Talk:Civilization (series)

message: Hi , 
I actually did provide a reason why I removed that list: it is considered WP:GAMETRIVIA. Wikipedia is written for the general reader, not for a gamer or a person interested in politics in pop culture. Articles on video games should describe the gameplay, a possible plot, development and release, followed by a reception section. A list of real world leaders appearing in a game series doesn't add any relevant information. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of work is not a reason to keep something on Wikipedia. Trivial information should be integrated, not have its own huge list. City-states too are not necessary to include. Since you're not a gamer, why do you think this is necessary to include it into the article? What are the benefits of including the list? What purpose does it serve? And to make a WP:OTHERSTUFF, why not include a list of levels, controls, weapons, vehicles, cheats? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  The civ series does not have a plot. The whole focus of the series is on having historical civilizations fight/out-develop one another, so it's no uncalled for to state which civilizations have been included in the series. It's no different than how several fighting game series articles include tables stating which playable characters have been in which entry (List of Street Fighter characters, List of Mortal Kombat characters).108.46.147.132 (talk) 03:06, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the table once more. It adds nothing of valuable information and says nothing about gameplay. It is trivial, and not suitable for a Wikipedia article.  soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:54, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh come on. You clearly didn't achieve consensus for that in July. Waiting six months and then repeating an earlier action is not a substitute for actually changing people's minds. To my mind, the analogy with the lists of characters is more persuasive than the analogy with the list of levels/controls/weapons/vehicles. Furius (talk) 14:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

text: I will add my voice that the civ table is unnecessary and gameguide material. I don't find the compared to a list of characters here compelling, as there's no narrative developed for any civ as you play the game. Further while they are based on historical figures, the devs have said repeatedly this is a loose interpretation of history and thus should not be considered accurate, so there's not significant historical content to keep. Its reasonable to note a few examples of how the game uses historical civs and figures in prose, but the table fails our content guidelines. --MASEM (t) 14:44, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

text: , I just happen to come across it again. I gave several valid reasons (WP:GAMEGUIDE, WP:VG/MOS) why inclusion is not appropriate, and nobody gave a good argument why it should stay. It's a gigantic table of real-world historic figures and cultures that make an appearance, without any substantial information about the gameplay or narrative. Wikipedia is written for a general audience, not for players who want to know what characters appear in a game.  agrees with me. Can you cite a guideline that would allow for such a list? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: , any thoughts? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been over two months at this point. I'm taking it out again. Feel free to go to WT:VG or WP:RFC. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:13, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

text: There are over 5 million articles on English Wikipedia. The article that "some other articles has it" isn't valid (See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). Those articles need to be cleaned up too, but there's only so many editors for so many articles. -- ferret (talk) 21:11, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Because a minority of editors do not like or care about this material is not a reason to remove it.  By contrast, myself and many others do indeed find this particular content helpful for understanding the series just as an article about battle casualties in a war containing a comparative chart would be relevant as well.  There is no valid reason for this content to be removed.  --143.105.17.63 (talk) 21:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gameguide material  

message: See below:
(cur | prev) 19:46, 30 April 2017‎ Soetermans (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41,723 bytes) (-26,026)‎ . . (Undid revision 777987452 by 2x2leax (talk)) (undo)
(cur | prev) 14:23, 30 April 2017‎ 2x2leax (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (67,749 bytes) (+26,026)‎ . . (undo) (Tag: nowiki added)
(cur | prev) 13:15, 30 April 2017‎ Soetermans (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41,723 bytes) (-26,026)‎ . . (See talk page; list of in-game world leaders is trivial and does not say anything about gameplay) (undo) (Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit)
No, no, no, you are wrong. It is very important info. Don't sabotage and throw away other people's hundreds of hours' work.
Learn to respect others' contribution!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.99.96.168 (talk) 00:21, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Good lord, it is not important information at all. Are you familiar with Wikipedia guidelines? WP:NOT says what Wikipedia isn't. Wikipedia is not a WP:GAMEGUIDE, not a WP:PLOT database. Wikipedia is written for a large audience, not for gamers or people interested in history. For John and Jane Wikipediareader, seeing a gigantic list of in-game appearances does not make their understanding of Civilization any better. And your WP:HARDWORK argument is not a reason either. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 06:13, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me? I am part of the Wikipedia community, and have been for over ten years. I'm an active member of WikiProject Video Games, and you expect me to explain to you why I am following its core guidelines? Well, sure, why not.
#WP:GAMEGUIDE: Wikipedia is not a gameguide. A video game article or a video game series article should describe the subject as a cultural object. Gameplay, plot, development, reception, that's pretty much the basic set up.
#WP:INDISCRIMINATE: Wikipedia is not the place for arbitrary collections of list of information, even if true.
#WP:AUDIENCE: Wikipedia is not written for gamers, articles are written for a large audience. Better yet, try to imagine that someone has never played a video game.
#And last but not least, WP:VG/MOS, which is the specific guideline on editing video game-related articles.
#WP:BURDEN: the burden to prove the notability and usefulness of a gigantic list is on you. I don't have to prove that it isn't. I've reverted you a second time and given you another warning. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia guidelines, instead of commanding a long-time editor that my motivations "better be good". soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and what you can also try to do is ask WikiProject Video Games for input, like on their talk page. Or, you could go to WP:RFC. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

text: ...No, I haven't, and I explained why I do follow Wikipedia's guidelines. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 16:46, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've left a message at WT:VG, asking for input. I don't think it's possible to reason with you, when I point to guidelines and you say that I don't follow them. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 16:54, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

text: Everything  and others have said about this table is correct. Its not wanted in this article, you're free to take it to another gaming wiki like Wikia or GameFAAQs. But it has to go, it falls foul of the policies that Wikipedia users have created for articles. - X201 (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Same. The table is unnecessary to the reader we target, which we consider to be a non-gamer. We're not here to document the game to this great a detail, and do bring up enough in prose to understand there's a multitude of civs to be selected from, and that's about as much as we need. --MASEM (t) 18:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Soetermans as well. This is the type of thing our WP:GAMECRUFT guideline exists to combat. This is the type of thing that belongs on video game websites like  Gamefaqs, or a fan Wikia or something. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia like Wikipedia, which is not a WP:GAMEGUIDE. Sergecross73 msg me 18:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

text: Also agreeing with the others. Just because it's helpful doesn't give it a privilege to belong here, else we'd include guides, walkthroughs, and cheat codes. The relevant policies and guidelines for the reason it keeps being removed have already been provided above. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

text: Also to address the deleted accusation/statement by the IP, while I appreciate you're choosing "not to escalate" the situation, but in reality, you have no grounds to anyways, as you have neither policy nor consensus on your side. You don't seem to even understand how WP:ARCHIVEs work. Please, try to at least learn the basics before so aggressively challenging everyone, making bad-faith accusations, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 12:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Just look at an old revision of the page, you can still see the info you want. It's just not going to be displayed in the live version of the article anymore. Then read WP:CIVIL - X201 (talk) 19:08, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We can also still see it by just restoring it. ;) After all, actual consensus amongst a majority of editors and readers is for it to be in the article.  --143.105.17.63 (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

text: Not its not. See What Wikipedia is not, and one thing is specifically being a game guide. Other wikis have this information. --Masem (t) 00:06, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone deleted the list of all the civs. Please stop sabotaging! 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Civilization (series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130203105143/http://www.gis.net/~pldr/fah.html to http://www.gis.net/~pldr/fah.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012130226/http://civ3.com/pressrelease.cfm to http://www.civ3.com/pressrelease.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Civilization (series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=68329&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=137281&highlight=
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080505052831/http://games.ign.com/halloffame/civilization.html to http://games.ign.com/halloffame/civilization.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article needs to mention the official Civilization board games, of which I think there are at least FOUR different versions: . --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Board games 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:39, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The redirect Civilopedia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Okmrman (talk) 21:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Civilopedia]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]