Talk:Pharaoh (video game)

message: There seems no opposition to the move. The discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and Video Games/Definition dispute is old and inconclusive. The request has been unopposed for several weeks, so I regard consensus as demonstrated. Andrewa 16:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think the articles should be merged as this one is too crappy to be stand alone. Also the pharoah article would help explain the game. This article should also be elaborated (as to the enhancements in cleopatra) once the merger has occured. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richardmilgate (talk • contribs) 18:25, 28 January 2006  (UTC)
*Weak oppose - All of the games in the City Building Series have their own articles.  Merging it now because it is "too crappy" just means it would have to be forked back out once someone destubs it.  --Kralizec! (talk) 22:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Point taken.  However, the name should still have a "(computer game)" after it I believe.  Ξxtreme Unction|yakkity yak 21:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: I hope everyone is enjoying the tremendous expansion of the article.  When I am finished, this should really be something.  Perhaps even it can be placed as a Featured Article Candidate.  So, *if* anyone would like to throw a Barstar my way, that would be really cool! :-) -Husnock 06:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Article is as far as it can go right now.  I will add more pictures of housing later as I complete missions where such houses are available.  For now, I'm going to try my luck at Featured article.  Here we go... -Husnock 10:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Great Expansion

message: To prevent an edit war, I have protected the article.  I am also concerned that one user in the dispute has an acknolwedged sockpuppet (Genidealingwithfairuse).  As I am involved I pledge to make no edits to this article while it is protected. -Husnock 16:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Self reverted as research shows not allowed to do that.  Might be a good idea for protection nonetheless. -Husnock 16:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: All my sockpupets are legit under WP:SOCK. They are hardly unknown. even nominated one for adminship once. But that was a while ago.Geni 16:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Protecting the article is not acceptable since you are involved in any conflict. Please unprotect it.Geni 16:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was an edit war in progress and, as stated below, I pledge to make no edits to the article while it is protected.  If I had not protected another editor surely would have. -Husnock 16:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it. Why didn't you wait to find out? Now you are in a situation where you are have to bet on my having more respect for process than you do.Geni 16:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I self reverted after reviewing the policy since I have not protected an article in several months.  No need for such nasty tones, I was simply trying to stop what appeared to be an edit war (after all, you did continue to remove mages after I asked you twice to stop so I could research the solutiion).  And, with that said, I think I have a compromise.  Standby for the new article on housing to only contain one image. -Husnock 16:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: <--
I have request protection for the article, to prevent 3rd party editors inflamming the situation. Gnangarra 16:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I withdrew the request as the page has been moved and User:Husnock is undertaking a rewrite of the article a protected page would be a problem. Gnangarra 17:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection

message: Proposed sub-articles are:
* Pharaoh and Cleopatra (housing)
* Pharaoh and Cleopatra (religion)
* Campaigns of Pharaoh and Cleopatra
* Monuments of Pharaoh and Cleopatra
Possibly moving the main article to Pharaoh and Cleopatra (computer game) might also not be a bad idea.
Any further thoughts on sub-articles? -Husnock 15:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've proposed the deletion of two of these pages, as it reads like indiscriminate information (WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information); it's just too detailed for an encyclopedia entry on a game and perhaps belongs in a gaming wiki instead. Still, I won't kick up a fuss if you want to remove the prod tags. Marasmusine 18:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've transwiki'd the three pages (as well as some of this pages content) over to subpages of StrategyWiki:Pharoah so that it can be cleaned up without worrying about losing information. -- Prod (Talk) 06:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub-articles 

message: Does anyone have any problem with me uploading some more screenshots of the game or is there already too many pictures.--User:Rock2e  Talk - Contribs  12:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a personal opinion, I'd say this article has a few too many screenshots as it is. Robotman1974 13:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: :Image:PharaohGame4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PharaohGame4.jpg

message: It says: "Each Local Deity God expects the same as every other Local Deity. A Patron God expects more than a Local Deity and will often require much more attention." Is this really true? From experience this has sometimes been true, sometimes it's not.Frediculous biggs 16:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy of Statement

message: :Image:PharaohGame4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 14:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PharaohGame4.jpg

message: I would like to make the following proposal:
I would like to propose that the expansion to Pharaoh be made out into a separate article, detailing the expansions features.  I do not believe it should be sharing the same article as the main game. GUtt01 (talk) 11:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal - Separation of Game's Expansion into own article