Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 11

message: now allows users to enter a category to put the cover in. While this is a good thing it is implemented in the worst possible way. Currently it is in the form of :Category: that forces the user to enter the entire category, allowing it to be put anywhere, such as :Category:Furniture. I would like to propose that the category mechanism be changed to :Category: game covers to force the use of "game covers" into the category to help maintain organization. The reason I don't do this myself is that they must be converted first before the template is changed, so we do not misplace them. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 03:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've processed the gamecube and xbox categories. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 04:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Whoops, I should have realized that before. I had followed  too closely. I'll change them promptly. Robert 04:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I've made the same proposal on the  talk page as well. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 04:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That'll certainly teach me to read more carefully next time... Robert 04:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I've emptied it. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible to get a bot to do it? Thunderbrand 20:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is no, since I don't think bots have the ability to "look" at an image and determine what system is on the cover. Correct me if I'm wrong though. Robert 23:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possible but far too much work for so little result. Unless of course someone has an advance OCR engine they've been working on. All the work that a bot could do at this point has been done. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 01:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revamp {{tl|gamecover}} 

message: they are up for deletion....--Dangerous-Boy 04:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Eiji Shinjo]] and [[Chaos (Toshinden Character)]] have been AFD 

message: I have sporadically uploaded packaging art for a number of articles over the past six months and put them in separate sections if the amount exceeds more than one (otherwise the sole cover would be placed in the infobox). But in light of the recent screenshot gallery discussion, I was wondering what the legality of these sections are? ~ Vic Vipr 12:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they are ok. I have seen a lot of articles with sections devoted to different kinds of packaging art (such as all the Resident Evil games). Thunderbrand 13:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're okay as in theres no one going through every article and removing the galleries.....yet. --larsinio (poke)(prod) 14:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Packaging artwork sections 

message: How should I convey this in an article? Is there a wikilink to something? I am writing an article for The Adventures of Pinocchio (Game Boy) and am trying to figure out how to convey this view. For an example, here is one the screenshots I am using to show the perspective :Image:PinocCastleLevel.JPG --MOE.RON talk | done | doing 17:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Isometric projection would be the correct term. Thunderbrand 17:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, yes, that should do just fine. Thanks and cheers mate! --MOE.RON talk | done | doing 17:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  3/4 top down view 

message: Nintendude has brough this GCOTW up for deletion. Please vote. --larsinio (poke)(prod) 18:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of songs involving computer and video games]] up for deletion

message: I recently found some articles linked to various other articles related to characters and concepts in computer and video games. They consist of non-notable fanfiction and it seems the author of all the articles is the creator of the series (User:Peachspirit). Should these be speedy deleted for vanity or what?
:Mario Fantasy 7
:Satna Palm Beach
:Materia Hut
:Melody Shroom
:Supernova Limit Break
:Melissa the Fox
:Mario Fantasy
:Maple Prower
:Marina Prower
::~ Hibana 23:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've proposed them for deletion as non-notable fan fiction. --Muchness 00:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fanfiction find

message: Several CS maps have been nominated for deletion, namely de_dust, cs_siege, cs_assault, cs_italy, cs_militia, cs_office, cs_estate, de_aztec, de_inferno, de_nuke, de_cbble, as_oilrig, fy_iceworld, de_survivor, de_train, de_vertigo, cs_747, and cs_backalley.  While I personally think they belong, I think this represents a chance to evaluate whether maps need their own articles. Aguerriero (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All that effort to nominate all those articles and the Nom puts in a weak "I don't want them here" argument. *sigh*. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CS maps at AfD 

message: FYI, it's on Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Goomba.  Issues about the article have been raised.  Would some people from this WikiProject be interested in addressing these issues? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.190.53.168 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 20 May 2006 .
*Update. It's now been defeatured. 172.190.156.78 20:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Goomba]] on [[Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Goomba]] 

message: Hadouken's up at AFD.  I voted for keep because I think the Hadouken has entered a wider gaming consiousness than just a street fighter move.  But I'm not too sure about dragon punch or hurricane kick which are also up.  I personally don't think any of the articles are that great, very crufty and possibly OR, but I think as a subject matter, Hadouken is probably notable enough. - Hahnchen 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hadouken]] at AFD 

message: List of piracy computer and video games has been nominated for deletion. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:47, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piracy games list on AfD 

message: I've added a deletion watch section similar to the one we have at the Webcomics project. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 01:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. I noticed we've been getting a lot of "Random article" on AfD posts here: tracking it somewhere is a better solution. jaco♫plane 01:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now if I can only remember where the deletion archive project is… Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 01:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion watch section 

message: I played around with the colors of the portal. If anyone kan come up with a better color scheme please do so. (Colors are set on Portal:Computer and video games/box-header). jaco♫plane 20:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Umm, larsinio... that looks horrible IMO. jaco♫plane 21:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like Jacoplane's better myself. Far less garish. --InShaneee 21:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. By the way, what was wrong with the old colors? Thunderbrand 00:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing particularly wrong with them, personally I just didn't like the green very much, and I thought the page was a bit boring. jaco♫plane 00:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but to thell you the truth I don't really go to the page much since you can't put fair use screenshots there. Thunderbrand 00:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't expect you to, but I presume it gets quite a lot of hits from casual users since it's featured so prominently on the Computer and video games article. jaco♫plane 00:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, true also! Although I do like the colors as is right now. Thunderbrand 00:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal 

message: No one answered this before it was archived, so, again: Why does this project no longer have its own cleanup tag? It’s an extremely specialized area of knowledge, and non-gamers are liable to delete info or AfD articles they don’t consider relevant or notable if the regular  tag is used. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 19:02, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. I don't even remember a cvg-cleanup tag. Thunderbrand 19:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  We could incorporate an article-rating field into the  tag, as the  or 1.0 project does, using their assessment scheme, with an additional "cleanup" tag. Nifboy 23:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea to me. --elias.hc 07:59, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a good idea.  This is going to create an awful lot of new work in rating the articles, many of which would never make it into a Wikireader anyway.  For rating articles, I would stick to Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Essential articles.  Do any other projects have their own specialised cleanups?  Because I think one of the main advantages of Wikipedia Cleanup is that it gives the article a wider reach.  I wouldn't be against a cvg-cleanup tag though, but I'm not sure if I'd use it that much. - Hahnchen 16:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: cvg-cleanup?

message: These sockpuppets are beginning to bother me. Is there anything we can do about them? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I'm not sure which sockpuppets you're referring to, but if you have a suspicion who they belong to you can request a WP:RFCU. jaco♫plane 00:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See category :Category:Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets of Krabs502. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 10:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why isn't he banned? Or at least forced to use one account.  In between some decent edits, he inserts reams and reams of shit vandalistic edits regarding WWE films, and ridiculous games based on medical documentaries. - Hahnchen 15:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krabs\d+ 

message: I'm working on a template to cite video games. I've copied it from , but it still needs a lot of work at this point.
"Sorry, but the princess is in another castle!" 
Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 02:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|cite video game}} 

message: 
So, how is this for a unified userbox for every single videogame character ever? Except for the Pokémon userboxes above (which I've similarly trimmed down, but I need to include concessions to their major anime/manga roles or else WP:PCP will lynch me), I don't see why this couldn't replace pretty much all of the game character infoboxes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, while I'm thinking of it, are there any generically useful fields that could be added? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, very neat ;) jaco♫plane 07:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As cool as the unified template looks, just flicking through the previous templates makes me think it wouldn't work.  Different game series care about different things, some fighting games care about style and their physical dimensions, whereas RPGs care about skills and classes.  The only way a unified template would work is if it included almost every possible field, and I think it would be confusing to use. - Hahnchen 16:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anything that is in the infobox that isn't referred to in the body probably shouldn't be in the infobox, and most of these RPG trivial stats and all of the fighting game trivia is never again mentioned in the body of the articles. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with that, I think the infobox can be used to mention quick short facts which do not have to be covered in the main body.  I don't care for the game trivia in some of the infoboxes, no, but it's going to be nigh on impossible to convince some editors that a street fighter's height isn't important.  And that's why I do not think a short universal infobox would ever fly. - Hahnchen 01:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you're right in the case of the ESRB ratings and DOB/death for real people. *sigh* I just hate seeing all these ugly templates, laden with trivia. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Test of a unified template

message: So, uh, how about some uniform styling or uniform names for all these templates? Right now, the names are unpredictable and the appearance varies from template to template. Any ideas? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Enough, what with the unified template

message: Please argue about the CVG infobox styling (e.g.  vs. variable color / borderless (e.g. ) here.
Obviously, I prefer the former, since it allows for a unified appearance which can be customized by each user in that user's personal stylesheet. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Style argument

message: What I was trying to do with  is make a template that always includes the basic real-world information about the character (image, name, creator, etc.) but also allows for a section for in-universe information. The way it includes the in-universe information is by using a series-specific sub-template, which meshes into the box.
Here's how it works:
{General CVG character
|name=Solid Snake
|image=:Image:IIH.png|250px
|caption=This isn't a picture of Snake, but I wanted an actual test image.
|firstgame=Metal Gear
|series=Metal Gear series
|creator=Hideo Kojima
|artist=Some guy
|voiceactor=David Hayter
|japanactor=Akio Otsuka
|motionactor=Mizuho Yoshida
|inuniverse={Metal Gear character
|realname=David
|aliases=Iroquois Pliskin, Old Snake
|nationality=U.S.A.
|affiliations=Green Berets (during Gulf War), FOXHOUND (1995, 1999), CIA (exact time unknown), Philanthropy (2005-current)
}
}
The blue text is the supertemplate, which covers the real-world info. The rest text is a sub-template that fits into the box created by the supertemplate, filling in any in-universe info. If necessary, multiple sub-templates could be used (say, a Earthbound series box and a SSB series box for Ness).
Does this make sense? Does anyone have any objections to me implementing this once we settle on a unified style? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone would like, I'm prepared to go ahead and implement this in an article or two, for demonstration's sake. I've already got a page ready to convert all of the Metal Gear articles just by adding "subst:" to the beginning of the template. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neat. I approve. Nifboy 04:45, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't you make easier on the eyes.  the appearance is just plain ugly.--Dangerous-Boy 19:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Argue about appearance above. Right now, I'm working on technical wizardry to get it out of the way. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why don't you create a subpage and copy the article there instead?--elias.hc 21:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because I already did that up this page. I wanted to try the template out in article space...best case, there's more useful input from people who watch articles instead of project pages, worst case, it's reverted or disliked and no info is lost anyway. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. At least I will not revert your edit(s). Go ahead. --elias.hc 21:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll give it a day or so, then I'll go ahead. (I've already got a template made to make the conversion easy.) - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Looks great. --elias.hc 18:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unified vs. standalone vs. hybrid templates

message: I'd like some input as to how to deal with the bajillions of characters linked to off of 108 Stars of Destiny. I've been redirecting some of the more minor dead-end articles back there (from Rina (Suikoden): Suikoden II: Rina is the sister of Eilie and Bolgan. The Trio are a travelling circus, and Rina is seen as the "seductive" sister). However, I was reverted with the mysterious comments "Don't mislead people into thinking it's done" and "Counter-productive". Quite frankly, I'd be fine if we didn't have any info at all on these exceedingly minor characters, and we certainly don't need articles on every last one of them. Nifboy 20:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno. Rework 108 Stars of Destiny into a List of Pokémon characters-esque list of minor characters, and redirect all of these there? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At least most of them are redlinks, but it gets complicated as some characters appear in multiple games (and thus might have a backstory?) whereas others don't.  I have never played any of the Suikoden games, I didn't even know it was based on the Chinese classic Water Margin until I read that.  But I think they'd be better off merged by game, with maybe recurring characters or main characters having their own article.  They can't seriously have strong detailed backstories for 108 protaganists per game can they? - Hahnchen 01:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Most Suikoden characters don't have enough character development to deserve their own article. I think they belong on a "normal list" (such as List of Mavericks). Kil (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suikoden Characters (all 200+ of them)

message: I was wondering if this category and article is sanctioned by WP:CVG? It seems a bit vague and open for POV. Comments? ~ Vic Vipr 14:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how there's any relation between poor sales and potential for cult, as the article claims. Both the article and the category lack a basis the way I see it. --elias.hc 14:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a pretty poor POV article.  But looking at the "cult xxx" articles, they all seem kind of similar (although slightly better).  You can describe anything as a cult can't you?  Look at the list of cult television, so I'm not sure how we're meant to classify things.  Are cult games just games that didn't sell all that well but were critically acclaimed?  If so, then Killer7 shouldn't be there, because no one liked it.  I'm not sure how Hitman: Codename 47 is cult at all.  Surely, the entire emulation scene and thus all arcade games could be identified as cult games.  So in conclusion, I'm not a fan of the category but I don't think there's anything you can really do about it.  You'll probably end up in edit wars over what's cult and what's not. - Hahnchen 15:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cult computer and video games

message: First of all, I've just signed up for this project, so hi.
Secondly, a question: Is there considered to be "standard" format for an article on a video game character, at present? The articles I've seen so far are fairly diverse -- Mega Man for example, lists the character's history first, whereas Proto Man lists a chronology of appearances before even touching on the character within his fictional universe (except in the introduction). Mario has development-related info spread out thoughtout various sections relating to appearance, personaility, etc; Link is featured, but doesn't have much on his real-world history, apart from documenting the differences between his various incarnations. Is there any recommended template on this stuff, or for that matter, should there be? I might be wrong, but it seems like if this project discussed, voted on, and came up with a sort of suggested template, it would be a godsend. -- Lee Bailey(talk) 18:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a lot of the character articles do not follow a specific order of info. I think that is one of the things we need to work on. Articles on games have a specific order, but not every game uses this. I think that is more of a guideline than official policy. Thunderbrand 18:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The information that exists in the article determines its organization. I think that's the mose common-sense answer I can give you. If Protoman doesn't have much of a history section it's because he doesn't have much of a history (or nobody has written about it in a way that matches up with the games). Nifboy 18:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I assume this would have to be a guideline rather than a policy, as not every character would have all information available. But I think it would be worth working on for the articles that could use it. This project seems like the right place to discuss it. -- Lee Bailey(talk) 19:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would rather have a diverse range of article formats, if they all work. Me, I would rather make sure I have all the information I want, and then organize it into a cohesive structure. And that's going to be different for every article. You can't write the Protoman article like the Mega Man article, because Protoman and Megaman are two different things with vastly different sets of available information. Nifboy 01:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that if a diverse range of formats all work, that's a good thing. Unfortuately, a ton of articles on game characters that don't seem to have structures that work at all. I can't see the harm in suggesting a format for anyone who wants to use it, based on the types of information that are generally, if not always, available for a game character. Wikiproject:Film, Wikiproject:Television, and many others have something similar. -- Lee Bailey(talk) 03:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General Structure of articles on game characters

message: There's a discussion on Talk:Cooperative gameplay that could probably use more input from the Wikiproject. The cooperative gameplay article currently contains a list of games that support this kind of gameplay. There is a suggestion to remove the list and creating a category for all games that have a co-op mode (Something like "Category:Computer and video games supporting cooperative gameplay"). I don't think that we have any categories like this yet, at least browsing through :Category:Computer and video games I couldn't find any. If we do this then presumably we would want to create other similar categories too. Is this a good idea, or are we pushing the categorization scheme too far here? Input most appreciated. jaco♫plane 07:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So long as we don't make "Category:Single-player computer and video games". Nifboy 07:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: For this one instance, I don't think it's so bad. I don't really want to see frivolous categories based on gameplay though (e.g., Category:Computer and video games where the player cannot jump) :D, you know? Even ones like "single player only games" or "multiplayer only games" etc seem rather frivolous. I must say that the category title is quite long though - but that's a different subject altogether. K1Bond007 07:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Metal Slug arcade games were all moved to :Category:Metal Slug arcade series, which is a subcategory of :Category:Computer and video games featuring cooperative gameplay.  It is also a subcategory of :Category:Run and gun computer and video games.  I oppose this move because it seems to go against the guidelines for categories.  See the example about French revolutionaries.  Also, this isn't an obvious subcategory.  If you see Metal Slug arcade games, it won't be clear that you shouldn't add run and gun and co-op unless you actually go into the categories and see how they're organized.  Besides, while all Metal Slug arcade games thus far have been run and gun coop affairs, there's no guarantee this will always be the case.  I think we remove the Metal Slug category from being a subcategory of both and move the games directly into the categories.  TO prevent an edit war, I'm running it by the project first. Ace of Sevens 06:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I modified the articles in question, and I hold that this was proper behavior both in this case and in general.  When a series of games holds so consistently to a style or genre over so many games, applying categorization attributes to the series category makes the most sense, if only to consolidate listings in heavily-populated parent categories.  The French revolutionary example, given explicity as an exception to the general rule, does not apply well here, since using an explicit franchise subcategory in no way obscures the members' significance to the parent but in fact elevates them by name.  I give :Category:Platform games as an example of what I think we should try to achieve with other prominent categories.  I'll refrain from futher category changes until some consensus is reached. --Heywood 17:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization of games per gameplay elements 

message: I added Europa (warcraft) to the list of CVG games up for deletion, but I also wanted to add a note here that it is unfortunate that the treatment of this editor in AfD will probably cause him to leave Wikipedia.  While I think the article should stay, it almost certainly will be deleted; that is not really the point though.  User:ShadowZach is a new user, and unfortunately his first encounter with the Wikipedia community was people using AfD jargon and generally biting him.  Granted, he didn't seem to thoroughly read the guidelines for new articles, but I feel that these people should be invited in for a hot cup of coffee, not have the door slammed on their knuckles.  I hope he decides to stick with it and check out our project, because I think he could become a good editor of CVG articles. Aguerriero (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - Kittybrewster 18:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately, AFD is probably the worst place to get be introduced with as a beginner.  AFD people tend not to be very nice due to the sheer number of articles that are nominated and the number of fancruft and nonnotable artilces they get. Hbdragon88 00:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warcraft map for deletion 

message: I've removed the word "The" from all the console/handheld articles that start with it. It just sounds wrong, and having it's say "PlayStation 3 is blablabla..." looks better if you ask me. Place either With "the" ~~~~ or Without "the" ~~~~ in the vote field below, thank you. Havok (T/C/c) 14:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the layout of the voting area so it's a bit more readable. Just put your signature under the appropriate section. --Poiuyt Man talk 22:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, actually, it is grammatically incorrect, but it's common speech, so it sounds correct. Technically, if you said, "hand me the PlayStation3", the other person would be correct to ask, "the PlayStation3 what?" ;)   23:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm confused; are you saying it's correct to include the article or exclude it?  At any rate, you are wrong.  Read any book on grammar.  In fact, read article (grammar). Words like "the" are used to modify nouns, as in "the PlayStation".  In your example, you are suggesting that placing "the" in the sentence "hand me the PlayStation3" is effectively turning the word "PlayStation3" into an adjective, which is absurd.  If someone said to you, "I'm going to wash the car." would you be inclined to say "You're going to wash the car what?"  No.  Well, not if you understand English grammar. Aguerriero (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read many books on grammar over my 40-plus years on this rock; what you seem to be doing is transposing a noun onto a title. "PlayStation3" is a title; "the PlayStation3 console" is a noun phrase. For instance, "the Captain Jack Sparrow" would be incorrect, while "the captain" is proper because it references the person (implying, in full, "the captain of the ship") rather than his title.   00:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That might be so, but in the context we are discussing here it isn't incorrect grammer. You can use the "The" or not. And you are basically saying that Nintendo are ignoring grammer when they speak of Wii? Check their website, they never use "The Wii" except when refeering to "The Wii remote" or "The Wii controller". I never stated this was about propper grammer, that has been brought up by everyone else. This is about the fact that not putting in "The" - in my opinion - looks better. That is the only reason for this vote, nothing more. Havok (T/C/c) 00:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The argument is more correctly titular than grammatical. Again, if the title does not include "the", then we don't include "the"—simple as that. Only when you venture out of the titular and into noun phrases, as within your examples from Nintendo's website ("the Wii controller") is "the" proper.   00:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I agree that there should have been discussion first. Thunderbrand 19:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering the last consensus was apparently reached on the Wii article(?), I thought it would be ok to add a poll here where we can all discuss it. Havok (T/C/c) 23:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Read my reply two up. Havok (T/C/c) 19:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: This all really just applies to the given situation. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 07:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And last I checked it was this situation we where discussing. Not if it was grammatically correct or not in any regard. As ridiculous and trivial as it might be, it is still a decision which must be taken. Havok (T/C/c) 08:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The ... vote 

message: *This is ridiculous. -ZeroTalk 17:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, actually, it is grammatically incorrect, but it's common speech, so it sounds correct. Technically, if you said, "hand me the PlayStation3", the other person would be correct to ask, "the PlayStation3 what?" ;)   23:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm confused; are you saying it's correct to include the article or exclude it?  At any rate, you are wrong.  Read any book on grammar.  In fact, read article (grammar). Words like "the" are used to modify nouns, as in "the PlayStation".  In your example, you are suggesting that placing "the" in the sentence "hand me the PlayStation3" is effectively turning the word "PlayStation3" into an adjective, which is absurd.  If someone said to you, "I'm going to wash the car." would you be inclined to say "You're going to wash the car what?"  No.  Well, not if you understand English grammar. Aguerriero (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read many books on grammar over my 40-plus years on this rock; what you seem to be doing is transposing a noun onto a title. "PlayStation3" is a title; "the PlayStation3 console" is a noun phrase. For instance, "the Captain Jack Sparrow" would be incorrect, while "the captain" is proper because it references the person (implying, in full, "the captain of the ship") rather than his title.   00:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That might be so, but in the context we are discussing here it isn't incorrect grammer. You can use the "The" or not. And you are basically saying that Nintendo are ignoring grammer when they speak of Wii? Check their website, they never use "The Wii" except when refeering to "The Wii remote" or "The Wii controller". I never stated this was about propper grammer, that has been brought up by everyone else. This is about the fact that not putting in "The" - in my opinion - looks better. That is the only reason for this vote, nothing more. Havok (T/C/c) 00:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The argument is more correctly titular than grammatical. Again, if the title does not include "the", then we don't include "the"—simple as that. Only when you venture out of the titular and into noun phrases, as within your examples from Nintendo's website ("the Wii controller") is "the" proper.   00:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I agree that there should have been discussion first. Thunderbrand 19:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering the last consensus was apparently reached on the Wii article(?), I thought it would be ok to add a poll here where we can all discuss it. Havok (T/C/c) 23:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Read my reply two up. Havok (T/C/c) 19:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: This all really just applies to the given situation. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 07:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And last I checked it was this situation we where discussing. Not if it was grammatically correct or not in any regard. As ridiculous and trivial as it might be, it is still a decision which must be taken. Havok (T/C/c) 08:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: We need to develop standards for video game console pages. looking at Xbox 360 to Playstation 3 to Nintendo Gamecube to TurboGrafx 16/PC Engine, there are no real set standards of sections. Much of the content is in parallel, but much of it is not. Things i think shoudl be included:
*Infobox
*Key games, first party/2nd/third party developers
*Sales/marketing sucess/failure information
**IN terms of competitors for contextual video game system generation
*Accessory information
*Hardware information
**Capabilities with game examples like Nintendo 64
*Developmental history
*Key people involved
*Online service (if any)
--larsinio (poke)(prod) 18:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Standards for [[Video game console]] pages

message: It would be good te get some feeback from more people on this article. I had protected it since there was a revert war going on, but I think some more opinions are needed on the subject. jaco♫plane 21:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Left Behind: Eternal Forces]] flamewar 

message: There is a huge debate on whether a free image of the PS3 should be used, or a promo one. The problem with the free one is that it's void, it's the old mockup of the system shown at E3 2005. Now that a new version of the system has been released it would be missleading to use the old one. Go to the PS3 talk page and give your opinion on this. Havok (T/C/c) 11:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[PlayStation 3]] image 

message: Can their be a  Sonic the Hedgehog wiki.
From A person J
Jun 8 2006 5:45
:You can create your own using the Wiki software. However, it will be independent from Wikipedia.--Zxcvbnm 22:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sonic ? 

message: I think it would be very helpful if we included the rating descriptors in every article, along with what the editors find the best example of the inappropriate(sp) parts of the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz (talk • contribs) 
:I only think just the rating in the infobox is sufficent. What the editors find innapropriate would generally be someone's POV, and the game would have to have a lot of publicity from many sources or controversy to mention that a part of it is innapropriate, not just us Wikipedians. Thunderbrand 14:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate how I get automatically loged off after a while of not doing anything. Back to the point, you have a point, but at least we could include the rating descriptors from the ESRB. But those are just the ESRB POV.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 13:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would go for ratings alone. Havok (T/C/c) 13:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ESRB Ratings 

message: I have placed  for peer review. I paticularly regard this article as important, as it the very first contribution I made to wikipedia. Any comments on its improvement would be appreciated. -ZeroTalk 14:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have submitted an article for peer review 

message: I've added the assessment system to  from the anime project banner. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 22:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also mind the new category: :Category:Computer and video game articles by quality. Also mind that the ratings you give articles are case-sensitive; If you set class=stub the template will show stub-class but won't add the category; you need to set class=Stub. Nifboy 03:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh.  Overnight, you've suddenly become Wikipedia's #2 worklist in terms of size ;-) Kirill Lokshin 12:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, is that good or bad? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 09:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's great, actually; more assessment is always better.  (It does provide a good example of some of our systemic bias issues, though; taken together, "Computer and video games" and "Anime and manga" have more articles than "Military history".) Kirill Lokshin 19:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm hoping I can take that to mean we haven't done that much fighting ;) Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've added the assesment to the {{tl|cvgproj}} 

message: I just noticed all the articles I started (i.e. video game publisher, video game developer, game tester, game programming, game programmer & game producer) were given a rating of B with the assesment template.  While I normally wouldn't mind this, it looks like the tag was added and the B rating given as a template grade.  That is, the template was added to all the articles at the same time, and they were all given a "B."  Who asseses the articles?  What's missing from the aforementioned articles that makes them B and not A?  Was B selected as a generic starting point? — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Four things. One, we have a list of essential articles that's already rated a couple hundred articles, of which all of the above have been given various shades of B. Two, the 1.0 assessment scale puts A-class above GA-class, and none of the above articles are even GA-class yet. Third, none of the above articles have references, a requirement for GA (and by extension A-class). Fourth, I'd like to do what the anime/manga project is doing with A-class: discussed and determined by the project's concensus as a whole. Therefore, B-class is the highest rating that a single editor can give to an article. Nifboy 23:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I've been using. I haven't assigned any A class since the essential articles page says it's not the same as the regular a class. I'll add some additional cases to the template for lowercase. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 09:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a good idea to swap the essential articles format over to the 1.0 ratings, now that there's a significant difference (A-class above GA). Nifboy 01:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who Asseses?

message: I've recently found out that screenshots of games owned by a Ubisoft are now under a free license, according to commons:User:Avatar/Ubisoft. Is this true?--☆TBC☆ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 09:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes (checked the german discussion). --elias.hc 11:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Second that. --elias.hc 08:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ubisoft Screenshots?

message: It's huge!--Dangerous-Boy 08:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just split it up into each game, like with the Resident Evil games. Havok (T/C/c) 09:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Onimusha]] needs to be split 

message: I've brought this up in the past but perhaps it is time to revisit this issue. I'm usually in Wikipedia IRC channels but I think we should have a channel dedicated to this wikiproject where we could bounce ideas off each other. If enough people are interested in joining I'll get round to setting it up  and featuring it prominently on the WikiProject page. jaco♫plane 00:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd go. Kil (talk) 00:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok I've registered #wikipedia-cvg with ChanServ. jaco♫plane 03:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IRC channel for WPCVG 

message: I am of the opinion that articles and media should not be directly sorted in to any PC category unless it has something to do specifically with the term/specification. Recently we cleared out most of :Category:PC games into more appropriate subcategories. I am in the process of doing the same for :Category:PC game covers. We need to setup a guideline, nothing major, to help advise people so we don't have to do this sort of cleanup. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 02:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: About 60 articles have been added to :Category:PC games. It needs to be trimmed again. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 02:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I didn't notice Windows and DOS categories at first... whoops. I'm going through my contributions and recategorizing the images I mistakenly added to PC game covers. Kil (talk) 02:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I created  to match , but you're right, subcategories would be better. The guideline sounds like a good idea too, so other editors (like myself :P) know which categories would be potentially useful and which wouldn't. I'll do what I can to help clear out . Robert 02:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: If a game is released for multiple operating systems, should it be placed in several categories, then? --Optichan 19:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Always. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PC categories 

message: I want to create a template that sits on top of the articles that deal with information about classes, like for World of Warcraft. Most of those articles are littered with cruft and reads more like a strategy guide. Good idea? Bad? Havok (T/C/c) 16:33, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support that if it was entirely commented out; otherwise it might make the page a bit messy. --InShaneee 19:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm afraid I don't follow. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he wants a standard "WP:NOT a strategy guide, so don't put it in there" type message at the top of these (and other) articles. However, such meta-instruction is generally reserved for talk pages. I'm actually tempted to suggest integrating it into the  template, given how common the problem is, but no, I don't think it'd be useful. Nifboy 00:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that if you do use it, it should be on the talk page. Or use the hide HTML code in the actual article. Thunderbrand 00:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No strategy info 

message: This article is still pretty much an attack page on the game.  Being that I really don't care much about it, I've barely done anything to right it.  But if someone can make an effort to sort it out, then it'd be nice.  Before, the article used to use sources like gamerankings and IGN, now it's mostly taken from partisan blogs.  I've removed the links to the blogs various times, which users revert every so often whilst denying that they're blogs (even though their front page declares this).  Right now, it's totally unbalanced, it's like an article on GTA written by Jack Thompson.  Quotes from reviews detailing the general game have been removed and replaced with passages about how you can kill nurses and how you're playing as terrorists.  But as I say, I really don't care for the Christian right anyway, but I also don't care for those who are pushing blogs onto the Wiki. - Hahnchen 08:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally wouldn't be editing the article if it wasn't for the vandalism and the shameless promotion as well. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles I can't be bothered to babysit - [[Left Behind: Eternal Forces]] 

message: Seeing as Resident Evil (series) is now listed as a 'Good Article', should I list it under the "Example articles" subheading? Morgan695 16:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno. I think that section is only for featured articles. The couple that aren't featued, such as Counter-Strike and LOOM, have been up there for a long time, so I haven't touched them. You can add RE to this page, though: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Featured articles. Thunderbrand 20:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Updating "Example articles"

message: Although not as bad as the not blocked Krabs vandal, this guy also inserts misinformation into random gaming articles.  His signal/vandalism ratio is slightly better than Krabs, but he can't resist inserting incorrect game characters into random game articles.  I got him blocked before for this, but this was like a piddly useless 24hr block.  So if some of the CVG admins can keep an eye on him and then fall on him like a ton of bricks when he inevitably inserts his vandalism, then that'd be nice. - Hahnchen 13:37, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A user for your watchlists - [[User:24.205.31.88]] 

message: Hey. Just got a question about something on the FIFA Series. An unidentified user removed the  parts of the sections on the FIFA Football 2005 and FIFA 06 parts of the article and made the heading a link. Who is right? Normy132 06:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the Manual of Style: "Avoid links within headings. Instead repeat the word or phrase in the first sentence and wikify there."  is also acceptable, given its prevalence. Nifboy 07:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. Normy132 08:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to other articles 

message: I'm not a member, but does anyone have a good suggestion for the length of a plot summary for some of the VG articles?
I can't see anything in the style guidelines (in fact, I notice that section is absent in your guide), but is there anything else that you could point me to?--Toffile 20:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Featured articles has a list of all the Good and Featured Articles. Those would be where to look first. Thunderbrand 22:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summaries 

message: I was thinking it would be nice to the Computer and video games themes category along the lines of "Prehistoric life computer and video games."  It would include all the games under the Dino Crisis, Turok, Jurassic Park and Primal Rage IPs, plus whatever else we can think of.  Is this a good idea and is that the best name to use? Ace of Sevens 01:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why not. The category name sounds OK, but it needs to be "Prehistoric life in computer and video games". Thunderbrand 02:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'd vote for "Prehistoric life video games."  But I'm one of the few that thinks the whole "Computer and video games" thing is unweildly (and should just be changed to video games with computer games and console games a subset of video game). — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with Frecklefoot on the title format. All the other subcategories in :Category:Computer and video game themes are titled that way. ~ Hibana 15:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about :Category:Feudal Japan computer and video games? Ace of Sevens 17:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It's apparent to me that Hibana doesn't understand what I'm refererring to.  I'm referring to a discussion we had quite some time back here about changing the name of "video games" to "console games" and making "computer games" and "console games" subsets of "video game."  It didn't fly (for various reasons, though I'm still in favor of doing it someday).  But this is OT for this section. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed category

message: If a game is later released as part of a collection, should that go in the infobox and if so, how should it be formatted?  Example: Sonic the Hedgehog has been repackaged in lots of collections. Should the platforms the collection appeared on be listed in the infobox for the main game article?  If so, should the name of the collection go there as well? Ace of Sevens 17:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the original box should go in the infobox of re-released games. From looking around, that seems to be the consensus. Also, if a game is included as an unlockable, it seems best to be mentioned in the article. Thunderbrand 00:14, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about the image.  I'm talking about the platform listing.  If Sonic the Hedgehog is in Sonic Mega Collection Plus for Xbox, do we list Xbox in the platforms section for Sonic the Hedgehog? What about Flicky, which is also in this collection, but is locked until you play Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine a bunch of times?  SHould Xbox be listed in its platform section?Ace of Sevens 02:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most articles I've seen list the re-releases in the infobox, such as Metroid and Sonic the Hedgehog. Thunderbrand 02:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps in retrospect, the field should probably be "Original platforms" or something to that effect because there are a number of issues that crop up like what you're talking about (I'm not advocating this change either - more of a 'rule of thumb' to its use). Emulation, collections, etc. It's bound to only get worse once Nintendo rolls out its VC, not to mention what is possible on Xbox Live, and whatever Sony is doing - then think of future generations because this is no doubt going to be successful. Here's an interesting question: technically speaking if Sonic the Hedgehog is a Wii game, which is how it's currently listed, then by that logic isn't Halo technically a Xbox 360 game? Afterall I can play it on Xbox 360 which is an intended use (i.e., not like I'm emulating Super Mario Bros. on Dreamcast, which is possible). You see what I'm saying here? I have no problem with stating it can be played on those systems or is included in certain collections in the article or maybe a category or something, but what we have currently going on at Sonic is rather misleading, however true. For whatever that was worth - regardless of what is decided upon it will never be consistent across all articles; with all the different ways to legally obtain and play games these days, anyway. K1Bond007 08:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I disagree.  Backward compatibility isn't the same as virtual console as virtual console requires a rerelease of the game.  The stard I've been using is that the platform for virtual console games is Virtual Console (Wii), not Wii.  E-Reader games are e-Reader, not Game Boy Advance and Xbox Live Aracde games are Xbox Live Arcade, not Xbox 360. Ace of Sevens 17:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not what is listed at Sonic the Hedgehog, though. The point is, what should be listed in that field. Where do you draw the line. I honestly don't know. I don't think listing the VC and whatever else in there is all that important and for games like Sonic, it's clutter. K1Bond007 18:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed that.  People make errors on everything.  The fact one was amde here is irrelevant to what the standards shoudl be.  I think this is very important.  What's the point of listing available platforms if you arbitraily decide some don't count?  The Virtual Console is a release of a game and should be listed. Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Mortal Kombat (arcade game) and other games with lots of releases for different platforms are going to have lots of entires under platforms.  That's just a consequence of there being a lot of data, not clutter. Ace of Sevens 19:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Compilations, etc in infoboxes

message: I just completed a gameplay section for Chrono Cross, as the previous incarnation of the article didn't cover it at all. However, in an attempt to explain it all for a non video-gamer (to satisfy Featured Article requirements), the section bloated up to four paragraphs. Is it too large? What can be done if it is to shorten it? Thanks.--Zeality 22:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Two things: One, there's an awful lot of "fluff" in there; "The main character, Serge, must explore the tropical archipelago of El Nido by foot and boat" is both non-descript and should be written in such a manner that connects "The player" and "Serge". Second, there's a couple references to "the X button". STAB THESE IN THE FACE. *cough*. Nifboy 00:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gameplay sections of articles

message: So is it perfectly alright to take a screenshot of a game and license it under the video game screenshot license and then put it in articles relating to the screenshot or is it more complicated than that? Jam01 00:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Using a screenshot to illustrate the article abotu the game seems like pretty straight-forward fair use to me. Ace of Sevens 00:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots 

message: Perhaps we should think of something for Template:Infobox_CVG regarding the fact that there are different types of Mac OS. For example, Sim City 2000 was released for the pre-X Mac OS systems, but can be run via Classic; it does not run on the new Intel iMacs. Yet, it's noted to run on "Mac OS". This is very unclear. This might need a recategorization of a whole lot of games, though... —Michiel Sikma (Kijken maar niet aanraken) 19:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Mac OS games should then be divided up into Mac OS Classic and Mac OS X, shouldn't they? --elias.hc 21:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox VG + Mac OS 

message: I would like to add the serial numbers to each of the ps1 and ps2 games released as their is no definitive index of them. Each region has their own serial number SLES and SCES for European releases, SLUS and SCUS for American, etc. Could this optional serial number feature please be added to Template:Infobox_CVG. It could also make use of the flags like the release dates and would make my job a whole lot easier. incog 18:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we need to have the serial numbers for each game. How is that encyclopedic? Thunderbrand 19:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It makes searching much easier as the wikipedia search alg sucks, it is simply additional information and would be completely optional. incog 21:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sony Serial numbers