Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 14

{{Infobox CVG
|width=
|title= 
|image= 
|caption=
|developer= 
|publisher= 
|distributor= 
|designer= 
|series=
|engine= 
|version= 
|released=[[Pic|22px|Name]]Release Date 1<br>[[Pic|22px|Name]] Release Date 2<br> ...
|genre= 
|modes= 
|ratings= 
|platforms= 
|media= 
|requirements= 
|input= 
|cabinet= *
|arcade system= *
|cpu= *
|sound= *
|display= *
|ports= **
}}

and anything that you don't know, just leave blank. None of the fields are required. --PresN 16:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

See the main page, near the bottom in "infoboxes" for more information. --PresN 16:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Sandman, I wish you were around for this discussion (and here) a few weeks ago. I was the only dissenting voice at the time. PresN, what he means by Herculean effort is that there are almost 800 articles in Category:Articles partially converted to Infobox CVG now, not to mention that the display field got broken for all of those articles. Also, you're supposed to subst the original Arcade Infobox, not just replace it with CVG - if you look at the current Arcade template source you'll see why. Anyway, as said in those topics, the main reason this was done was because the Arcade Wikiproject is pretty much dead and CVG is taking over those articles. --SevereTireDamage 16:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

800? (Cry). I'll take a look at them, see if there's some process I can come up with the fix them. -PresN 17:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Dumb question: How do I remove the catagory from the page? I was messing with 18_Wheeler:_American_Pro_Trucker, and it should be fine, but i can't figure out how to remove it from the catagory. --PresN 17:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Ohh.... Never mind. Silly me, I wasn't doing it right. --PresN 17:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I've gotten 40 done, 627 left to go. --PresN 17:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

To cut a long story short, my opinion is that the arcade game infobox should have its own, and the CVG one is fine for computer games. There is a lot of redundant/unnecessary information in the CVG box for arcade games. A yardstick for arcade information is in the history of MAME itself, or on mameworld.net. The previous arcade infobox was just perfect for my initial inspiration of getting all the missing arcade games from MAME into wikipedia. Now, frankly, I feel overwhelmed by the new box and don't feel like adding thousands of games. Anyway, thanks to those who still have the energy to fix existing entries. Sandman30s 18:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

What is the project's standing on inclusion of gaming clans in game articles?

This came up about a month or so back in the article for Rome: Total War, and may be about to occur again in Star Wars: Empire at War. I have used the precedent that they aren't mentioned in other articles to support removing mention. In the R:TW incident, the consensus was that clans shouldn't be mentioned.

But I thought I'd ask the project here so that if it comes up again in the future (or continues with SW:EAW), I would at least have a solid footing for or against inclusion.

Cheers --DarthBinky 18:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that gaming clans have any business in articles. --PresN 19:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but I wanted to make sure that there's a consensus on it, and maybe a mention made in the guidelines/policy. --DarthBinky 20:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

You can probably cite WP:BIO as rationale. Most clans (your Frag Dolls notwithstanding) won't have any sort of notable coverage in print or the gaming community. Most articles on individual gamers have a hard enough time standing scrutiny. --SevereTireDamage 22:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I'm talking about mentioning clans within articles about games, not articles about clans. For example, the articles for Star Wars: Empire at War and Star Wars: Republic Commando each had sections listing a few gaming clans (each with the unverifiable title "Major Clans"), and I removed them from each. The SW:EAW one has been re-added a couple times since, but the people re-adding it are not responding to my rationale listed in the talk.

I guess I'm just looking to make sure I'm doing things right just in case this becomes a problem (like I said, there was a problem with clans over on the article for Rome: Total War). Thanks for the comments. --DarthBinky 23:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Today, I've found several links to wrong pages at the list pages for systems (List of Gamecube games, for example). Example: someone put the link as Catwoman, when it should be for Catwoman video game. I've went through some lists partially, but not completely. Anyone care to help? You basically just need to check games that are based on a movie, TV show, comic book character and so on. RobJ1981 12:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I was disappointed that PresN listed my WikiProject:Arcade games as inactive, but I couldn't really contest it. While I am still actively writing articles for arcade games, no big issues have come up lately, so, yeah it looks dead, though I don't think the participants have abandoned it. But then NeonMerlin came along and actually striked out the project! Is this really necessary? The project is still there and free to join, striking it out seems to indicate and is gone or going away. Can't we leave it with the inactive tag? — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I changed it to almost inactive, I suppose if there are still people out there interested in it, you can't really call it dead, just...in a coma. --PresN 16:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The requested article section needs some cleanup, I think. It currently has 132 articles in the list, and no one is going to go out of their way to create something in the middle of a list that takes up more than a screen, with 2 columns. Additionally, last night I took Warring Factions off the list, just an hour after it was created. It was allready speedy-tagged, and was deleted within the hour. A lot of the articles on the list are like that. I propose that we name articles that are on the list, but that don't deserve an article of their own. If no one disagrees, they can be taken off a little later. --PresN 16:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, give a reason.

-Alfador, how to unlock him in Chrono Trigger - it's about how to get the cat to show up in the ending scene of Chrono Trigger. CT is going towards FA status just fine without this peice of cruft, and it doesn't need an article.

-guitar.wav - Huh? a .wav file? Wtf?

-Infraworld A game that was in developement for the Sony PS3 by Quantic Dream. It has since been cancelled, due to an inability to get a publisher to buy into the bizarre concept - which is completely unknown to the public. Screenshots, videos and even concept art and articles are rare to nonexistent. - the self description says it all.

-Knuckles in China Land - A japanese-teaching game, that you can't download anymore. NN!

-SpellForce series - Notable, but considering that Spellforce could cover it, and is a stub to start with, doesn't need a seperate article.

-Thy Dungeonman - A game that was playable in one episode of homestar runner. NN.

This is just a few to start with. Remember, we're nominating articles that, if created, would be speedy deleted anyway/put in AfD and deleted. The list is just too long. --PresN 16:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thy Dungeonman I'm on the fence on, but the rest I agree with removing the rest. Also, note this AfD for Superfluous game lists. --SevereTireDamage 20:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Right, List of Pac-man games coming off then. Anything that's been AfD'd before is automatic withdrawal. --PresN 20:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• Why are you taking off List of Pac-Man games? There is certainly more than enough Pac-Man to fill a list, and it's notable. I didn't suggest the page or anything, but if it weren't for the success of Pac-Man...many games probably wouldn't even exist now. RobJ1981 23:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• I've added some wording that directs people to provide a url with information regarding what they are requesting. I think we need to keep a certain standard regarding requests. A url with information, or at least a description, which would be a pointer for those who would actually create the article. I suggest that we prune the list and remove any titles that don't provide any secondary information. Ajaxfan 00:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I actually agree that List of Pac-Man games could be useful, but the problem is that it was AfD'd- which means it can be speedy deleted if brought back similar to what it was. Which is, if someone makes a stub just to make the article, it's no good. If you want to turn it into a real list, then great, but otherwise... --PresN 14:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and nominate some deletions, people! 5 out of 132 isn't going to help. --PresN 14:12, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Other ones I'm nominating- GUND (stuffed animal company) (right)- Muling (carrying around items to transfer to another character- can only be a dicdef)- Dimenxian (Algebra-teaching edutainment, NN)- Project Ashcroft (I can't even find out what this is supposed to be)- IQ Supli (cheap japanese standalone "Iq raising" game thing, nn)- Angel Arena (WC3 mod, there's only about 1000 of those) Atlamillia (an important part of the start class Dark Cloud game which wouldn't need it's own article even if dark cloud was GA class)- China (Command & Conquer: Generals) (WP:NOT a game guide)- Eskiv (Free online flash game. Only about 10 million of those)- Gravoor (Online flash game series at Newgrounds. Re:10 million)- Hot Potato! (Way too many things called this to know what they're talking about w/o discription)- Mang (I'll take it off if anyone can find what it is- I can't)- No End Soon (A rumored game for the Wii, codename. Crystal ball.)- Skibi's castle TD (Another WC3 mod)- Sunder: Land of Divide (A rumored game from back in January, never showed up)- Xpert Eleven (Free online football management game, nn).

I didn't list anything that was published for any console or computer system- they may still be non-notable, but I'm not going to be a jerk about it, if it's a real game.

I took off Operation: Logic Bomb- it's existed for a while at Operation Logic Bomb, and Pulse Man, exists at Pulseman.

I plan on deleting everything listed here on monday, unless anyone raises an objection to it. --PresN 19:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC) (Edit- Added a bunch of names) --PresN 19:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that a List of Pac-Man games article should be deleted on sight, however, it should be removed from the Request page so someone doesn't casually create it due to the AfD mess. There are several good "List of games" articles, like List of Final Fantasy games and List of Gradius titles, the key being more horizontal coverage and not just a bullet list. Having worked a lot on Pac-Man, I may even take up the task myself later if I can find a decent source.

As for the others, I say you can delete on sight most of the entries that aren't from a franchise nor have an informational external link. (Andrew Garye? Who? Eggplant Wizard obviously doesn't need its own article.) But to be honest, it seems most of the things on this list stay red forever. Most of the time we're fighting off unnotable stubs. --SevereTireDamage 22:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree about the list of pac-man games thing, I think an good list would be a nice thing. But it will just be a mess if someone creates a stub to fulfill a request. --PresN 18:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd be grateful if someone could comment on the standard format I proposed here a while ago, for listing archived AfD debates relating to the WikiProject. I've received no replies since posting the question originally, but I'm guessing that has something to do with the fact that the page is a very low-traffic one to begin with.

Thanks! RandyWang (^raves/_{review me!}) 07:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

On the style section, I'm a adding note about treating fiction as fact. Many game articles involving story elements are really bad about this.(I've been guilty of it myself in the past as well.) Albert Wesker is just one recent example I've noticed that's really bad about this sort of thing.--Mitaphane _talk 17:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

List of Arm Wrestling games by genre. It's a page for an Arm Wrestling (arcade game). It's no list at all. I did a little checking, and it's also called Arm Wrestling arcade game: so the whole list thing is a redirect I believe. So could someone delete the list redirect? It's no list, and I don't see why a redirect is for it. RobJ1981 19:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

You've got a good point there. Can you call a list with one item in it a list? (The Wiktionary people can have a semantics debate over that one). I agree with the removal of the re-direct, in fact I think the whole page should go.X201 19:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've prodded the page; it should be deleted within a week or so. RandyWang (^raves/_{review me!}) 03:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Oscara (talk · contribs) madea bunch of very idiosyncratic lists like that. I thought I had cleaned them all up, but I guess not. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There are always more. ;) RandyWang (^{chat me up}/_{fix me up}) 21:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Somebody vandalized the Arcade system board page. I have restored it. Who knows what else was deleted? Please can a sysop investigate? Sandman30s 19:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

According to the history, you reverted everything to the way it was. --PresN 20:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

And that's the only thing that that IP has edited. --PresN 20:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC) (spoilers: not a sysop :-P)

Thanks, the 'List of Arcade system boards' was deleted, as well as categories. Anyway, I am going to clean up this page and later on add more arcade game entries. Sandman30s 21:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

this AfD got me curious, and so I started searching for games on SourceForge that had articles on Wikipedia; the number appears to be rather large. Given that OSS games get virtually no press (except NetHack), are there any compelling reasons one way or another for these nearly unsourcable games? Nifboy 07:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

If they're unsourcable and non-notable, I'd say kill them. The problem is that if the number is "rather large", you're going to inundate AfD. Maybe nominate them in chunks of say, 5 at a time? Like, 5 in one nomination. The AfD process falls apart when a list of 30 articles is nominated at once. --PresN 18:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd say there are quite a few notable ones. Pretty much any source port or other source project is notable as are any games that have gotten rpess coverage. A lot of them aren't, though. Ace of Sevens 18:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, but according to our current standards of notability, there's little justification to keep them in. The same rationale being used (usually correctly) to delete the many ROM hacks, fangames, Web and Flash games over the last couple of weeks could be used to delete most SourceForge games. --SevereTireDamage 05:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a debate going on at Talk:Dark Castle regarding the allowed use of game icons, from interpreting {{Game-icon}} and WP:FUC. It could set a precedent for icon use in all game articles, please have a look and leave your comments or make the discussion a general one here! Arru 20:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been working on abolishing galleries of cover art, due to the fact that such galleries flunk WP:FUC, particularly #3 and #8. While I think it would be a good idea to have multiple covers in articles covering multiple games (Pokémon Red and Blue or Metal Gear Solid), I've been seeing articles with a half-dozen or a dozen images of each minor variation of the cover, up to and including both original release and best-seller covers. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Could you give some examples of the pages with bad galleries for reference? As discussed on Wikiproject Comics, there's always the potential for image galleries to go bad, however, there were several good examples cited there that prove with restraint and commentary it could be worth keeping. For instance, in this case, regional box art can often show the difference between how games are marketed in different territories. But at the same time, we don't necessarily need to see a Greatest Hits cover AND the original cover if they're the same art. --SevereTireDamage 05:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

This one's screenshots, not cover art, but check out Real-time tactics. Ace of Sevens 05:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Also check out Resident Evil 4. Up until recently, all of the Resident Evil game articles had galleries of a half-dozen to a dozen box images, plus two logos in the infobox. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the RTT article was definitely excessive (no need for two Total War shots, and why put in two shots from games that don't even have their own articles?). There's also not all that much difference between the different shots, it's not very illustrative if they're trying to convey a broad sense of the genre.

RE4 has a lot of shots, and the two PC covers are entirely unnecessary because that artwork is already covered on the other two platforms. But at the same time, that's the perfect example of what I was describing above - the US gets the most obvious boring full body shots, the Japanese art had ones that emphasized the faces, and the Europeans got the cooler, more abstract shots. Of course, then the argument would probably arise, "Well, we have the rest of the covers..." I also saw what you did for the Resident Evil (video game) page. Now THIS was pretty damn absurd and it was good to clear it out most of it, but I probably would've compromised a little and chosen one box shot per artwork, especially since that page covered many versions. --SevereTireDamage 06:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

If someone wants to write a sourced section or article about how games are marketed in different territories, go for it. Don't leave a gallery of unfairly-used fair-use images laying around until you write it, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, you don't need to go into original research opinion and speculation (as I did in the above comment) to see value in showing various covers. For a comprehensive, encyclopedic overview of a video game the artwork used for selling it in different markets could be included for obvious, self-evident or bland commentary about the differences. OTOH, having multiple images of the same cover art with a different system or regional stripe on the side is pointless, and I'm not arguing for that. --SevereTireDamage 22:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

this is a prime example of what ruins this site....of course the regional variations should be shown...and why is it always the us versions which remain, why cant you leave things be???Owwmykneecap 15:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with this, but I'm going to quote Ryu Kaze here: "We're using the most recognized cover boxart for an English audience — which is what is supposed to be done." In most cases, that's the US one. If there's something interesting or unique about, say, the European one, than that can be used. But a table of 12 box covers serves no purpose. --PresN 16:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey I have an article that I wanted to put in the CVG Peer Review (here), but it doesn't have a rating yet. Should I wait for the rating, or should I just put in on the review board? I don't know much about the reviewing process as a whole, so any help would be nice. --Clyde Miller 14:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There's nothign official about most of the ratings, except for GA and FA, so just go ahead and put it up for peer review- PR is just asking people to comment on it, there's not really anything official obout it either, it's just helpful. I'll go ahead and rate the article anyway. --PresN 16:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone change the rating in the CVG template box on an article's own talk page? Specifically, I upgraded the Klingon Academy page just after the template was added and it looks like a B-Class article to me now. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I'm still not sure just how much autonomy one has in relation to an ongoing WikiProject. --J. Spanky 16:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Anyone. Nifboy 17:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about "Authority" or anything of the sort; anyone can do pretty much anything to contribute to this WikiProject. Off the top of my head, I can't really think of anything that's off-limits, except to make major changes without community support. RandyWang (^{chat me up}/_{fix me up}) 21:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There's always vandalism. Or taunting Happy Fun Ball. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Deckiller and I are of differing opinions about the use of lists in Final Fantasy (video game). I expanded the gameplay section to this and included a number of lists. I'm aware of WP:NOT and figured that some of the information might be irrelevant or not of encyclopedic interest, and said so in my comment. Deckiller and I had a brief discussion on our talk pages (here and here), and my original text has been modified (and greatly improved!) thanks to him.

However, there's one thing which I'd like to ask the project at large. In a recent comment, Deckiller stated, "bulleted lists are not acceptable in featured articles, see other gaming featured articles" and replaced a bulleted list of player character classes with a prose list. (Of course, the article in question isn't a featured article, but we'd all like it to be that good.) We agree that there are certain lists that are unacceptable, but as far as I can tell there are plenty of gaming featured articles which do have bulleted lists. Not counting lists under "See Also", "Trivia", and so on, I found:

• BZFlag (8 bulleted lists, 1 table)
• Donkey Kong (arcade game) (1 bulleted list)
• Doom (1 bulleted list)
• Katamari Damacy (1 bulleted list, 1 non-bulleted list (of characters))
• The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (1 bulleted list)
• The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker (1 bulleted list)
• Perfect Dark (2 bulleted lists, one of which is a sidebar)
• Super Mario 64 (3 bulleted lists, 1 non-bulleted list (under "Tasks, aids, and obstacles"))
• StarCraft (3 bulleted lists)

These tend to be lists of gameplay features or objects (areas, items, enemies, etc.). The next most common type of list seems to be a list of voice actors.

My own feeling is that some data is both relevant and best presented as a bulleted list, but I realize that the project may have come to some other consensus. I looked but couldn't find anything in the project pages. Did I miss something? Am I making an obvious mistake? Thanks in advance. 141.211.63.35 17:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The main difference, I think, is in the amount of prose that goes into the lists; In most of the FAs cited (except BZFlag, which is FARC material) each bullet is a full sentence or more, whereas "mere" lists, which provide no context or explanation, are the ones being argued against. Nifboy 20:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I basically think that bullets are fine if it's not just things like a list of level names with nothing else. Like, in Kirby's Dream Land 3 (which I've been working on), I have four lists, one of which is in table form. The other three are bulleted lists, but each bullet has several sentances to it, so there's plenty of substance in each entry. If you want a good example of bad lists, try this old revision of Star Wars: Battlefront II. I consider that a bad case of list overload. -- gakon5 13:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added a section for the external links templates. I'll be adding a section for image tags later. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you. These will most definitely come in handy. RandyWang (^{chat me up}/_{fix me up}) 09:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I may or may not have deleted 70 out of the 130 new article requests...no, I did, never mind. I may or may not feel bad about it...no, never mind again. I'll whack some more later, too. Please put descriptions on your requests, people. And don't ask for articles on WC3 mods! --PresN 16:01, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Final tally- out of the 132 that were there last week, there are 50 left. --PresN 22:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I could use some help here:[1].

There is many articles listed, many of which could easily be sorted into a subcategory. I went through some, and could use some help with the rest. RobJ1981 20:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Are there any criteria that need to be stuck to, apart from the obvious one of "put it in the right place"? - X201 22:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• For example: if it's an action game, use an action game stub. There is subcategory stubs for many things (not all though). So if there is none, just leave the cvg stub. In the category page (which is the link above), there is a list of subcategories...so it should be pretty simple. I just asked for help, because there is alot of pages of things that aren't in categories yet, and I really don't want to be the only one doing it. I hope this helped. RobJ1981 23:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Is there a policy on the stub-sorting in regards to multiple categories? I mean situations where you're not sure if a game should go in adventure vs. rpg (see: Fushigi no Dungeon, a console roguelike) or beat 'em up vs. platformer, a Poke-stub that's also an RPG-stub, etc. Are you allowed to put pages in multiple stub cats? --SevereTireDamage 23:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Not that I know of. Multiple stubs can be used, I've seen it and done it myself with no problem. I suggest adding to the cvg stub if possible, and let that be the only stub if you can. But if it's something like a Pac-Man game, it should have platform stub and Namco stub.RobJ1981 23:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ran into a weird problem regarding {{3do-cvg-stub}} when I looked at Who Shot Johnny Rock?. I'm a little confused on the syntax, so I thought I'd let someone here try to figure it out. Currently there doesn't seem to be an actual Category for 3DO stubs (I guess, stubs related the company or system, since there aren't other hardware platform-specific stub cats, like NES stubs), so it automatically adds the entries into the default cvg-stub cat. --SevereTireDamage 23:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Well if the stub doesn't actually exist, revert it back to cvg stub. RobJ1981 00:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I went ahead and placed all of those articles in specific stub categories, so the template is no longer used. --SevereTireDamage 00:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• After a bit of sorting, the list of regular cvg-stub's are down to 380. I'm hoping in a few days, it's less. RobJ1981 16:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I got through many of them last night, but it brought another problem to my attention. There probably should be some kind of {{cvg-design-stub}}, as many of the stubs (like top-down perspective, attract mode, room-over-room, synthesizer programmer, etc.) relates to Category:Computer game design terminology and concepts. (As an aside, that should probably be renamed "Computer and video game design" to stick to our naming conventions.) Also, I don't have a clue what to do with Category:Action game stubs. --SevereTireDamage 19:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• A design stub would be helpful. As for action game stubs, I don't know about that one. Many games are classified as action or action/adventure. When I looked through action stubs, I noticed many games based on TV or movies. Maybe a stub for TV and/or movie based games should be created? There is certainly more than enough TV and movie games out there. RobJ1981 19:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
• A small update: it's down to 331 (only 2 pages!) now. If there was a sound and/or music stub category for cvg, that would certainly help as well. RobJ1981 20:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi guys, I suggested this on the List of Nintendo 64 games talk page, but haven't had a reply so I'll put it here. I suggest giving the page an overhaul, putting the list in a table format, so as to give more information and to tidy up the page, similar to the style of the virtual boy games list. I've created an example of what it could look like here, User:Timkovski/n64 list. I also propose removing Japanese titles from the list that are released in other territories and so have an english name, e.g. having an entry in the list for both Castlevania and Akumajou Dracula Mokushiroku when they both point to the same article. I would really appreciate suggestions/comments. Thanks. --Timkovski 20:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I'd leave in the Japanese/European titles, if applicable, though, they can be consolidated under a single entry, like the Virtual Boy list. --SevereTireDamage 21:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I say that any "list of...games" should be modeled after List of Virtual Boy games, which has ascended to FA status. Hbdragon88 05:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I would prefer trying to limit it to one title per article, with a few exceptions for games without formal English titles (e.g. Doukutsu Monogatari and "Cave Story"). Having two or three titles for most entries would double the size of the pages, and, I imagine, obliterate the navigability thereof. Nifboy 05:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if people are aware of Proto's gamecruft cleanup project, a page I recently became aware of. I know I've been trying to deal with excessive articles about fictional objects, places, and concepts in Pokémon, Metal Gear, fighting games, and other games. I've noticed that there are dozens of articles retelling the plot of StarCraft in explicit detail, an ongoing effort to cover every single character, object, organization, place, and concept in Halo, an article for every possible person/place/group/thing in Deus Ex, a dozen or so articles retelling the story of the Metal Gear games from the POV of each character, and an article for every single fighting game character no matter how minor the character or game.

However, I've run into a lot of opposition trying to reduce plot summary and merge many of these articles, lately in the case of Metal Gear and Deus Ex articles but elsewhere as well.

So, reality check time. Are articles like this generally acceptable? Was I wrong for reducing the amount of plot summary in this and merging it here? Am I the only one who sees any of this as a problem? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes

(The Bread 08:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC))

For one, I dislike articles that are only plot summary and/or game manual rehashing. There are some things that really shouldn't have separate articles: one-off characters, level-by-level, blow-by-bloq plot summaries, and the like. I think that the precedent for condensing plot sumaries and minor fictional characters about whom little can be said out-of-universe is clear. In this sense, characters and plot in games really aren't too much different from their counterparts in other media.

One argument that I believe has been raised is that the twist with games is that not only are fictional items in these games cultural artifacts in and of themselves, but ludology is beginning to consider the aesthetics of game design as an art form, the player as a performer, and the modern video game as a means of expression rather than just simple goal-oriented entertainment. So there might be a finer line than we think between unencyclopedic game-guide material and encyclopedic study of player behaviors in a particular game. Granted, this amount of this type of material is sparse, so it isn't a silver bullet for every problematic game article in existence, but it is beginning to show up.

Now, obviously the scarcity of this material doesn't help a lot of the problematic articles. Someone should write a GA/FA on a particularly notable component of a fictional universe other than a character, so that we can point to it and say, "If you're going to write about something at this level of detail, this is what it should look like." We can cite WP:NOT, WP:WAF, and WP:FICT all we want, but none of those really contain a positive example of a good article of a non-character component of fiction. This would be more productive that just citing policy and guidelines. I think that we should also link to in-universe/strategy wikis and add HTML comments asking game guide info to be contributed there instead of here. — TKD::Talk 08:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's Link (Legend of Zelda) (which is a fairly good example) and Bulbasaur (which, no offense to Celestianpower and HighwayCello, is not), plus a number of similar comics articles (Captain Marvel comes immediately to mind), but the problem is that oftentimes comparing such-and-such minor character to those is misleading, because such-and-such minor character won't have the third-party published works that Link or Bulbasaur or Captain Marvel do.

These discussions often boil down to...

"There just isn't much to say about this subject."

"What are you talking about? Look at all that's there!"

"Well, that's detailed plot summary/original research/fanon/guesswork/supposition/game guide, and it isn't appropriate for Wikipedia."

"WHY ARE YOU DELETING INFORMATION?!?"

Most recently, it has been argued that we should keep detailed plot summary because, of all things, WP:IAR and that more information must be good. How do you determine how much plot summary is too much? How can I argue that a character isn't a separate subject from the game in which it appears? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I was aware that we had FA character articles; I was pondering about other fictional elements (and I now remember that we have spoo). And it was sort of my point that editors need to realize that if they can't find enough out-of-universe information, then the utility of a separate article is questionable.

My general rule of thumb is that articles on a single element of fiction shouldn't contain more than about 50% plot summary. Plot summary serves to provide context, not be the sole content. — TKD::Talk 09:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Even spoo is on and off FAR/FARC, because half of it is sourced to usenet posts.

Personally, I try to stick to the yardstick of about half plot summary; I've just been stymied running into all sorts of character/group/object/place articles that are all plot summary. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I would greatly appreciate some input at Talk:List of recurring Metal Gear characters, particularly over the difference between this standalone article on a supporting character and this list entry on the same character. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it's time to revisit hte issue of templates - again. Wario now has four character templates - SSB, Wario series, Mario series, and Mario series villans. Also, why is the font so small on each of the templates? We really need to come to a standard on this - we need to format them all the same way, but I disagree with the current style of dialing the font so small, especially when there are so amny entries. i mean, whne I look at Talk:Wario, there are also a ton of templates, but since they're all the same size, it's easy to go through them. The inconsistnecy of these templates makes them look really, really bad. Hbdragon88 18:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that they look weirdly incongruous due to their mismatching colors and horizontal sizes. However, right now all menus are hidden by default, so it's not quite as bad as that screenshot makes it look. Making a standard for navboxes will probably be impossible, since the needs of each navbox will be very different. --SevereTireDamage 19:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I've started a discussion over at Cultural differences in computer and console role-playing games talk page regarding the wide use of the terms cRPG/CRPG to mean "console RPG"/ "computer RPG". I would like to get a bigger perspective from the CVG community before I take action based on this discussion. --Mitaphane _talk 19:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the migration from the Arcade infobox to the CVG infobox, there's discussion at Talk:Final Fight regarding using arcade flyers as the infobox box image. Currently, CVG guidelines only state that cover art be used in the CVG infobox, not taking in account games that were released first and/or primarily as arcade titles. I don't believe arcade flyers can be used as a substitute for cover art - arcade flyers are essentially advertising for arcade games. It wouldn't make sense if someone used an advertisement to represent a console game, so it wouldn't make sense to use an arcade flyer for an arcade game.

The logical equivalent of cover art for an arcade title is the arcade's dedicated cabinet, but that wouldn't look so great for an infobox. I suppose we could use box art for one of the ports, just like we do for multiplatform games, but that would discount the fact that some titles were released in arcades first. --Jtalledo (talk) 00:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

New guidelines are currently being worked on, in someone's sandbox. Currently, though, they just reflect the old arcade guidelines.

Personally, I'd look for boxart that resembles the arcade art, as a compromise. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

These flyers were widely distributed and are currently the closest equivalent to cover art for console games. Though I agree using cover art for ports is less apt as they often represent an altered product which isn't the primary subject of discussion. Other products and events are frequently represented by promotional material in other projects such as film and music so I really don't see what the problem is. Combination 10:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Movie articles typically use promotional posters, for example. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 10:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Promotional posters for films are nothing like video game advertisements. Arcade flyers aren't closely associated with the game like cover art is for console games. Box art is what video game buyers see on store shelves. Movie posters are what people see in theatres. Most arcade game players have never seen arcade flyers, since they're mainly shown to arcade operators. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well that's how arcade games are being advertised and identified in the marketplace, even if many will not be exposed to them in the same capacity as a movie poster. Combination 18:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Arcade Flyers? What I noticed when I was trying to clean up Arcade Games that weren't converted to a CVG infobox fully, is that most of them used either a cover from a port or a screenshot of the game. I think that's as it should be- arcade flyers are just ads for the game, the infobox should have something representative of the game, not an ad that game players didn't see. --PresN 19:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it, the arcade project's guideline is to use screenshots, whereas the CVG project decided, under the misapprehension that the arcade project was dead, that fliers are best. Personally, I don't care, although if we end up with a conflict over whether to favor port covers or whatever the arcade consensus is due to the unification of the infoboxes, she should favor the more-recognizable one (so definitely the arcade convention for Pac-Man, but probably the NES cover for Bionic Commando). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Both arcade flyers and box covers contain promotional images that may have nothing to do with the actual look of the game they represent. These images are used mainly because of a strong fair use rationale, because the market value of an advertisement is negligible and usage is transformative. Screenshot use is also appropriate, but due to Wikipedia policy, only one screenshot can be used for identification purposes, all others must have critical commentary to justify fair use. So, since fair use policy allows either promotional image or screenshot, either one could conceivably be used for the infobox. I think it's best to come to a compromise to allay usage disputes, something like an hierarchical guideline. That is, if a promotional image (flyer or box art) is available, use that (as most video game articles do), if neither are available, use a screenshot. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 18:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Before I joined this WikiProject, I asked whether it was willing to cover browser-based games such as Neopets, RuneScape and AdventureQuest. Your reply and my decision to join set a precedent that browser-based games will be covered by this WikiProject.

Please follow up on this precedent. For starters, add the WikiProject tag to the talk pages of articles on browser-based games. Then set some standards for such articles, and collaborate to improve such articles. That's what a WikiProject is for, isn't it?

Shortly after joining the WikiProject, I posted that I wanted to improve RuneScape to Good Article status and to cleanup and add screenshots to the AdventureQuest article, and that I was seeking members of this WikiProject to collaborate with me on these articles. Is there any particular reason why I have not received any responses within the last 10 days?

I joined this WikiProject to collaborate with others on articles of interest: Neopets, RuneScape, AdventureQuest and Chip's Challenge. If no one wishes to collaborate with me, and being in this WikiProject does not help me find others to collaborate with to improve these articles, there is no reason why I should stay a member of this WikiProject. Please follow up on your promise to include articles on browser-based games in this WikiProject, and find someone willing to collaborate with me on these articles, or after 7 days I may decide to leave this WikiProject.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand the purpose of Wikiprojects in general. Wikiprojects are just a group of like-minded editors working on whatever their interests and knowledge are suited to. The reason you've probably not gotten any support with Runequest or AdventureQuest is because there's nobody who is both able and interested in helping at the moment. There's no way for a "promise" to be made on behalf of the project as a whole; either there's someone interested in helping or there isn't.

If you're disappointed in the support you've received, that's unfortunate and I'm sorry, but there's no real purpose served by "leaving" the Wikiproject; as long as you're working on game articles, you're more or less a member, and by voiciferously dissociating yourself from the project, you're just reducing the chance that a later editor who happens along who is interested in that subject knows about the work that needs to be done. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. Sometimes I type faster than I think. It's really late here - I'll get my sleep and reply tomorrow. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Before joining, I asked whether you would be willing to include articles about browser-based games as part of this WikiProject (as I did not see any articles about browser-based games in the list). The response was in favour of including browser-based games as part of this WikiProject. As no promise was made, I think we should determine whether there is true consensus for including browser-based games as part of this WikiProject. If there is consensus, then it should be made official that this project covers browser-based games as well. To make it official, slap the CVG tag on the talk pages of articles on browser-based games and include such articles in lists such as "Featured Articles" and "Tasks". Then we should find members of this WikiProject who are interested in working on articles on browser-based games. In addition, we could go to the talk pages of articles of browser-based games and find people who play those games there, then rope them into the WikiProject.

I believe that one purpose of WikiProjects is for WikiProject members to collaborate on certain articles. For example, let's say I join a WikiProject Google. I write an article about Google Groups (the article was really written by me). I post a request for feedback on the article, and someone responds that with a little work, it could become a good article. I then post on WikiProject Google's talk page about the Google Groups article, asking for suggestions on how I can improve the article. Another member of the WikiProject responds with some suggestions, and then we decide to work on the article together to fix the issues and get the article to Good Article status. When we discuss about the article on its talk page, we learn more about each other, and become Wikifriends.

That's what I'm hoping to achieve from a WikiProject. To ask for help on how to improve an article; to seek Wikipedians who could collaborate with me on improving an article; to find Wikipedians who share a common interest to make Wikifriends with. For me, a WikiProject is a good place to drop a note like "Hi, I'm trying to improve RuneScape to GA standards. Could someone look through the article and suggest how I can improve it? Does anyone wish to work with me on improving this article". Will WikiProjects help me achieve these aims, or is there a better way to achieve them?

While I understand that many members of this WikiProject probably don't play RuneScape or AdventureQuest, I wanted to know whether not getting any responses was because of that, or because of a general disinterest in collaborating. If any member of this WikiProject plays Neopets, RuneScape, AdventureQuest or Chip's Challenge? If so, please drop a note on my talk page (or here), as I wish to become Wikifriends with you, and may collaborate with you on the article of our game of interest in future. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Again, you're making things a bit more formal than they really are. If you want to use this project's guidelines and tools to improve browser-based game articles, more power to you! Nobody wants to exclude them from this project. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Wikiprojects work just like you think they do. You come here, say, "Hey, could someone check out this article I wrote, see what needs to be done", and if someone wants to, they do just that. You don't need to write a long formal statement of what you think about wikiprojects and wikifriends and all that. Just say, hey, does someone want to help out on this, and if anyone is interested, they'll come help out. --PresN 17:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Jimbo has posted on Talk:List of commercial failures in computer and video gaming say this is OR and should be deleted. Most of it is sourced in the linked articles, just not in this article. Everything needs to be sourced or removed or the page won't last long. Ace of Sevens 19:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Well if something doesn't have a source, it obviously doesn't belong. In my opinion, pages like that shouldn't exist... due to the fact of speculated and rumored things put on it so much. Many of which can and/or will cause edit wars between editors. RobJ1981 19:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• We should find sales data. A failure is relative, but with sales data, we can justify it a little more.--guitarhero777777 22:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey I noticed that our project box needs to be updated. If someone gives me a crash course how, I'll do it. If someone doesn't feel like teaching me, could they update it themselves? Thanks to whoever. --Clyde Miller 02:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by updated? I've been mucking with it, as have a few other people. The way I get ot it is to hit the edit button on it, and change Gamebox to Gamebox_contents. Then you're editing the actual contents. I know there's a real way to get to it, but I've forgotten what it was. Peer Reviews are up to date, as are Cleanup, Merge, Requests, and GCotW. I suppose that Expand needs updating, but I'd have to go back in the history to see when various articles where added to the list, so as to remove based on date. Anything else you were looking for? --PresN 16:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

My bad. When I went to edit it, the rest of the project page didn't turn up. That's why I thought I wasn't editing right (I didn't want to delete the project page). I guess I'll just save it anyway and hope it works. Also, I thought some of the games in the CVG review were missing because they were not in any order (alphabetical, by date or otherwise). Is there reason for that? If not, I'll help organize it (Oh by the way Gundam: Battle Assault was just added today. I'll try to add it on).--Clyde Miller 18:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I did it the way you explained and I still can't reach content. I tried from the portal and it doesn't show up as a box. Is this right? --Clyde Miller 19:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I mucked around with the box, and added G:BA. Here's a quick tutorial!

On the main page, hit the edit button that's inside of the box.

You should have an edit page that has nothing to do with the contents of the box.

The link in your browser should be yada yada yada?title=Template:Gamebox&action=edit

Change that to yada yada yada?title=Template:Gamebox_contents&action=edit and hit enter

Now you're in the edit page for the box contents (hurts the eyes to read, frankly)

The discussion, template, edit and history buttons should go to the contents now, rather than the box template.

Oh, and if you hit template, it'l have the contents, but they won't be in a box- each page that links to the box formats it in the way it wants, that's why the portal makes it look different than at the main page. --PresN 19:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Try this link and add it to your watchlist: Template:Gamebox contents. --SevereTireDamage 20:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I got it. Thanks to both of you (I got it to work both ways) and I'm watching the page. Oh, and thanks for adding G:BA PresN. --Clyde Miller 23:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

So I've been trying to sort some cvg stubs tonight, but I've been noticing that it's very difficult to place games like American Idol (video game) and Dance:UK into relevant categories - none exist that seem to fit them nicely. Since rhythm/music games make up a fairly large genre, is there room for a music-cvg-stub to be created, to put on these articles? RandyWang (^{chat me up}/_{fix me up}) 08:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. This stub could also be used for game albums and tracks as well. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 09:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, cool. I've requested the stub here, and will create it if there are no problems. RandyWang (^{chat me up}/_{fix me up}) 12:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

2 things about the video game cover tag:

1. It currently accepts up to 3 platforms to categorize an image under, perfect for multiplatform titles. ex: Image:Ypp box art.jpg.
2. I'd like to move it to {{game-cover}}, but first an admin needs to edit the upload tag list to reflect this (I moved it back after I remembered this).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by CyberSkull (talk • contribs)

Wha-da-wha? Please, explain in a little more detail. I think you're saying that there's a video game cover tag, which you feel is better than the current game-cover tag, and you'd like an admin to adjust the game-cover one so it matches the video game cover tag? Am I catching this right? --PresN 17:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe CyberSkull means that {{gamecover}} should be moved to {{game-cover}}, to follow the same format all the other cvg tags do (with the hyphen seperating the words). I will be happy to fix the upload tag list when you're ready to make the move, CyberSkull. Robert 17:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, I'm assuming I'd have to move it in order to delete the redirect, but wouldn't it be more beneficial to keep it as {{gamecover}} so as to be consistent with the other cover templates, such as {{bookcover}}, {{DVDcover}}, {{magazinecover}}, etc? Robert 20:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

There is no issue with the actual move. I moved it back no problem because I realized {{gamecover}} is on the upload list and I cannot modify it. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I forgot that non-sysops can revert moves. In any case, I went ahead and edited the upload list, so feel free to move it now. Robert 12:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)