'd like to petition for a 3rd opinion on the Manhunt 2 article. It's on the talk page if anyone cares to have a look and comment. Thanks in advance. DarkSaber2k 13:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a matter of fact, 4th and 5th and more opinions would be appreciated here as well. DarkSaber2k 13:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Manhunt 2]] Request for 3rd opinion 

message: Hi, just to let you know there's an ongoing discussion at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Attribution-Ubisoft, about using Ubisoft screenshots & its license --Andersmusician $ 16:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it's bordering twoards keep. hbdragon88 17:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image template Deletion 

message: An IP is refusing to allow for European box arts to be used in these two articles. Could an administrator semi-protect it? - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Protection of the Picross article may be premature since neither of you have discussed it on the article's talk page yet (and there are only two editors involved-don't forget to watch out for 3rr, btw). However, protection of the brain age article may be warranted if it's removed again. Bladestorm 22:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The IP certainly knows of me, since he references my "ideals and convictions". If he reverts again, I think semi-protection is warranted. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the problem with protecting the picross article is that neither of you are actually discussing it. Protection isn't intended to stop edit-warring between only two parties. And semi-protecting would favour one side over the other. In any event, just start a discussion on the talk page; if nobody engages in proper discussion after a reasonable period of time, then you'll have a very strong case for favouring your version. Bladestorm 22:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection of Picross DS and Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day! 

message: Could someone take a look at Expedition to the Demonweb Pits? The plot summary section doesn't sound like a normal plot summary. Should it be there? It doesn't comply with WP:IINFO #2 either. Cool Bluetalk to me 19:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the Video games project, we don't deal with pen-and-paper role-playing games. Go ask at WikiProject Role-playing games, WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons or WikiProject Greyhawk. --Mika1h 17:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Expedition to the Demonweb Pits

message: A rewrite of WP:FICT is being proposed at Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)#Rewrite proposed. — Deckiller 22:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:FICT rewrite

message: Overall (from what I've seen), alot of them need cleanup. Lots of them include game guide content in some form at least. In a recent example: I cleaned up Rune Factory: A Fantasy Harvest Moon a little earlier, but it needs work still. Also, does anyone know if Rune Factory is for DS only, or for the Wii as well? I noticed it listed on the List of Wii games article, but the reference seems to indicate it's for DS (as does the Rune article). So I wasn't sure. RobJ1981 05:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see nothing to indicate that it's coming to Wii. Only DS. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should it be having a long charater list within the article like that? I believe that there should be a separate character article, although that would leave the main article pretty bare. I am referring to Rune Factory: A Fantasy Harvest Moon by the way. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If any of that game guide info is salvageable, can you tell me which pages and I can perhaps move the info to StrategyWiki:? -- Prod-You 00:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Harvest Moon articles

message: Me and another editor a while back added list of cover images a while back to Next Generation Magazine. Yet another editor thinks that it has violated Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria and removed them. I was wanting to know the VG project's opinion on the matter rather than one editor's interepretation of policy. You can find the disscussion here. Thanks for your opinions. —Mitaphane 16:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest that you also pose the question over at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content which deals with a lot of fair use image questions. Bottom line is that if a fair use image is there with no critical commentary, it's a no-no. Galleries are frowned upon as well. -- MisterHand 16:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say it was a violation of Wikipedia's fair use guidelines. There really wasn't anything in the text that the images were supporting, and you can't use fair use images to stand alone. Archiving all the covers is definitely a useful thing and would make a suitable subarticle on Next Generation, but outside of what Wikipedia allows.  Incidentally, you can find all the Next Generation covers at http://www.magweasel.com/wiki/Next_Generation - hahnchen 17:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Magazine covers are copyrighted, so they are not free pic. Having multiple covers would violate WP:FU, only 1 cover image is needed in the article. Remember that fair use pics are supposed to be kept to a minimum. TJ Spyke 21:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magazine Covers 

message: There is currently a debate at Talk:Microsoft Points#Currency symbol over the use of :Image:Microsoftpoint.gif as an alternative to "Microsoft Points" in article text for various articles. Few editors have commented so far, and I'd appreciate some other opinions on the matter. Dancter 00:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you've already noticed, I've commented at User_talk:JAF1970#Image:Microsoftpoint.gif.  I think the images are jarring in text, and the general audience will not know what it means.  Regardless of the copyright status, I don't like seeing the image in articles.  And a lesser point, currency symbols should be placed before the amount, ie £10. - hahnchen 00:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope you don't mind, but I cited you and some of the others I'd found who had tried discussing the image with JAF1970 in the discussion there. There has been some additional discussion of the image at Talk:Xbox Live Arcade#Microsoft Points symbol, but arguments are basically the same. I'm considering listing the image at AfD. Dancter 04:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image:Microsoftpoint.gif

message: Please head over to the List of Virtual Console games (North America) and check out the discussion page.  The section titled "Think about this" is where the dispute is at... outside opinions would be helpful.  Thanks! Miles Blues 03:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help Solving Dispute 

message: Please to be noting that I've PRODed the Overworld article. Just thought that since, you know, a sizeable number of CVG articles link to it, it would be wise to notify the group here. Thanks for your time! Geuiwogbil 03:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overworld PROD 

message: There's a discussion going on about whether the current (north american) or european title for the game should be used for the article.
The original discussion is here: Talk:Mario_Strikers_Charged#Move.
I've also tried to present a more organized 'reboot' of the discussion here: Talk:Mario_Strikers_Charged#Reboot_on_the_Move
As much input as possible (for or against) would be greatly appreciated. Bladestorm 18:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move: "Mario Strikers Charged" → "Mario Strikers Charged Football" 

message: No one's responded to this yet... Anyone out there? :) Miremare 21:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't gotten any responses for Super Nintendo Entertainment System's review either. I'll review yours in the hope you're return the favor ;) Anomie 23:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If I could help by reviewing SNES, then I would, but it would certainly be better left to someone who knows what they're doing! I'd suggest whining on here until someone does it; it worked for me. ;) Thanks for the review, I'll implement what you've suggested. Cheers, Miremare 15:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ultimate Play The Game]] peer review 

message: No one has voted since June 14! I think that it's a good part of the project and a great way to expand and improve articles on gaming, but we need the participation of many people involved in the Video Games project in order for this to work as intended. I would like to see a new Gaming Collaboration of the Week every week! :)
:The collaboration of the week is pretty much dead.  Maybe we should properly phase it out.  The group of editors concerned over the CVG space have very different interests and objectives, this project itself is no longer as focused on article writing and editing per se, but on matters of policy and general guideline. - hahnchen 22:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As mentioned the project is dead and already we did have a survey and more than a few editors agreed that we should let the GCOTW die as there is just not enough participation. Now I will see if I can maybe encourage a few new editors into trying out the GCOTW but I say at this point just let it die and see if there is enough response to consider reviving it. Xtreme racer 00:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I mentioned this to Jacoplane, but should we have one more collaboration? I was thinking video game.--Clyde (talk) 00:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, Basic game mechanics should be. Why don't we just set up a group of people who go around to articles of THEIR choice (and with input from others)? It wouldn't be official of course. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was mentioned in the previous discussion about GCOW. Those that are willing should get to choose. Perhaps something along the lines of one per month with all of the research being pooled and then added to the article in one big quality edit with proper citations and notes. - X201 08:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that we have one more collaboration to finish off the project. I don't think though that the video game article would be a good choice. Maybe we can come up with a really bad game article or system article or video game company article. Xtreme racer 00:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Silk purse from a sows ear? Yeah I'm game. Find the worst CVG article (obviously one that we can find info on) and go to work. - X201 08:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I nominated the Fatal Frame series because it's a fairly popular horror survival game series and there's a lot of information out there on it, plus the framework for the series is already on Wikipedia, including a template, but the articles just need to be cleaned up and expanded!--AutoGyro 13:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe we should just do Basic Game Mechanics as it was the winning candidate. If everyone agrees I will go ahead and start the nomination and will let it continue till Thursday of next week. Xtreme racer 00:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it doesn't need to have another week. It's already been there for two weeks and should have been the GCOTW in the first week. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well someone should do it. I don't think Jacoplane can update it regularly. We are standing over a dying man with a defibrillator and no one can do anything.--Clyde (talk) 02:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Or, because of the lack of participation, maybe we could have a collaboration project on a particular game until it makes it out of stub/poor grade status? Scytheml 20:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week|Gaming Collaboration of the Week]] Needs More People! 

message: The title says it all..
--The source of the cosmos... 15:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Asking one of the project leaders is a good way to do it, because they'll decide whether your task force is needed or not. GrooveDog 20:21, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Such a thing is not appropriate for Wikipedia. You should look for a site related to console modding and start your discussion there. Anomie 17:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: GrooveDog, I don't believe that this project has leaders - most projects do not. Greeves (talk • contribs) 17:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do you create a task force here 

message: With sources, do you think this list could become a Featured List candidate? Kariteh 16:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it could, yeah.  Looks like it just needs a reference section and an expanded lead.  I went ahead and added Ingrid from Street Fighter Alpha 3 Double Upper (PSP), Maki Street Fighter Alpha 3 Upper (GBA), along with Eagle and Yun's appearance from Alpha 3 Upper to the list. Nall 00:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Street Fighter characters]] Featured List 

message: There's been a vandal going around removing/altering non-NA information, such as changing the European dates for Worms: Open Warfare 2 based on NoE's page (which doesn't actually say anything that would back up his given date). He seems to use multiple accounts, and seems to be stalking me with the intention of reverting pro-EU edits. Could an administrator look at the following contributions and consider blocking these accounts?:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Thanks. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You shoud make a Wikipedia:Request for checkuser. Kariteh 17:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, does s/he appear... agressive or hotheaded? There was a user who was particularly interested in release dates and who used a lot of socks and attacks. Kariteh 17:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Slightly, I suppose. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A vandal 

message: Can everyone just check that when adding citations, particularly web ones, that they complete it as best they can. Its not hard to create a good one, with a quick copy , a look at the source and a reference to its place in an article, a good cite can be developed easily. It'll only take 30 seconds, and makes the article much more professional very easily. Thanks RC Master 17:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Citations for VG articles 

message: Everyone, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines, as there seems to be an active discussion about game guides and such. Andre (talk) 19:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That "discussion" has turned in to an argument and will remain so unless someone else intervenes and offers an alternative perspective. Ashnard Talk Contribs 06:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope of information 

message: Howdy folks. If any of you have ever perused any of the Suikoden articles, you will see that there is a vast amount of information, but also a vast amount of disarray. Some of the information isn't entirely encyclopedic, and needs serious cleanup. That's why I'm interested in creating a Suikoden Task Force. I want to do the following:
*Create a single, coherent list of stars (characters) that shows recurrences, overlaps, and relationships between them - currently, there are several of these.
*Create list pages for all of the stars - currently, some characters have their own pages when, in reality, they are barely noteable enough to have them (see Miklotov). Some are listed on "List of.." pages that are quite good (see Minor characters in Suikoden. I'd like to make these pages the norm of Suikoden characters, and only have full articles about extremely significant characters - if you're a series vet, I'm talking about folks like Flik, Viktor, Tir McDohl, and whatnot. It will require some hashing out and discussing who should still have their own pages, but I'd be willing to defer to consensus on that.
*Make articles like the Geography in the Suikoden series less like "in-universe" language and more like encyclopedic information.
And more stuff as I can come up with it. The only thing I don't know is how to set this up, either in a bureaucratic sense or in the sense of setting a page up and making it look nice. I'm looking for co-conspirators on this, so please let me know if you would like to help! bwowen talk.contribs 18:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of these articles about a single character would wind up heading off to "Articles for Deletion" if I had my way.  Such characters usually aren't notable outside the game(s) and themselves have no third party information sources.  I would much rather see them in a "List of..." article, if there's sufficient content.  Otherwise, we wind up with lots of articles like Jade (Beyond Good & Evil). --Slordak 18:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is usually more the opposite in my experience, with the character articles growing extremely bloated. --tjstrf talk 19:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Feel free to move all the excessive fictional database information to The Wikipedia Annex upon completion. — Deckiller 19:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with you on this, Slordak - I don't think that Miklotov should have his own page, because there really isn't enough information about him to merit it. Tir McDohl has enough to have one because he was the central character of the first game - thus there is plenty of information. Thus, I'm looking for a hand with this Task Force. I don't know how to make one - so I need help setting it up - and I also need extra hands for this sort of business - merging and creating articles like Minor characters in Suikoden - i.e. Minor characters in Suikoden II, Minor characters in Suikoden III, etc. Also, I would like to see Minor characters in Suikoden expanded - currently, there are only ~19 characters on that list. I'd say that almost all but 10 should be on that list. My two cents. bwowen talk.contribs 20:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Slordak, "Articles for Deletion" is for articles for deletion, not merge/redirect. Kariteh 19:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Since the characters are the focal point of Suikoden, you shouldn't have an issue finding significant out-of-universe information to establish notability of groupings of characters (I.E. recurring characters, and then casts of characters for each game). Remember: not every detail has to be listed, and every character shouldn't be given a picture (we don't substitute the game). — Deckiller 20:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

text: If you want to start a new task force the best thing to do is to create your proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Suikoden, in terms of the layout I would suggest you look at the other task forces that already exist and emulate them. If there are no major objections it will be accepted. There are no real bureaucratic procedures, so WP:BOLD. If people object you'll find out soon enough. JACOPLANE • 2007-07-6 15:50
Figures, since I've been out/busy lately.  For what it's worth...  it's great if you want to help, as there's a lot that needs to be done.  That said, I can't see this matter as needing a Wikiproject, simply because there aren't enough people actively improving the articles.  I think it's been well-known what needs to be done for some time, but there aren't enough editors into it.  The parlous state of the Suikoden (video game) article is a good testament to that.
Myself, I've rewritten & merged the articles associated with Suikoden 3 and 5, and did some work on 4, but someone more familiar with Suikoden I & II needs to work on those articles (and merging the associated character articles).  This proposal has come up before; I set out the tasks that I at least think require doing at Talk:Suikoden#WikiProject?, and they still need to be done. SnowFire 04:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Suikoden]] Task Force

message: Is this an indiscriminate list, or do you think it is very encyclopedic? hbdragon88 00:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indiscriminate list. — Deckiller 02:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a sister project it could go to? I actually think the main problem is that it's not referenced (or all that referenceable in the first place). Granted, I alas contributed to some of it...but I wouldn't be too sad to see it go. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 03:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I just added a few to it too, but would shed no tears were it to go. Miremare 15:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Yuck, nominate as indiscriminate list! Gotta agree with X201 as well, fancy missing out one of the greatest uses of Ride of the Valkyries in gaming history! DarkSaber2k 15:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of video games with classical music]] 

message: It seems that the CVG template can automatically tell when it is placed in a non-article (or at least a category or template), as it does not list the article as unassessed, but it does not automatically change "article" to "non-article". Can that be changed? It would be convenient and reliable, as opposed to relying on people knowing to manually add class=NA when they add the template. JohnnyMrNinja 01:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cvgproj template 

message: I looked at the Featured List of Nintendo 64 games today and noticed that a couple games have been added since it became featured. (see a full diff) Could someone re-check them and eventually adjust the number in the lead? Circeus 21:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Nintendo 64 games]] needing review 

message: {cvg year interwiki} is confusing to bots and it generate double interwiki entries in categories. I think this current template isn't usefull at all and could be a good thing to subst and remove it. --Martin Rizzo 22:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a pretty bad template.  We should only interwiki to pages which exist. - hahnchen 23:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with {cvg year interwiki} template 

message: When are they needed? Example: Marvel:_Ultimate_Alliance#Voice_Actors. The game features a lot of characters, but I don't see a need for listing every voice actor. Look at movie articles in comparision: for animated films, there isn't massive lists of everyone that did a voice. I've removed the massive list from the example I listed a few times over the course of months. But it usually gets re-added, and my suggestion of just listing the main voice actors is just ignored. RobJ1981 06:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure there's some kind of rule about not listing extensive credits isn't there? Miremare 07:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think so, but the list on Marvel:_Ultimate_Alliance#Voice_Actors always seems to come back. RobJ1981 07:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:LISTCRUFT and WP:NOT#DIRECTORY are the closest I can find. Neither mention credits specifically, though there must be something in it otherwise we'd have endless movie articles listing makeup artists and whoever made the tea on set. Did you suggest on the article's talk page that it should be trimmed to just the most significant actors? Miremare 07:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just listed it on the talk page. But overall, the talk page for the article isn't very active right now. I will try to go through the list and condense it, but I somehow think the same people will revert it back to the massive list though. RobJ1981 18:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, I think these can be limited to voice actors for the primary characters only, similar to film articles. A link to the imdb would provide a full list for anybody interested. The exception would be if a minor role is played by a notable actor (for example, Patrick Stewart's small part in Oblivion). -- MisterHand 18:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Voice actors lists in game articles

message: :
is an entirely nonnotable character in my opinion, with appearances in just two video games.  However, this makes it difficult to merge – is she a DK character or a Mario character?  Should it just be merged into the game of her first appearance?  Should hse show up in both DK and Mario character lists? hbdragon88 22:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: She leans towards being a Mario character more it seems, but has ties with Donkey Kong as well. Putting her in both lists should be the best way to do it. RobJ1981 22:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the reason why she hasn't been merged thus far is because of the ambiguity, and her sheer age as a charcter. I'm not sure if a merge is necessary. Andre (talk) 22:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: She has appeared in only a few games (from what I can tell), that's certainly not much to go on when making an article. A merge into a list/lists should happen. If she somehow becomes a more notable character, then the article for her should be fine. Until then: it should be redirected to a list, in my opinion. RobJ1981 04:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character merge 

message: A relevant gaming article, Action (gaming) has been nominated for deletion. Please comment on its AfD. Thanks. I think it's worthy of a Wikipedia article. ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 19:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not going very well, but I think it's a valid article that just needs expanding (as any stubs do). The m:deletionist vultures swooped in for the attack, unfortunately. :/ ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 02:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not convinced that this article is valid. I'm not going to vote yet, but I can't really see why this article should stay. Andre (talk) 02:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I voted keep.  I don't see how it isn't important. Giggy UCP 03:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Action (gaming) AfD 

message: There's currently a dispute between me and another editor over the naming of the Domark game F1/Formula One. I think the only way to resolve it is for someone independent to review the arguments and evidence presented on the talk page of the article and confirm either way (or at least help decide on which we go on). I figured this Wikiproject was the best place to ask, so if anyone can spare a few moments to have look I'd be grateful. Many thanks AlexJ 19:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Game name dispute

message: Yeah, it's a nice site but there's not much on it. It needs your contributing help. Contributers! Away! — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Infamous Dr. Salvador (talk • contribs) 16:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That site seems to be mainly for game info, not guide content.  It is also difficult to find any info since most of the pages are full of placeholder text. -- Prod-You 02:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GamerWiki 

message: I haven't seen it anywhere and a quick look reveals no standard agreement on a media listing for downloadable titles. A few I've looked at include Lumines Live! (Direct Download), Prince of Persia Classic (Download), Geometry Wars (no media listing), Calling All Cars! (PlayStation Store, a section of the PlayStation Network article), and flOw (PlayStation Network, Downloadable Game). Is "Direct Download" good enough? Should it be Xbox Live Arcade or PlayStation Network (not Store, wouldn't want to encourage section linking) depending on which the game is available through (this would assume that each service is the medium through which the game gets to users, seems valid to me)? I'm just looking for some consensus. If someone knows how to turn this into a poll or this has already been decided on, please do so or point me in the right direction respectively. Thanks.Camann 22:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't need a poll, discussion should do fine. Download, and maybe the filesize if it's available, seems fine to me. I don't know what a Direct Download is, as compared to a regular download; what would an Indirect Download be? Andre (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like Download too. How about the listing be "Download(size)". One problem, though, is that filesizes may vary based on the platform. flOw is likely larger in its PS3 version than the flash PC version. Maybe "Download-size(platform to which this size applies)" the () for platform is the standard I've seen so far, but how should Download and the size be there in relation to one another?Camann 00:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Download" seems best. Anything like "PlayStation Store" should certainly not be used because that isn't the media, it's where you buy the game. Miremare 00:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe the size isn't really necessary, if it's going to be confusing. Andre (talk) 01:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I assume 'drect download' probably refers to the fact you DL it right to the console without having to go through an install or anything (just a guess, I've never DLed a game to a console outside of bonus stuff on PSP). Personally, I'd call the medium "Digital", but that's just me... ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 01:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, digital describes all video game media. What would an analog video game be? Or an analog video anything? ;P Andre (talk) 01:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well music downloads are usually refered to it that way, which is why I thought of it. *shrug*. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 01:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Heh, I guess an "indirect" download would be like downloading through a proxy, though I doubt anyone's ever put this much thought into it. Melodia, your guess about an install would be good, but PS3 d/l games wouldn't pass that. Every one I've downloaded puts an install module into my games category, I have to run that before I can run the downloaded game, so if PS3 downloadable titles are "Direct Downloads", then the term cannot refer to the lack of installer. What I bet is the case is that "direct" of direct download means no requirement of external storage medium, but marketing probably likes it too because customers get the connotation that the data travels faster due to lack of some vague "middle man" to slow it down. Of course, I'm sure Andre only meant the question to be rhetorical, but I couldn't help but wrap my head around it. Best to just stick to "Download" for media, no ambiguity there.-CamannTALK 03:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Download is just fine. - hahnchen 13:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: What useful information does this give that you wouldn't already have from the "platform" category though?(Really not against this, would just like a reason)Camann•TALK 17:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah. It's more like calling a DVD, "PlayStation DVD." Andre (talk) 20:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardization of media listing for downloadable titles? 

message: Just a reminder, when editing new/forthcoming game articles this week please be sure to tag them with ! Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why?  I don't see a huge need for that template. E3 is a big event, but I don't think tagging articles with a template for a brief time does much. At least with future game tag, it's on the article for months to years (as games are announced a while before they actually come out). With this tag: it's just a temporary thing, that will just be removed after a little bit. I think it's just better to list updates as they come, and mention the update was from E3. I'm considering putting that template up for deletion, as it just serves a one-time a year/short purpose. RobJ1981 06:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support that deletion. It seems pretty silly. DurinsBane87 06:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto that support. Seems odd (and a bit US biased even) that we have a template for E3 but not for Leipzig or any of the other conferences/shows. - X201 08:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support that deletion as well. Talk about pointless! DarkSaber2k 08:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the downsizing of E3, I can understand your views.  I think just having the  is probably enough, or maybe we can have a template for all big industry events?  I can see its use however, articles like Killzone 2 are getting quite a lot of edits, not all are good. - hahnchen 13:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lots of articles that have nothing to do with E3 also get quite a lot of not good edits. DarkSaber2k 13:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I've put it up for deletion here: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_July_11#Template:E3, feel free to comment there. RobJ1981 22:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, delete. Giggy UCP 22:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  e³ 

message: I was looking over the Quintet games article and subsequently went to the article on The Granstream Saga which referenced a link to Hardcore Gaming 101's article on Quintet themselves. 
My comment isn't that the link mentioned references the voice acting, rather that it leads to the article on HG101 that contains erroneous and misleading information and to my knowledge a lot of this information has filtered its way onto the wikipedia articles. 
There is nothing of note on the main Quintet page, however as I mentioned on the article for The Granstream Saga there is mention of the "Soul Blazer Trilogy", which in fact is a fan originated term and was never something the original developers intended for it to be called. 
The games in question (Soul Blazer, Illusion of Gaia, and Terranigma) have similar thematic elements and have been subsequently labeled a "trilogy" by fans, but as it stands other than the aforementioned shared elements and developer these games have nothing else in common to be considered a "trilogy" as such. 
I was going to edit the pages myself, however my knowledge of wikipedia's inner workings is pretty minute.  But I really don't want to see disinformation being left on these articles, as being many people will read the information I mentioned as "Fact" since it is on Wikipedia as well as go to the article at HG101 and believe that to be true as well since it is a respectable site and one that is known for well researched and truthful articles, except in this specific case. 
And since there is only one fan site (in Japanese, which is linked from the main Quintet article) all subsequent information has been derived from that and is not a definitive, factual source to go by only what a fan surmised from their limited research (similar to the HG101 Quintet article) 
Anyway to wrap up, please look into removing or noting the factual information related to these articles (and even on the main page which is missing information about games they developed, which is found on their official home page, but not on the Wiki article and as main reference) Same for the articles on Soul Blazer, the Soul Blazer series (which specifically mentions the erronious HG101 article as Fact), Illusion of Gaia, Terranigma, and The Granstream Saga.
Sorry for the longwinded explanation I just wanted to make myself clear on the issues that need to be cleared up to make wikipedia as accurate as it should be. Thanks Again. BLang30 13:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't have to be a master of Wikipedia to edit. You should feel at liberty to edit things yourself — even if you're new to Wikipedia. It seems quite an obscure subject, so I doubt many editors here will be able to distinguish between what is right or not as not many will have played it. To wrap things up, if you can write this post on Wikipedia, then you should be able to edit out fallacies if you have taken such an interest.  Be bold. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You might also consider emailing HG101 with this information. If they're a respectable site then I'm sure they'll want to remove the inaccuracies from their article. Miremare 17:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not that "Hardcore Gaming 101" is lying or saying something inaccurate, it's just that they're stating their opinion, which they do aknowledge to be unofficial. Officially, there is no Soul Blazer series. In the press, there's one magazine, Hardcore Gaming 101, which happens to have written an article about what they think can be called the "Soul Blazer series". It's just an opinion. So, since it's unofficial, I moved the sentences about the "series" from the introduction of the articles to a Reception section further down in the article. That's where it belongs. Kariteh 09:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quintet Games Articles and associated links 

message: there was this game for the NES. I can't remember what it was called, but I know that you were in charge of a space colony (or something like that), and you had to build ore refineries, defense systems, space ships, oxygen generators, and stuff like that. I was horrible at it, so I'd like to give it another shot. Anyone know what game I'm talking about? --MKnight9989 13:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, this is outside the scope of discussions here.  Might I suggest one of the retrogaming site forums?  Try http://forums.gamespy.com and look for the Consoles and Classics section - one of those forums may be able to help you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: or try the entertainment section of the reference desk Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Entertainment - X201 21:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  back in the day...