Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 27

message: A few more sets of eyes on articles related to Starcraft would be appreciated.  Edits related to StarCraft II are being placed in articles other than the obvious one and often include speculation, OR, and POV comments and assertions.  For example, I've reverted a few edits to StarCraft: Ghost‎ and I'd appreciate some help there.  Thank!  --ElKevbo 22:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On a slightly different note, I've brought the StarCraft: Insurrection article up to (what I percieve to be) a satisfactory level, taking a similiar structure as the StarCraft: Brood War article. -- S@bre 17:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: StarCraft articles

message: On April 1, 2007 at 15:58 (UTC) we came to consensus in Talk:Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars (archived here) to add information to the infobox of its article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars, however, unlike other the other infobox templates,  did not support foonotes, so I edited the template to support footnotes and discused the change on Template talk:Infobox CVG § Footnotes on April 1, 2007 at 17:19 (UTC). On 23 April 2007 at 11:53, Combination reverted my edit without discussing the change on the talk page. I explained I do not support Combination removing footnotes, because it is not an unused field, and the purpose of this field and why it is necessary. Articles such as Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars use footnotes in their infobox. Other infoboxes use footnotes, such as . (See United Kingdom for an example.) They are not redundant, and they do not belong at the end of an article. Combination continued to revert without discussing it on the talk page. Long story short, we've been in an edit war. I want Combination to talk about this. I have given my reason for adding footnotes, and video game articles, such as Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars use them. We have come to a consensus to move the information from a different section in the article to the footnotes of the infobox, just like  does with United Kingdom, on the talk page. Combination continues to revert without discussing it here. When I go to edit videogame articles that use Infobox footnotes, I see they are gone, and the information is lost and reduces the quality of the article. In addition, the footnotes have citations, and removing the footnotes deletes the linkback to them. In essence, the reader wonders something like, "Um, I see reference 4 in the References section, but it doesn't exist in the article? Why is it here?". Combination finally discusses the issue,  I'm tired of this. Can we just have footnotes like other civilized templates? Thanks in advance! ☺ Taric25 18:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why you need a footnote in the infobox itself.  Is there something wrong with having the footnote at the bottom of the article just like almost every other one that uses them?  You say that they do not belong at the end of an article, but why?  You give no reason for that.  It seems to me that you changed the template (which I'm shocked isn't fully protected), then used that change in one article, then claimed that a reversion was unjustified because that change was now being used.  I know that it's a small change that's being used in one article, but you really should have discussed it here first before you messed with a template used in 16000+ articles. --PresN 06:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted the template to its original (no footnotes) state and protected it, while we discuss on the talk page. --Oscarthecat 08:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Infobox CVG]] footnotes 

message: Do these even need to exist? Arcade games are video games: so the should only have the video game year category, right? :Category:Video games by year is where the arcade years are listed now: 1971 to 1999. RobJ1981 20:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories for arcade games by years

message: Could I request that project members who have an interest in the CVG Infobox please go to the project talk page and read the Footnotes discussion between the disputing parties and add a bit of practical advise to move the discussion on from the constant revert revert revert that has been going on over the past weeks. - X201 08:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted the template to its original (no footnotes) state and protected it, while we discuss on the talk page. --Oscarthecat 08:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template edit war 

message: What does everyone think about the image of a tank on . Could we get something appropriate for this? G1ggy! 04:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's one thing trawling the CGW archives has taught me, it's that wargames (particularly WWII) essentially defined the strategy genre years ago. Therefore, I think it's wholly appropriate. See also: Crimson Fields, the game the image comes from. Nifboy 06:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That image is actually quite hard to pick out with its dark greens and blacks.  I don't think there's anything wrong with a tank image, but something a little bolder and iconic would do.  Although to be honest, I really wouldn't mind just standardising all cvg stubs with the cvg controller image. Consistency rocks. - hahnchen 18:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategy Games Stub Template 

message: The previous discussion can be found here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/archive26#Wii Points: to list or to not list?. There is also an active discussion here about it: Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Not a sales catalogue or price guide. To summarize it: in my opinion (and others) download prices for the newest consoles (Wii, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360) shouldn't be listed. Prices are listed on the official sites for the downloads and many other gaming sites, an encyclopedia shouldn't be a price guide...period. RobJ1981 06:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Encyclpedic" is defined by Webster's as being comprehensive on a branch of knowledge.  In the interest of being comprehensive, naturally we would list prices that are completely standardized - these aren't prices that change from store to store, like most products that might go on "sale" at any time. A copy of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles downloaded off of the Wii Shop Channel is going to cost the same in North Pole, Alaska as it is when downloaded in Enid, Oklahoma. And what do we want to be as an encyclopedia? We want to be informative. Useful. That's the entire purpose of an encyclopedia. So again, to be informative and useful... we list the prices, because that is both. I also notice that the "Wikipedia is not a price guide," they're a general good guideline, is not actually something you have linked as real policy. It's just something that's being DEBATED as policy. That's not the same as something we can take a hardline stance on. And even if we could, something that is a standard flat charge without concern of taxes or sales would be a natural exception. So again, Keep.  In truth, I'm amazed this debate is still going. --Bishop2 19:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If Capcom sets an MSRP for a game, wouldn't that mean that it's the official price and that we must include the price? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: That's funny, I could swear that, in the interest of being informative and useful, that would mean including game guide information. You're also absolutely wrong about the price changing in different areas, there's a thing called an "MSRP". --Teggles 19:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, and do you know what the "S" stands for? SUGGESTED. That's why, today, I walked into Best Buy and saw 'Spider-Man: Battle for New York' for $19.99. Then I went into GameCo 10 minutes later and saw the same game for $29.99. It's also why I can find the DVD of Pirates of the Caribbean: CotBP at Best Buy for $14.99, and then see it in Target for $13.77. Prices are different based on what the store opts to set them at. Prices of Xbox Live Arcade or Wii Shop Channel games don't change anywhere in the continent, no matter where you shop from. --Bishop2 20:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't seem to get it. The MSRP doesn't change. As for the suggested rubbish, hell, the release date is suggested, many stores will release at different dates. Not to mention you completely ignored the game guide argument. We don't have to include information just because it exists and a group will find it useful. When you have something like the Model T, its pricing is important because it made a difference, but all you're doing with Wii Points is providing a price guide. --Teggles 04:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, MSRP's do change. TJ Spyke 04:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I would like to point out (in the case of Virtual Console games for the Wii at least): games are a constant price, with only a few exceptions. The table at the list page for the games: doesn't need a special box to list the redundant price. I've suggested a compromise of just listing the overall price (per group of games), at the top of each section. But no one seems to even agree with that. So this matter seems to be an "all or nothing" deal. In that case: prices shouldn't be listed. I try to compromise, but people don't want to listen. RobJ1981 21:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I get more input on this? I'm considering a request for comment (for the list page/pages for Virtual Console at least). This pricing needs to go. Constant prices or not: Wikpedia shouldn't be turned into a price guide. RobJ1981 15:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Enough already. See Wikipedia:Consensus, in particular this sentence: "Asking for a consensus in a completely different "venue" or section of Wikipedia, in the hope of finding more support for a failed proposal, is known disapprovingly as forum-shopping." -- MisterHand 21:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a failed proposal in my opinion. There was some discussion about it: then the discussion died. If most people outright said they didn't want the proposal: that would be failed. There is some people that want the prices, and some that don't. That's not a consensus, so I see no reason why the current way should be accepted as default (since nothing new was decided on, yet at least). RobJ1981 22:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You first proposed that Wii points be removed from List of Virtual Console games (North America). There was clear consensus that the points should stay. Since then, you've been forum-shopping the proposal around, including this talk page and the administrator's noticeboard. -- MisterHand 01:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Clear consensus my ass. Micro-consensus does not trump Wikipedia wide consensus. I've removed Wii points from the article you've mentioned. -- Ned Scott 03:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where's the Wikipedia wide consensus against Wii points? Even with all the forum shopping, nobody's been able to get it. -- MisterHand 03:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Several past discussions (linked above by Rob) show people not being too keen on the idea of price lists, let alone Wii points. Stating the price of a game can be encyclopedic, but these lists are not. -- Ned Scott 03:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some people (after the issue was forum shopped to editors less familiar with the subject matter). Not all people. There's nothing even close to a "Wikipedia wide consensus" on this issue. -- MisterHand 10:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This edit by an admin clearly states the poll doesn't control the article: of Virtual Console games %28North_America%29&diff=129378690&oldid=129282310. I have the right to continue this, as I feel the poll isn't the solution to this. Look at the other links I provided above: some people are for, some are against. This is certainly not a solved case. The fact several users (TJ Spyke being one) are ignoring the discussions, and claiming the poll is 100 percent right... is a bit rude in my opinion. Not joining the discussion is one thing: but ignoring them because they claim it's over, is just wrong. TJ's edit here (at the bottom) is simply bad faith in my opinion: of_Virtual_Console_games_%28North_America%29&diff=134219395&oldid=134218873. RobJ1981 03:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Voting can be evil, and it takes a back seat to discussion. I'm supporting Rob on this one. -- Ned Scott 04:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wii Points are relevent to each game, as much as even the ESRB rating. There has also been no consensus to remove them, and it's not a price guide (so it doesn't violate any WP policy). TJ Spyke 04:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Besides the Virtual Console list pages (for several countries): there is also the following page that is a download price guide. Xbox Live Arcade#Xbox Live Arcade games for the Xbox 360. I don't think there is one for PlayStation Network games (at least I couldn't find one). RobJ1981 04:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

text: They are not price guides. TJ Spyke 04:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It might not have been the intention, but it might be the result. -- Ned Scott 04:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What is it then, if it's not a price guide? A point guide? Also as a note: the links above don't work (the diffs from Nishkid and TJ on the Virtual Console list page), I'm not sure what I did wrong with that. RobJ1981 04:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Video game download prices (again)

message: Do we archive the closed AfDs, or just take the older ones off the list? Marasmusine 11:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Archive them to the VG Deletion Archive.  It's a complete pain in the ass to do, which is why the closed list gets so long.  --PresN 23:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Closed AfDs

message: I am currently putting some finishing touches on The Price Is Right (US game show) article to submit for FA consideration, but the section on computer/video games needs some help. This is not my area of expertise, nor do I have any idea what sort of reliable sources I should be using. I also feel that, even though it is a section of the article, that it should follow some of the standards by the gaming community. If I could get a few eyes over there for some help it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! —Twigboy 17:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's going to be hard to find sources online for what looks to be a rather casual game such as this from 1990.  MobyGames has some information, and at a long shot, there may be something from the 1990 Computer Gaming World archives. Just Googling the thing, I found out you can actually download it from a legally dubious website.  If you can't find a source for the "cancelled" NES game, then just leave it out. The other 2 products, won't have many sources at all in the video game press, they're not really targeted at the same market as the ones which the press covers. - hahnchen 11:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much figured on that, since it is more of a novelty item. There were a lot of assertions in there, and just a Google search was coming up pretty blank. Thanks for the assistance.—Twigboy 00:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Price Is Right games 

message: There is currently debate at Talk:List of Virtual Console games (North America)#Alphabatize about how to sort the sortable list of games.  On one hand, there is a preference to list all of the released games together in one table. On the the other hand, some people, intmidated by the appearance of one large table, insist on separating the list into five tables, each grouping the games by their original systems, which ruins the potential to sort the games as a whole.  I am asking for help in resolving the issue. --Brandon Dilbeck 22:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virtual Console game list sort conflicts 

message: Could someone please put some level of restriction on the article, because the edit war over the pissible 360 version is getting out of hand. Thanks. Zidane tribal 20:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I count two reverts by two anonymous users, with a relatively stable level on the article otherwise.  This isn't the level of vandalism or edit warring that admins will protect for.  In any case, WP:RFPP is the place to request protection. hbdragon88 00:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The war has been long, i myself have reverted at least 10 times, but thet`s not the point, thanks for the advice, i shall take it. Zidane tribal 00:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MGS4 

message: Hi.
How's about having a ports section in the video gaming infobox? That way, you could change 'release date' to 'original release date' and that way it'd be less confusing. You would know which was the original machine the game was released on and when.Doom jester 22:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would only complicate things further. Third-party games are generally released (almost) simultaneously on several systems, meaning there isn't any "original" platform. I've been in the habit of ordering platforms= in a roughly chronological order, which means it's pretty obvious which platforms came first. Originating systems should be covered in the first paragraph, the infobox is only there to supply additional information the article does not cover--e.g. Golden Axe was released on a vast number of systems but the article largely focusses on the Sega Mega Drive version because it's the most well-known. GarrettTalk 23:26, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure it would complicate the Golden Axe article any more. As it is, the article's already got release dates for the arcade, and then another one for master system and megadrive. If there was just an original release date for arcade, and then there was another box for what ports were done, the infobox would be the same length. But to be honest, you're probably right when you say it would make things too complicated. I think it's already too complicated. If you've got big long infoboxes it just looks a mess. I think it could be improved, but I'm not sure how. By the way, in that Golden Axe article, it's kind of screwed up because there's a big long stretch of blank space. You could fix that by moving the first screenshot beneath the infobox to a point further down the article, in a different section, but well.. that kind of thing happens in so many articles, maybe that's something that wikipedia in general could address. I've seen the white space thing happen all over the place..Doom jester 13:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox ports section 

message: Hi! I've created a new template with help from code found in , to use with games that have been cancelled. Help is needed to improve. --MrStalker talk 08:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the purpose of this template? --Scottie_theNerd 10:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems obvious to me, though there's a very good reason never to use it -- such templates are supposed to be able to be eventually taken out. This one simply can't be, so it shouldn't be used. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I was getting at. I get the impression that this template is trying to do what a category is designed for. --Scottie_theNerd 11:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sharing the sentiments above, there is no need for this.  It isn't always clear if the game has been cancelled, and if that is the case, it should be made more clear in the opening sentence or infobox, this banner isn't needed. - hahnchen 12:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

text: The purpose of this template is obviously to inform readers from the start that this is a game no longer in development, and was never released. I've seen this type of template on several other wikis, most of which more game oriented, and I figured that it would be good to have one here as well. But if it common opinion that such notices are unnessesary, so'll be it. --MrStalker talk 17:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not even opinion, really. Templates of that sort are only to be used if they can be removed at a later date. It's not so much that we don't want to inform, but rather than it's not the way articles are made on WP. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Gaming wikis work differently to Wikipedia. What may be convention on one wiki may not necessarily be consistent with Wikipedia policies and procedures. --Scottie_theNerd 17:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|Cancelled game}} 

message: Hello. I've recently nominated this article as a Featured Article. Here is a quick link to the FAC. Your inputs will help WP:VG obtain another Featured Article. Thanks in advance. — Bluerで す。 16:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Vagrant Story]]

message: Some video game pages have galleries, some don't.  What are the rules and recommendations concerning whether a game should have a gallery, and how many pictures should be in said gallery?  If this information is already established, sorry and please link to the relevant Wiki info page.  -- Solberg 04:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I haven't seen any documentation on this.  But I would think that it shouldn't have a gallery, except in extraordinary circumstances (eg. very highly notable graphics).  But don't quote me on this since I may be wrong. G1ggy! Review me! 04:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything on that link...the gallery has no images (does it?) G1ggy! Review me! 07:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dumb question regarding galleries 

message: Man in Black and I seem to have reached an impasse regarding whether the PlayStation Portable article benefits from a table showing the varying versions.  Only him and myself are participating in the debate, I think it should stay, he thinks it should go, and has removed it.   Anyone want to contribute, either for or against, just so we get a more reasoned debate? Discussion is Talk:PlayStation_Portable#System_Software_removal here --Oscarthecat 06:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PSP Firmware versions 

message: I've recently seen an edit war over what characters should or should't be redirected to List of Mario series enemies. Some include: Boo (Nintendo), Blooper (Mario) and Petey Piranha. From what I've seen: I believe the Petey article is the only one with an active merge discussion. There is a split tag on the list page as well (but I see very little discussion on the talk page about it). I decided to post it all together here to get more responses. My opinion on the matter is: if the character has done enough to warrant an article is should be an article (not just a section on an ever growing list page). A small section on the list page should be fine still: with a link to the character article. RobJ1981 06:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They need to be merged because they lack out of universe information and the possibility to ever gain more than a few sentences of it. Only one user actively opposes these anyways. TTN 10:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no need to merge, not all articles have it and it is cramming too much into one too big page. The list is big enough as it is. Henchman 2000 17:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suggest a split into two articles: List of Mario series enemies (generic) and List of Mario series enemies (villains).  That would cut it into two articles of a reasonable length. Gravee 17:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After the other articles are merged, I plan on transforming the character list into an actual functioning one(for the main recurring characters), so most of them will be able to be placed there after. TTN 17:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mario character merges

message: *Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games
Did anyone notice or discuss this? I think it would be better suited as a task force, but it just sorta appeared yesterday.--Clyde (talk) 16:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. It doesn't need it's own Wikiproject, would be better suited to a task force. - X201 17:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless they are thinking of taking on other forms of adventure games, like Fighting Fantasy books or something. Marasmusine 14:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  We have a neighbor (apparently). 

message: At the latest count (found here: Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Video game articles by quality statistics), there is 9519 video game stubs. Overall video game articles (of the ones with Video Game Project tag on the talk page) are at 16973, so stubs are over half. I'll start to expand some, but could use some help. RobJ1981 10:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Noted.  I'll look into it too. --Bishop2 13:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed with this.  Bumping them up to start requires either an outside assessment or the use of AutoWikiBrowser to autoasses, does it not? --Bishop2 13:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: One has to be careful about not inflaming or provoking editors when doing this, though.  Sometimes we do want to split sections out of larger articles to make them into their own separate articles.  However, I do agree that if someone creates a stub about, say, a minor character, and then never goes back and fills in the details, there's no reason to have the page at all; it should be merged with a "List of characters in X" page or with the main page.  See Jade (Beyond Good & Evil) as an example of the kind of page which needs to be merged... -- Slordak 16:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The efficient way is to start with the list article and only split it if and when a section becomes too long. Kariteh 17:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub class video game articles is very large

message: I am working right now on the 1080° Snowboarding FAC (could use a copyeditor if anyone is bored) and I am finding problems getting the manual for the game, barring actually buying it. I need to cite that when you lose, you restart. I already checked replacementdocs and didn't find it. Does anyone know if another website exists where they have copies of manuals? I'm stuck.--Clyde (talk) 18:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to clutter up the nomination with fairly trivial points, but consider firing up an emulator and replacing this grainy dull image - :Image:1080 multiplayer.PNG.  A screenshot of a 1080 being pulled off in multiplayer splitscreen (if possible) would be a welcome improvement. - hahnchen 23:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually haven't ever downloaded an emulator before, but are they legal (in the U.S.)?--Clyde (talk) 19:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a grey area, the emulator is technically legal, but downloading the game itself isn't.  --PresN 00:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think an FA is worth breaking the law, sorry. It's kind of like NOS where I live. Legal to buy and own, but not to use. I'll keep looking for a better picture though. Can anyone help me with the manual problem?--Clyde (talk) 00:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manual 

message: I came across this today. Is this really needed? It's just a list of NES game serial numbers. While it appears to be sourced fine, it doesn't seem that notable for an article in my opinion. RobJ1981 05:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can place it under Articles for Deletion, citing the reason that Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information. ColourBurst 05:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now listed, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_NES_Game_Inserts. --Oscarthecat 06:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of NES Game Inserts]]

message: I brought this up before, and only got a couple small confusing responses. Rather than put it on AFD, I figured I'd bring it up here. List of video games by genre seems extranious and PoV. Is it really needed? Especially since there's no annotations one could make on most of it, etc. Thoughts? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 20:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably better to have a list of video game genres, or list of categories whose members represent those genres.  I agree that this article seems to be "all video games ever made, broken down by genre", which seems... futile.  -- Slordak 20:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Seems that in some respects it's duplicating (badly) what the categories do for us, e.g. Category:First-person shooters. --Oscarthecat 20:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of video games by genre 

message: Is List of MUDs supposed to have content? The talk page seems to imply this. Also, it is linked from MUD. Axl 20:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you'd cared to read the page, it says the reason why it was deleted under "Deletion log". --Mika1h 20:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There's no need to be rude. Axl 20:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Specifically, it's redundant with :Category:MU* games. Nifboy 22:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MUDs 

message: See thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#mobygames.com, and recently added notability tag at MobyGames. Thanks. --Quiddity 03:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do Mobygames entries have an edit history like Wikipedia? - X201 08:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. --Quiddity 18:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mobygames, again 

message: In my opinion, this is overcategorization. Many game names differ by country, I don't think categorizing it is very useful. What does everyone else think? RobJ1981 18:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kill it. No need to ask in future, just send things straight for deletion. - hahnchen 19:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: lol, there's a category we can put into :Category:Categories with eleven words in their name. But seriously, I agree, it's a bit overdone in terms of being a useful category. Not to mention it almost begs for sibling categories comparing US to Asia, Europe to Asia, and whatever else. I don't think it's necessary. --Temporarily Insane (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Leaves me thinking "what's the point?".  Can't see any point in having such a category myself. --Oscarthecat 19:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Discussion on whether to keep this category can be found at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_8#Category:Nintendo_DS_games_with_different_names_in_Europe_and_the_U.S.. --Oscarthecat 19:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: "every article" is the very problem. An innumerable number of Japan-developed games have names that differ slightly or completely from the rest of the world, so this category would encompass virtually all NES/SNES/Genesis/MSX/FM-Towns/etc. games. GarrettTalk 21:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My comment was fully tongue-in-cheek, but I forgot that writing it out doesn't have the same punch as it does when I speak it out loud. hbdragon88 22:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's worth anything, I knew what you were intending with that comment. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Alas, I didn't spot your subtlety, just read it and thought "OMG, we're dealing with some sort of category-creatin' zealot here, off we go for a long and drawn out discussion..."  Phew. --Oscarthecat 22:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I suspected as much, but some users have said things very much like that and meant every word of it. :P GarrettTalk 04:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Nintendo DS games with different names in Europe and the U.S.]]

message: Various systems have a "system-only games" sub category, for example :Category:PlayStation 2-only games. None of the games in these categories are listed in the parent category too. Doesn't that strike anyone as a bit odd? Is a Playstation 2-exclusive game no longer a Playstation 2 game? Anyway, this was brought to my attention today on my talk page: user_talk:Miremare#Categorisation (scroll to the bottom) where I have outlined my reasons for believing this to be a bit weird. So what do people think? Miremare 01:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This was brought up before, and I seem to remember consensus leaning toward getting rid of the -only catagories - which makes sense to me, as such catagories could easily be done with lists and be much more effective, IMO. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 02:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If someone would be WP:BOLD and start the CFD, I'll vote add my comment that would lean towards not keeping to delete them. hbdragon88 04:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I guess I'll do it. Presumably the "x-only" cats need merging into their parents rather than deleting. I may need some help here though -- so far I've got "x-only"'s for ZX Spectrum, DS, Gamecube, PS2, PS3, Xbox 360 and Wii. Are there any more?! Miremare 20:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok, these subcats have been nominated. WP:CFD, June 9 Miremare 20:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub-categories 

message: Wondering why the project needs List of Western computer and video games (Western as old wild west, not as in USA etc) when there's a matching category :Category:Western video games.  While the list is just a list and adds no extra information, it seems rather redundant to me. --Oscarthecat 15:57, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also misnamed- Computer and Video Games?  Must have fallen through the cracks when everything got renamed to V games only.  --PresN 00:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More category/list fun - Western video games 

message: Why does this article pass WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE? Taemyr 21:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Same could be asked of List of Xbox 360 games. --Oscarthecat 21:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Look again at WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE. Does it fit any of those 10 numbers? No. But a better question would be: Is this article redundant with :Category:Nintendo Entertainment System games? --Temporarily Insane (talk) 22:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No it does not, one could perhaps argue about it being a statistic list thats low on content.  But unless I am mistaken the list is examples of the policy, and not necessarily exhaustive. Taemyr 22:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I guess because not every NES game has its own article.  GamerWiki, which aims to have an article for every released game since it is a catalogue of games, can use the category in this way, but Wikipedia can't. Tim (Xevious) 09:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Nintendo Entertainment System games]] 

message: Hello everyone. Persuaded by Kariteh, I decided to indulge in a bit of quasi-self-promotion and announce the creation of Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games, which came into existence a few days ago, with Klytos making the first move. Understandably, it's a relatively small-scale project for now, but we already have a couple of things planned. If you're interested in helping to improve Wikipedia's coverage of this partially forgotten genre, you're welcome to help out; our first task is to start the article on Sierra On-line (a page that should be useful not only to adventure game enthusiasts, but isn't) from scratch, as it's possibly one of the most unencyclopedic, long-winded and shabbily-written articles on Wikipedia. And that's going to be a colossal task, so the project will need all the help it can get. In any case, I hope this is just the starting phase and that the initiative will grow into something much bigger soon. I apologize for the tone of this message (which is suspiciously reminiscent of bad advertisements); in a nutshell, though, if you're willing to help, welcome aboard. Cromag talk to me 23:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We found you four days ago; see We have a neighbor (apparently).. hbdragon88 23:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for clearing that up. I'm not sure if turning the project into a task force would be sufficient, as four of the five task forces already in existence are for specific game franchises and the genre encompasses much more than that. The Video Game Images force, however, is broader in scope and its existence is an argument in favor of the merge. Also, I didn't look around just yet, but I don't believe there are many active WikiProjects devoted to specific game genres. If enough members of WP:CVG and the handful of WP:ADVENTURE contributors agree, though, I'd have no problem with the project becoming a task force. Cromag talk to me 23:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not so much about scope as it is about activity; a Project isn't necessary to coordinate one or three editors. Nifboy 22:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that it's been active for less than a week; we can't expect hordes of Wikipedians to join after a few days, especially if the project's not being promoted at all, save here. But again, if after a longer time three or four editors will remain and no new Wikipedians will be joining up, I'm all for the merge. Cromag talk to me 06:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Adventure games 

message: Hello again. Regarding the proposed merger of the "system-only games" subcategories mentioned somewhere above, there's only been two opinions registered so far, and one of those was by the creator of one of the said categories. Come on, whether you're for or against, let's get some consensus! It's at WP:CFD for June 9. Cheers. Miremare 02:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub categories again 

message: Hi guys,
You've probably seen the Schools selection of CVG articles here: http://schools-wikipedia.org/wp/index/subject.Everyday_life.Computer_and_Video_games.htm
There is an update of content every few weeks. If you think there are any important topics with good articles missing you are welcome to propose them here: Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_CD_Selection, ideally by giving the URL of a good version of the article. Please don't submit games with an adult only rating. Thanks --BozMo talk 13:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia for Schools 

message: Can a few members of the games project take a look at the Frag-Ops page, and at this deletion nomination Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frag-Ops (2nd nomination). I will abide by any ruling made by the project. --Basique 19:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of quality, the article is probably better than a lot of stuff around.  But you need sources, 3rd party sources.  If this game garnered any popularity whatsoever, then it will have been reviewed in magazines like PC Gamer.  If you get multiple magazine references in such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science and Industry, it'll be kept.  It's probably a bit too late to save the current article, (I can't be bothered to research into it), but if you save a copy and recreate with reliable sources, it should be OK.  Forget DRV, it's for muppets. - hahnchen 21:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks man, already have a copy saved so I'll keep it archived. --Basique 00:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frag Ops 

message: I've recommended the above article for Wikipedia for Schools. I'm trying to tidy it up to a standard acceptable for that but it has a NPOV tag on it, the problem is I can't really see a NPOV problem in that section, could someone have a quick read of the Seventh Generation section and tell me if they can see a problem? Thanks. - X201 08:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs a few references for the bits regarding reception--"Although widely regarded as a superb console..." and "Spore ... is received well", for instance. Some may need more than one reference, as the opinion of just one website's staff isn't automatically the same thing as the opinion of the press as a whole. That's probably why the neutrality template was added in the first place. GarrettTalk 11:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[History of video games]]