Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 32

message: Does anyone here have access to issue 13 of the UK edition of PSU3 magazine because I need some info from of it for a citation. - X201 08:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your best bet is to visit the PSU3 forum.  All Imagine Publishing magazines seem to have their own dedicated forum, I'm sure the guys there can help you, especially for a recent issue. You might even be able to attract the attention of one of the magazine staff, I know at GamesTM they take the feedback and forum sections very seriously. - hahnchen 17:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, I've just read that due to disappointing sales of the PS3 and thus PS3 magazines, that PSU3 is to merge with Play (magazine). - hahnchen 17:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PSU3 Magazine

message: Just looking at this set of articles, there is rampant problems with fair use, gamecruft, WP:IINFO, In-universe tone...
The main article looks fine, though it has a little bit overdetailed/in-universe plot-summary, and possibly more images than needed (and I'm generally for keeping images, too!). Also, the character sections seem to be more wordy than necessary, seeing as the same info is retold on the char pages, verbatim - if that's the case, then only a short sentence is necessary on the links part of the main anime page. Also, it seems to me that the pages are set up to preserve the spoiler of who the servants are - that seems like it should be mentioned at the top of the character pages, and as part of the blurb on the main page.
Thanks for your help. I've only seen a few episodes of this anime, so I won't actually be able to do anything besides comment, though.KrytenKoro 15:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major issues with [[Fate/stay Night]] 

message: The Zoo Tycoon task force was recently created without any discussion. I don't think that this topic has enough scope to justify a task force. Delete? JACOPLANE • 2007-10-1 21:32
:Agreed.  Too small a series to warrant a task force. --Masem 21:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On that note, I noticed that Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals really goes over board with non-free material. 14 images, a music file and a video file.--SeizureDog 21:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I killed the gallery. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 22:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and I was reverted by someone who seems a bit confused and uncivil. Anyone wanna give this a go and fix this/educate? I can't find the specific rule against galleries of non-free images. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't find a gallery specific one but WP:FU#Policy_2 sections 3 & 8 would apply. - X201 12:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: No need to allow them time to gather members, Zoo Tycoon is simply not big enough to have a need for a task force. Anything that needs to be done to the Zoo Tycoon articles could easily be done by the members of WikiProject Video games without the need for a separate task force. Delete. Xtreme racer 01:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On a separate note through I have removed the theme music and video from Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals as there is no real need for this in the article. Both seem to have been uploaded by the creator of this task force. Xtreme racer 01:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zoo Tycoon task force 

message: Check out Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Devil May Cry#I guess we're kind of "official" now. Apparently the DevilMayCry.com website has copied the synopsis from Devil May Cry, Devil May Cry 2, and Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening. Even though it's probably a violation of the GFDL it's pretty awesome :) JACOPLANE • 2007-10-1 22:22
:That's pretty awesome.  Maybe leave a note about it in the DMC pages so that future editors don't think it was the other way around?  --PresN 14:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Devil May Cry synopsis copied from Wikipedia for official website by Capcom 

message: Please check the talk page of the list of best-selling video games and tell us whether you want the article divided or not. Yesterday we had an edit war between two people splitting it and two others reverting. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 00:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of best-selling video games]] 

message: A user keeps adding to the Mega Drive article that the processor in the machine is 32-bit rather than the generally accepted 16-bit (certainly accepted by Sega themselves). From the Motorola 68000 article: "it is an implementation of a 32-bit architecture on a 16-bit CPU", indicating, to the best of my understanding, that it is a 16-bit processor. The user in question has also modified Motorola 68000, Amiga and Atari ST with this apparent POV/interpretation. Despite my protestations that this is a matter to be sorted out on Talk:Motorola 68000, or at the very least consensus should be gained for the change on each page (I and at least one other editor have reverted this change on the Mega Drive article), the user quotes WP:BOLD on the Mega Drive talk page as a reason to do as he likes, and removed my post on his talk page requesting he stop changing all these articles. So, any ideas how to deal with this? Miremare 22:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for opinions 

message: Master Chief (Halo) is up for FAC, just a heads up. David Fuchs (talk) 01:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Master Chief (Halo)]] 

message: Anyone here familiar with the technical aspects of the Wii's Virtual Console?  An anonymous user and I are currently in a content dispute (see the discussion) over what the definition of the feature is.  I'm trying my best to keep it from escalating, but I could use a third opinion and/or some outside verification - I currently do not have time to locate sources on this.
The IP user I'm arguing with asserts that VC is *only* the specialized portion of the Wii Shop channel, and that all of the emulation software is built in to each download.  While this may be true, no source has been provided that verifies this.  My own assertion (based on what little research I've had time to do, as well as my conclusions based on discussions I've had with people familiar with the product) is that Virtual Console is a feature of the Wii, and that the emulation software is provided as part of the Wii System Software, thus making the individual games just packages containing the ROM image and metadata.  I also do not have a source to back this up, so technically both assertions are WP:OR right now.
If anyone can help with the discussion, it would be much appreciated.  Thanks. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content dispute at [[Virtual Console]] 

message: Thought you'd like to know. --Kizor 02:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Link is here. Looking at the list, there's some perfectly valid deletion nominations in there, cruft-galore, although nomination en-masse of various articles like this pretty poor show. --Oscarthecat 06:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, so now that it's closed, is there going to be some proper nominations/discussions on what to do about the articles?--SeizureDog 00:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  26 World of Warcraft articles up for deletion 

message: Hi. Please weigh in on the main picture choice for the video game article on Talk:Video game. There was a Pac-Man image being used, but I don't think it's necessary. There's plenty of free games that can be used as the main picture. I picked SuperTux since it's easily identifiable as a Super Mario Bros. clone. --Jtalledo (talk) 07:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think for a generic concept like Video Game, it'd be important to make sure that the image is easily recognizable.  Pac-Man is instantly recognizable by almost everyone - it's the most popular video game of all time, so it easily identifies the genre and industry.  It's a perfect excuse to use an image under Fair Use.  Free games, and especially clones of commercial games, may not identify the genre as easily, or may mislead the reader by making them think the clone is the original game.  (Note, operative word is "may" - I'm not saying it necessarily will - just something to be aware of.)  If there's a way to generically represent a video game without using a commercial game as an example, then great - just be sure that it's something virtually everyone will recognize as a video game, and not a computer science experiment or something. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 08:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture for [[video game]] 

message: Should the List of weapons in the Counter-Strike article be removed? --Silver Edge 09:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: DAMN. Looks like alot of shit needs to be removed from that. I'm too tired right now. I'l help tommorow. DurinsBane87 09:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Clear violation of WP:NOT#INFO and WP:VG/GL. I have removed the list of weapons due to it being an indiscriminate list of information. The rest of the weapons sections needs to either be removed completely, or sources need to be provided so substantiate WP:WEIGHT and WP:V. --Scottie_theNerd 10:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Based on the fact that the weapons articles for Worms Armageddon, Halo: Combat Evolved, Halo 2, and Half-Life 2 have been removed, I would really just speedy any standalone articles I saw on sight. At least this is still in its parent article... David Fuchs (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Counter-Strike List of weapons 

message: The Chikyuu Boueigun 2 article is currently listed as a rename, but is now in the 'old' requests with no comments. It's Earth Defense Force 2, if the Japanese name doesn't ring a bell. All the sources I could find about the game are now cited in the article to help with any decision. I'd be grateful if any project members would give an opinion one way or the other on the requested moves page. Also, there's a couple of other game articles there too. Thanks. Someone another 16:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming of Chikyuu Boueigun 2 

message: I'm not sure about games that have just been announced, like Fire Emblem DS. Do I create the article now, or wait until there is more info? Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose it depends on whether there's enough confirmed info. As it's part of a notable series and from a notable publisher, and you can cite the announcement or other sources, I don't see why you shouldn't create the article now. Miremare 16:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks. First article created; yes!!! Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FE DS 

message: I'm getting into a revert cycle at the Warhawk article with a user whose sole aim on Wikipedia seems to be to push PlayStation products, User:Playstationdude. Warhawk started off as a disambiguation page, and I feel it should stay that way. Playstationdude seems to think that it should be a redirect to Warhawk (PlayStation 3 game). This is an egregious example of recentism, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, users are just as likely to be searching for the other articles related to that name such as the Curtiss P-40 or War Hawk.  In edit summaries, I've told him to get to the talk page about it, but it hasn't happened. This could do with some extra input. - hahnchen 17:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:RPP is where you want to go to force discussion. User:Krator (t c) 17:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for finally putting the link on it. I didn't know where you wanted to talk. It is not that I always push PlayStation products, I actually work on a wide spread of topics. The reason I keep putting that redirect there is that Warhawk (PlayStation 3 game) is a very popular game and I added the disambiguation part on it. Maybe we can work something out. How about on the see disambiguation part I put a more detailed part saying something like "...if you are looking for the Curtiss P-40 article or...". I really did not realize until I looked at the history page lately how many times we have changed it back and forth.--Playstationdude 23:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I understand why you'd say that, right now, Warhawk (PlayStation 3 game) is probably going to be the most searched for of the Warhawks. But this is an encyclopedia, we look beyond the zeitgeist. By redirecting Warhawk to the most recent game, you're claiming that it has precedence over all the other Warhawk's combined, I don't think it is. You also did a cut+paste page move, this breaks the article history, if you use the move button (next to the history button), you can preserve this. If you think that Warhawk should go directly to the PS3 game, then you should goto WP:RM and request a move from Warhawk (PlayStation 3 game) -> Warhawk, this will give a forum for discussion and allow you to bypass a needless redirect. - hahnchen 23:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for understanding and the advice. I will go to wp:rm. I want to thank you for not getting so angry about this.--Playstationdude 00:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Warhawk]] revert war

message: Just a quick note that Half-Life 2: Episode One is up for FA. Thankyou. Qjuad 23:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Half-Life 2: Episode One]]

message: I noticed that a lot of articles have very similar tables to show review scores, agrigate scores and awards but there's no standard among them so most of them end up being completely different to each other. To me, it seems particularly messy and that's what templated are here for. So after a bit of experimentation and a lot of investigating, I made a template for it. This is my first template so it may not entirely be correct but I think I've got a good base down which people can add to.
I haven't copied this over to the templates section yet though just in case if it's just not going to be used so I would like a bit of feedback.
Template:Scores CVG 
Crimsonfox 16:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Example of its use can be seen on Crimson's user page, User:Crimsonfox. --Oscarthecat 16:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I knew I forgot something. Thanks. Crimsonfox 16:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Changed. Nitpicking it always good. Crimsonfox 17:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I like the ideam and I completely understand where you are coming from ,but I wouldn't know how to do the latter. Some people are lazy at adding references anyway so I'm not sure if this would further discourage people to add references. Crimsonfox 17:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: You would have to have the entire reference tag included in the parameter, since <ref>s within templates don't work right. So unless there's a good reason to have separate parameters (like your auto- suggestion), it doesn't get you anything. Anomie 17:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the only thing I think it would be good for, but unlike other uses where missing a parameter or a similar aspect needs to red-flag (such as the fair use rationale) I think we should assume editors are smart enough to know references are needed.  However, in the template documentation, make sure to include that a reference should be added for each review score. --MASEM 18:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Made good on your first comment Anomie, got rid of most of the "yes" bits. Going to leave compilations for now as more may be added in the future. Wouldn't know about changing it all to HTML though. Crimsonfox 19:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, I'd like to say that this is a very good idea. It will help standardize the appearance and layout of the review tables. A quick question though; more of a clarification really. I've seen regular font and italics used in such VG review tables? I believe the rationale is that per WP:MOS-T, magazine (periodicals) titles should be italicized. What this first led to was a mix of italicized publication titles, and for consistency editors would either italicize everything or nothing. I guess what I'm asking is this something that should be taken into consideration for this template? (Guyinblack25 talk 20:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, WP:MOS-T does mention that magazine titles should be italicized so unless there's any specific argument against this I'll go ahead and change it after class. Feel free to do it in the mean time, I'll be a few hours. Crimsonfox 07:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Done, italicized everything that needed it. Crimsonfox 17:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't implement it just yet. I'd suggest VG Reviews for the template name rather than Scores VG. I'd also change all the parameters from scoreABC to ABC. Pagrashtak 17:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would make a lot of sense wouldn't it...I'll do that now. Thanks for the feedback. Crimsonfox 17:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So...... is it ready for use? :-D Also, do you guys plan on actively implementing this on all game articles that currently have a review table? If so, need some help? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless there is anything else that people want to mention, apart from changing the name to "VG Reviews" (Which I will do soon) I feel it is ready to be put in. And yes, some help would be nice when we get around to it. Crimsonfox 14:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest using it on newer games first (either those that lack a review table, or that have a minimal table) and make sure it covers anything; you want to find and figure out if there may be special cases that could be able to correct for (I think, for example Guitar Hero II would prove to be a challenge.) --MASEM 14:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I would split that table in GHII into two tables to begin with and make then a lot thinner. That thing takes up way too much space. Crimsonfox 15:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, I object. There's no sense leaving twelve empty award parameters for a game that didn't win any awards, and we don't need empty revx and revxscore parameters cluttering up the page. Pagrashtak 15:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Also object. Same reason as Pagrashtak Crimsonfox 15:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How is it going to be used? Making people go to the template's page so that they can copy a single field to make sure they get the syntax correct isn't going to be very friendly. It needs a certain amount of fields awaiting data to make life easier or else people will just revert back to tables and Crimson's efforts deserve better than that. What about pasting a set number of the predefined fields on a newly released game with a note about extra fields being available?. - X201 15:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Then how about — Please copy the whole template and delete any unwanted/unused fields — Or something along those lines. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I would say after reporting the review score but in that score field.  The first column of review sources is the "generic" part with links already to appropriate WP pages, while the second column is the game specific and thus the appropriate place for references. --MASEM 16:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I noticed that too. I tried applying it to the Kingdom Hearts article and in the preview it had a very large blank space. One other detail on spacing is that there is very little space between the paragraph text and the table itself. Perhaps it's a issue with how the table floats/aligns. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what it is, but don't have time to edit it.  Each of the template if statements leaves behind a br-whitespace.  The fix is to end each line and start the next with the HTML comment bits (that is  at the start of the next. --MASEM 16:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  You're absolutely right; I took a stab at fixing the template in the manner in which you described and it seems to have worked.  --Slordak 17:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's really starting to shape up nicely now. Is there a way to provide more horizontal padding to the outside edges of the table? A minor detail, but I think it would help the overall appearance of the table in fitting into articles. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template for Review Scores and awards 

message: I was browsing the HL2 mod list when I noticed a request for an Empires (mod) article on the Talk:List of Half-Life 2 mods page. The problem is that the mod in question already had an article, but it was deleted after a pretty messy and, in my opinion, biased afd (look for Empires in the deletion log). I'm wondering if any work I put forth toward this article will just be in vain as die hards would just argue the mod still isn't notable/meritable enough and the previous deletion is only grounds for another one. What the mod does have going for it though is a couple of magazine articles, features and a few awards. Think the article has a chance to live now, or will it just be shot down by guys like User:GestaltG? --L3TUC3 23:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could always work on the article on the Half-Life Wikia, and once you've managed to get a decent article that establishes notability through reliable sources, reintroduce it to Wikipedia. JACOPLANE • 2007-10-15 23:33
I'm usually up for a good and controversial deletion debate. Once you've done what Jacoplane wrote above, drop me a message when it will inevitably be up for deletion. User:Krator (t c) 23:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empires (mod) article 

message: Thanks to Donkey Kong, we now have a precedent for using copyrighted images for featured video game articles. DK survived the entire day with an image of the Game & Watch handheld (with game graphics clearly displayed, even). So, next time your pet VG FA comes to the main page, you'll have some ammunition for using a box image. Zeality 02:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. For reference, the version of the article featured (which includes the video game image) can be found here. --Oscarthecat 06:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Although the image is tagged as public domain, you'll notice. Pagrashtak 15:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So we can't always use such images on the Main Page ;) Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 08:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, cool. So, I'll just take a picture of a Chrono Trigger cartridge and release it into the public domain like that guy. Zeality 17:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyrighted images on TFA

message: I've noticed that most Tekken character articles and The House of the Dead video game articles have a list at the end of all the possible endings.  Is this fine, or do you think this makes for an excessively detailed plot, perhaps too in-universe?  I'd like some support before I rampage through the article, or a reprimand if I am actually damaging the articles. hbdragon88 03:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's two or three endings, I think it's fair (see, for example, BioShock); if its more than that, it should be stated that there are multiple endings, and if there is a designated "good" ending, the plot should be resolved per that ending; mind you, if there's no such confirmed ending, it should be left vague (instad of allowing fan speculation to take over to decide what is the best ending.) --MASEM 03:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, take Nina Williams for instance.  She's been in six Tekken games, and they list the final ending for each one of them. hbdragon88 03:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's too many myself. But it would have to be a consensus. --Crash Underride 17:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endings 

message: Hey guys...Age of Mythology was recently featured (woot!), and I'd like to see it on the Main Page at some stage.  Anybody have any tips or advice on ways to make this happen?  Cheers, Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 08:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests - X201 08:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously.  But I'm sure you've noticed that not every article lists there makes it onto the Main Page - not every request is successful.  Are there any suggestions on giving the request a greater chance? Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 08:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading their advice gives you an angle of attack. "Generally speaking, preference will be given to ... requests that are particularly relevant to a given date (especially major anniversaries).". It's the fifth anniversary of A0M's release this year which is one  angle to campaign with. Being civil and not putting insults (however mild) in edit summaries will also help. - X201 08:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting an article on the Main Page 

message: Considering how important of a game this is, it's really quite shameful that it's stayed a stub for as long as it has. I've built up a "Gameplay" section for the article, and plan to get it up to GA status (which really shouldn't be too hard). Any help would be appreciated, especially if anyone has any information on its development or can help build a reception section.--SeizureDog 11:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Media reception" section ahouldn't be too difficult; all the relating information can found at its page at Gamerankings. One screenshot needs a fair-use ratonale, while one already has one, but needs a proper one. You'll probably need to provide some context to its soundtrack; a solitary list is pretty pointless as a section. The lead needs expanding too, but this should come as the article itself expands. What about its legacy too—has it spawned any sequels or heavily influenced other games? Ashnard Talk Contribs 14:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also got a couple of mentions on the Magazines Project so might be worth contacting the appropriate person for review quotes. - X201 15:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I do hope that question about the legacy is rhetorical. It spawned 10 sequels and basically created the extreme sports video game genre. It's one of the most important games of all time. It would boggle my mind if you hadn't heard of the series beforehand. But of course, yes this is a section that will need to be developed as well.--SeizureDog 16:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it was a rhetorical question. If this not being noticed is so "mind-boggling", then what must be equally "mind-boggling" is that you haven't made a section on it yet. Thank you. Ashnard Talk Contribs 17:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which would be because I've just started working on the article today. Though on this note, it seems like the tone of our conversation is getting pretty caustic.--SeizureDog 17:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Tony Hawk's Pro Skater]] 

message: I've started the daunting task of re-listing this article by year of publication, so that it's doing something other than duplicating :Category:ZX Spectrum games. I've chosen by-publication year over by-genre as it's more objective. It's a big list though, so any help will be appreciated. Cheers, Marasmusine 17:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like a good candidate for a sortable table. - X201 11:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to everyone who has helped out with this. I've not done a sortable table before; will look into it. Marasmusine 17:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of ZX Spectrum games]]

message: ...is one of my favorite PC games. I know it isn't very well known. In fact the biggest community of that game is so deserted that it's like there are few people there.
But the article reads like a story. I don't know how to trim a story, so help would be appreciated. Thanks. TheBlazikenMaster 18:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I trashed it, because it says that it's copied from the instruction manual, and we can't accept that.  I also trimmed out the essay-like bits, such as "multiplayer is fun" and this bit about there being a lot of fan links.  I'll go through the story later and try to write a compact version that isn't a copyright vio. hbdragon88 19:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gruntz]] 

message: Template_talk:Infobox_CVG#Move_to_Template:Infobox_VG. We should probably change this follow the new name of this Wikiproject. Axem Titanium 21:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The same goes for :Template:Cvgproj to :Template:Vgproj. Axem Titanium 13:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with moving both. The name of this project (as well as the broader issue of CVG vs. VG) has been stable for many months. — TKD::Talk 12:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreeing with moving as well.User:Krator (t c) 13:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I take the rest of the project's widespread silence as non-opposition? Axem Titanium 21:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Make it so. User:Krator (t c) 21:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: OBJECTION! 22:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? I don't see any problem with moving it. It's been known as WikiProject Video games for some time now. --Optichan 22:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we get a bot lined up first to convert? I don't want my watchlist being flooded by some user taking ten hours out of his day changing these all over. Pagrashtak 23:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: (ec) As Pagrashtak put it, someone will go and change all the template transclusions for no reason other than to avoid a redirect, whcih has no purpose whatsoever because it's the same thing regardless of whether it is titled CVG or VG. hbdragon88 23:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Support move of both templates. There is no reason not being consistant on this. --MrStalker talk 11:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Template:Infobox CVG]] --> [[:Template:Infobox VG]] 

message: I just did a major overhaul on the Mega Drive article but it's considerably lacking in the technical specifications. I've gathered as much info as I can understand but without someone who understands it a bit more than I can, it's not going to get improved any further. I left the tables on the left for information purposes until the info boxes on the right are fully fleshed out. Also, it would be good if someone with technical skills can write short summaries of each section with in the "Technical Specification" as well, something similar to the SNES article.
Not sure where else to take this, so I figured this would be the best place to try. Thanks. Crimsonfox 23:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mega Drive Technical Specifications 

message: There's a discussion on the page which was settled in favour of the article being at We Love Katamari, but the article's recently been moved back to the heart symbol. I'm under the impression there should have been a discussion but I'm no expert on article names - could someone clarify? Someone another 13:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The user that moved it, User:Photouploaded did the move with only the edit summary of "name of the game".  Given that was one of the arguments of the discussion previously and thus rejected, citing accessibility rules over trade names, this was probably done without consulting that discussion and should be moved back. --MASEM 14:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I need to read through the naming conventions. Someone another 06:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: And I nominated the template for deletion. User:Krator (t c) 10:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  We ♥ Katamari - article moved 

message: I found that earlier and it's incredibly extensive on the Mega Drive but I'm not sure if it could be used as a source or not. Could someone help me out? Thanks Crimsonfox 15:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Borderline. I'd say use it, but not to establish notability - only for verification. User:Krator (t c) 15:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The author (Sam Pettus) is AFAICT reliable on the subject of console emulation (one of the few!), and the long list of sources at the end of the article is encouraging. I say go for it, especially since establishing notability should not be a problem at all. Anomie 17:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source reputable or not? 

message: I'm running Populous: The Beginning through WP:FAC again. If you can, look over the article and respond on the candidates page. David Fuchs (talk) 19:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a minor request at the FAC, but supported. Good luck, Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 07:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solicitation to [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Populous:_The_Beginning|Populous FAC]] 

message: I'm really curious as to why this article has not been created yet. Kotaku and Joystiq both have entries. I know this sounds like whining, I'm just curious as to what the general consensus is behind not having a page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.204.236 (talk) 00:08, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's explained over here. Basically, the blog doesn't have enough third-party coverage/references to meet notability guidelines for web content. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 00:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is officially fixed! Third party sources and all. :D ClockworkCompanionCube 15:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Destructoid teaming up with Hudson Soft and being mentioned on Microsoft's XBOX site is definitely enough to keep the article on wikipedia, but do not be surprised if subjective deletionists attempt to get it removed yet again. 216.37.86.10 15:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of Destructoid Article 

message: Does this need to exist? It seems like a cruft article to me. It's on gamer wiki already, so why have it here?  Compiling information, and just jamming it into a list with many sections... doesn't seem that helpful overall. I recall seeing this before, and it had less sections. Now people just seem to be adding more and more. Even cutting some sections, still makes it seem like a fancruft article to me. Resolution and aspect sections make the article only useful to those that want to know the information. In a way, this is a game guide on what features are in each game. Wikipedia isn't a game guide, so shouldn't this be deleted? RobJ1981 04:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Comparison of Wii games]]

message: How do we create an assessment table for a Wikiproject? WP:FF lacks an assessment table that would make it easier to find out about article assessment statuses. — Blue。 04:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to add quality and importance ratings to the WP:FF template, and create the corresponding categories.  Then talk to WP:1.0, they run the bot that actually creates/updates the tables for all the wikiprojects.  You might want to talk to Kariteh about it, I'm pretty sure he was the one who did it for WP:SE.  --PresN 04:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kariteh's been quiet for some time, but I guess I could take from examples. Thanks! — Blue。 05:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment table 

message: I'm questioning the use of Images on character specific articles. Some articles, such as King Dedede, feature a picture of them from outside their franchise in the Infobox. In all honesty, I don't really like that. This leads me to believe that said Cameo/appearance is an official portrayal of the character, when, in all reality, it's not. For example, in the article I mentioned, They are now using the image of King Dedede from Super Smash Bros. Brawl. The Brawl Dedede is an entirely different Dedede, and his design, and appearance in Brawl is not canon to the Kirby Franchise, for if it was, then Link/Sonic/Snake/ect would be cannon to the Kirby series. 
In short, I don't think Cameos/Special appearances should be displayed on the infobox, when the article is about the cannon character. But this gets me into alot of edit wars, so I was hoping to hear the projects opinion on this. Dengarde ► Complaints  23:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the reason the cameo picture is used in King Dedede is because it's clean and modern. David Fuchs (talk) 00:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: My personal opinion would be that if it's an active franchise, the latest canon incarnation of the character should be used. If not an active franchise, the most recognisable incarnation should be used. Miremare 00:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I had to really search for what is considered the "proper image" around here awhile ago since I had not found it in any of the VG guidelines. Usually, when a new character is revealed there is always a rush by mostly the new users to quickly change that character's image. No, they should not be used, what you said here (number 2) is pretty much the reason why almost no article use images from games other than where that character originated from (assuming its still an active franchise). « FMF » 00:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A note on dedede though, his creator was the one who created the brawl image (more than likely). Just something to think about. I know what your getting at, but Dedede might not have been the best example, given the circumstance. Balladofwindfishes 23:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: "The most recognisable image of a character is to be used."
Time of publication is irrelevant to this, IMHO.  User:Krator (t c) 00:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Or canonicity for that matter. I can accept the Brawl image there for Dedede because really, how many people recognized characters of the Kirby universe outside of Kirby himself until Brawl? NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 00:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that canonicity does not matter, but I was actually drawing the opposite conclusion, because his appearance in the Kirby series is recognised much better. However, I had never heard of the character before this discussion, nor played any of the games. User:Krator (t c) 00:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character Images 

message: The quality of the entire set of articles on the Legacy of Kain series is of really poor quality, and I was wondering if anyone wanted to help me do a major clean-up of the articles, especially the series page and the Defiance article. I just joined, so I'm still not sure how everything works around here. I look forward to making the Wiki articles I know and love even better! ClockworkCompanionCube 04:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy of Kain Articles 

message: Look at WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008 for example. It's cluttered with lists: some useful, some not. I think things such as: match types and championship belts/titles need to be in prose form and not a list. Yes, knowing which titles are in the game is useful: however it's simply game guide content in my view. If people want to know this information, they should be visiting a gaming or wrestling site that specializes in it. I've looked at other fighting game articles as wrestling games are basically fighters as well, and I don't see all these massive lists there. Fighting games don't feature titles much that I know of, but they certainly have many modes and types of battles.) I've mentioned this on the pro wrestling project as well, since some work on the video game articles as well. RobJ1981 05:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow. Overcited lists, at that. Do we really have a citation in the opening sentence and the infobox to prove that the name of the video game is, in fact, WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008? Pagrashtak 05:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment about wrestling video games articles

message: I just recently found this obscure article about an obscure game that's related to a not at all obscure creator of a pretty famous game. From the looks of it, it's only a few short steps from being GA status, but it lacks a bit of things. With a little work it could be ready for a proper GA review in no time. -InsaneZeroG 05:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, it has no references. Pagrashtak 05:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs a lot of work before GA status. Not only are there no references, there's no reception information, the gameplay overview is too short, among other things. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, so "a few short steps" may not be the best phrase then... -InsaneZeroG 07:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Obscure? Maybe I just got the net too early...♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Characters" section needs modifying—you can't just give their names and voice actors alone. Also, try to have a paragraph that encapsulates the style and personality of characters as a whole; obviously, try to find a source for this stuff. Ashnard Talk Contribs 11:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Snatcher]] 

message: This is an idea I've been mulling over for some time, but only decided to propose now. I noticed it says on the main page of WP:STARWARS that it's effectively a collaboration of numerous projects including this one, but I thought one task force specifically focusing on one aspect of Star Wars (and one which doesn't actually have so many high-quality articles) would be pretty useful. It's fairly self-explanatory, so check out the proposal. I'd be interested to hear what you think. Una LagunaTalk 18:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea. Why don't you create the proposal @ Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Star Wars? JACOPLANE • 2007-10-28 20:28
I was thinking that the Star Wars WikiProject could cover it just fine, but if a task force is necessary, I have no objections to it. hbdragon88 22:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I'll create it when I get the chance... I'm a little too busy for creating it at present. Una LagunaTalk 22:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Star Wars video game task force proposal 

message: List of video games: A-C, List of video games: D-H and so on. Anyone want to format these better? As of now, they seem to be "catchalls" for every game ever. All of these lists are important, but need a lot of work. I personally feel the catchall attitude isn't the way to go, unless the lists get a better format. Some sort of sourcing wouldn't hurt either. Going by the fact that most on the lists have articles isn't completely helpful, as people could be adding hoax articles to the lists that go unnoticed. RobJ1981 20:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What sort of format should they be in? -- DatRoot 22:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Several video game lists that need formatting

message: Hi, have just picked this up from the Wikification project and have done what I can with it but this is not my area of expertise so if someone wants to take a look at it I'd be grateful. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 22:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a gaming article that mentions nothing of gameplay. That's starnge. It also needs sections on "Reception" and "Development" if possible. The "Story" section needs shortening too. Ashnard Talk Contribs 14:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Dragon Valor]]