This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.
hi there, i'm looking to get hold of reviews of 'g-police' for the purpose of rewriting its article, if it's not too much trouble. the playstation version is in E51 and pc version in E55. if there's no significant differences, the playstation version is fine (though i suspect there might be something to do with controls or graphics). anything you know of pertaining to the game's development (such as previews, bits of news) would also be appreciated. the sequel, 'g-police: weapons of justice' is reviewed in E75; it would be handy to know the general sentiments on how it compares to 'g-police', again if its not too much hassle.
Bridies (
talk) 13:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
GTA games
I'm sure there were 11? or do the expansions for 1 and 2 not count?
John Hayestalk 00:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Fine, I just remember it used to be 11, and I saw those edits between 6 and 9.
John Hayestalk 09:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Just noting your edit summary on GTAIV we can't really go for GA until a while after it has come out as there will be lots of changes.
John Hayestalk 16:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
could you elucidate? I was unable to find the comment you were referring to.
xenocidic (
talk) 16:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for elaborating. I changed the lead sentence a bit as it didn't make sense that Microsoft would be announcing a game would be available for Xbox 360 "and" PlayStation 360.
xenocidic (
talk) 17:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm do think that it should be mentioned in the header, otherwise at a quick glance it will look like all platforms will have episodic content.
xenocidic (
talk) 17:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
GTA
Quick comment. If it is eleven including mission packs and nine without, do we class mission packs as a game if they do change the game, i.e. GTA:London? Might be easier to say eleventh installment or something. Not major, just noticed the comment you made and the change. If you said it had 21 installments I'd be suspicious but not really know for sure, I never followed the earlier ones that well.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 23:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. I wouldn't consider Fable: THe Lost Chapters to be a separate game either.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk) 23:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Magazine Request
Hello. I am looking for a review of the game Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge from the magazine Edge; the archive stated it was in issue E131, which would be the Christmas issue. It would be very helpful, thank you.
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 15:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Not that there is any pressing need, but it has been nearly three weeks, w/o comment, and I would like to know if you can't find the issue or when you could get back to me w/ the review. —
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 23:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It's totally all right, I'm not in any particular rush. (I did, however, ask someone else for the review, so I guess I'll apologize for not being too patient.) I will, however take you up on your offer to get the original review, if it's not too much trouble; the text is just a bit too positive to be a 7/10. --
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 21:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Got it. Does the review come with a caption?--
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 19:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Wait, one more thing. The ref provided says "Page=1117." Is that a typo? --
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 19:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I meant like a caption to a screen or photo, like I've seen in a few other magazine reviews. This review might not have one, but just wanted to make sure. --
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 20:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
The Japanese version is different from the American, so I added both.
HalfShadow (
talk) 23:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Please edit the TF2 page to indicate that the Demoman drinks scrumpy cider. After all, when you smash the bottle over someone's head he says "Aye, me bottle of scrumpy!" —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Purerizzo (
talk •
contribs) 22:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Another magazine request
Hi -- hopefully you're not so sick of magazine requests that you've given up on them. :P There are a few Edge articles I'm looking for: first, their review of God Hand (December 2006, issue 169, with the Hylian Shield on the cover), and their preview of God Hand (August 2006, issue 165). Also -- and I believe this is in their December 2002 issue (issue 117) -- they handed out "retrospective" 10/10 scores for Super Mario Bros., Elite, and Exile. If they have a write-up for the Super Mario Bros. score, could you get that as well please? If it isn't in December 2002, it should be in Christmas 2002. I'll provide you with contact details upon reply. I appreciate your help and the work you've already done for wikiproject video games/magazines.
Tristam (
talk) 09:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
That's excellent, thanks! And really, actual scans are not necessary -- text transcriptions would perfectly suffice and are preferred if that is quicker. My first priority is the Super Mario Bros. retrospective review article (second is the God Hand review). Thanks again! You're doing game enthusiasts a great service -- many of these old Edge issues are hard to come by, even on eBay. --
Tristam (
talk) 23:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: I was able to track down the God Hand review in issue 169, so all I really need is the Super Mario Bros. retrospective review. Thanks! --
Tristam (
talk) 00:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
That's perfectly alright! I appreciate your help. At any rate, I wish I was surer which issue it was in -- when I said December 2002 issue, I was simply going by Wikipedia's own
Edge (magazine) article. It may well be a special edition (by the way, what notation are you using with E1-100? What do those numbers stand for?). Perhaps it's either "Retro: The Guide to Classic Videogame Playing and Collection" or "Retro: The Making Of... Special." Now I did find the latter on eBay and saved a picture of the front cover; I didn't buy it because the front cover lists off a bunch of old, influential games (Spacewar!, Tetris, Asteroids, Street Fighter II, even Sonic the Hedgehog), but no mention of Super Mario Bros.! The kicker is that it even lists Elite and Exile among them, but I'd be amazed if they listed off all those games without making a mention of Super Mario Bros. if it was among 3 different games to get a retroactive 10/10 score. Anyway, thanks again for your help and if you ever stumble across this elusive issue I'd appreciate it if you could fire up the scanner. :) --
Tristam (
talk) 23:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Based in
Thanks for adding the based in category in the magazine template. Much appreciated :-)
Timbouctou (
talk) 04:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Magazine Request, EDGE May 2004?
Hi. I was wondering if you could verify whether the May 2004 issue had a Hideo Kojima interview that was transcribed
here and if it is accurate.
Hahnchen suggested that you may have this issue. Thanks!
Strongsauce (
talk) 22:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey thanks for that info. Do you happen to have the author of the article? Also is it the May 2004 issue?
Strongsauce (
talk) 02:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Quantum of Solace
Thanks, I was never great at maths.
Alientraveller (
talk) 10:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
RP is indeed a rating
Okay, I'm going to have to nip this one in the bud. RP is indeed an official, copyrighted rating of the ESRB. You cannot put an RP rating on anything without explicit permission from the ESRB. In other words, the company must take the trouble to ask permission from the board to put the RP there. This isn't like an
X-Rating, which anyone can use because it's not copyrighted by the MPAA (in contrast, no one can use an
NC-17 rating without permiission because it IS copyrighted by the MPAA.) If you need me to go directly to the ESRB to have them explain this to you, I can do so, especially since I'm a co-worker of
Jerry Bonner.
RATING PENDING Titles listed as RP (Rating Pending) have been submitted to the ESRB and are awaiting final rating.
”
Here's the thing though - you can only put RP on the product if the publisher lists the RP. If it doesn't, then it's not RP. (An example of this is
Spore, which has the RP rating badge on the site.)
JAF1970 (
talk) 04:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
RP is not a rating. There's no actual way to prove whether or not a game has indeed been submitted to the ESRB for classification (as X201 has pointed out since RP is not included in the ESRB database). With
WP:NOT in mind, RP is merely a symbol used by advertisers but it's not an actual rating. I see the RP symbol as more of a placeholder template for the convenience of gaming companies (so they'll have an idea of where to place the rating on websites/advertising/game covers once the actual rating is available).
Sillygostly (
talk) 06:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Note to Sillygostly: Companies actually have to PAY the ESRB to get the RP badge when they submit games as part of the fee. IT IS A RATING. I'm right, you're wrong. Period. End of story.
JAF1970 (
talk) 16:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Prove it. Why would a company pay to use a symbol that serves essentially no purpose? Just because you disagree with everything that I say, it doesn't make me wrong.
Sillygostly (
talk) 08:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there any reason you two are bickering on this talk page? --
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 01:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Re: Seeing as you found it...
Thank you very much for the barnstar. It's always nice receiving one. You're right, they should be given out more often. That's something that will hopefully start happening in the near future. (
Guyinblack25talk 20:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC))
Hey fellow member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Magazines;-) Is there any chance of me getting the Super Smash Bros. Melee review from Issue 106? Cheers.
AshnardTalkContribs 15:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I've got it and there's been no problems. Thank you.
AshnardTalkContribs 19:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry that I forgot to ask this, but could you please specify the page numbers? Also, is an individual reviewer specified here? Thanks.
AshnardTalkContribs 20:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Well? If you miraculously don't have the answers to them questions, then just state that please.
AshnardTalkContribs 07:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
My abrupt manner was intentional. I guess I'm a bit stressed at the moment.
AshnardTalkContribs 12:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, X201. I've finished all the items on the checklist the GA reviewer set out on the
talk page for the Sega Mega Drive article, but I'm not sure the article is ready for another look by the reviewer. Since you and I both fixed this article, can you look over it? I'm not going to tell the reviewer it's done until you approve, too. The talk page has the checklist and a little commentary by me on what I've done about some of the issues, so you may want to read over that first. Thanks.
RedPhoenix (
Talk) 19:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Mega Drive
Sorry I wasn't on the last couple of days, I just read my talk page messages since I was off for this weekend. Anyway, I'm a little disappointed Noj r didn't give us this list of reference issues and let us have the rest of the hold time to fix it. But I've got some direction to go in now, and I'll get working on it. I'm pretty busy with a lot of articles right now as part of my work with
WikiProject Sega, including another good article nominee, but I'll put some work into the references (probably format the list as a checklist and mark them off one by one) and finish it. Then maybe we can put it up again a third time. I think if the references are cleaned up and more work goes into the sourcing, we could have an FA on our hands.
RedPhoenix (
Talk) 16:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The lead is one of the most important parts of any Wikipedia article; its job to summarize the article in 2 to 3 paragraphs in order to familiarize the reader with the structure of the content that you will providing them as well as to give a quick one-minute overview of the topic. Many articles that are processed through
Good Article or
Featured Article assessments will be heavily scrutinized for a poor lead section.
For articles dealing with video games, a common practice has developed for leads, being a 3-paragraph discussion.
First paragraph
The first paragraph should state the name of the game (using both bold (to identify the article's name) and italics as per the manual of style), along with any other alternate names the game may go by. The genre of the game should be clearly identified as well as the developer and the publisher. If a notable person has been cited by the game as having worked on the game's development (such as
Tim Schafer or
David Jaffe), this should also be noted. Release dates should be given, along with the release of any ports, remakes, or sequels.
Second paragraph
The second paragraph should summarize the plot briefly in one or two sentences; a high level overview is only needed to set the stage for further discussion. One or two sentences should be included to discuss the gameplay, including any notable features of the game.
Third paragraph
The third paragraph should cover the reception of the game, citing its general critical reaction and any significantly notable successful or failing elements in the game. If the game has won awards, this aspect can be noted, but specific mention of any award is discouraged.
This approach should help you to write a good lead for nearly any game, though this may need to be altered for other games. If there's not a lot of reception information for a game, it may be worthwhile to combine the listed first and third paragraphs into one paragraph. There may be need to talk more about an aspect not normally covered in video game articles (such as with E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (Atari 2600)) which should be noted in the lead.
Hi, I was wondering why you
removed the sidebar from the magazines talk page. Isn't it convenient to have all the WP:VG pages linked up together?
JACOPLANE • 2008-04-11 08:02
Falling under a bus
It is not entirely unambiguous on which side of the Atlantic you find yourself, but here in the good old US of A, I've often heard—and said—things like, "If Bill gets hit by a bus, we're in dire straits." If I understood your posting in Reference desk/Language, your "fall under a bus" means the same thing as my "hit by a bus," namely, "Should Bill suddenly become unavailable for any reason, then..." Am I right that these two similar bus mishaps have the same semantic content?—
PaulTanenbaum (
talk) 01:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
GTAIV - Exclusive Episodic Packs for Xbox 360
It is confirmed by both Rockstar and Microsoft that these expansion packs will be exclusive to the Xbox 360. Why do you keep deleting the line? A PS3 fanboy?
Fanboy?. Nope. Wikipedia is about fair and even handed coverage, it isn't on a crusade to support one console more than another. I've grown up enough to know that the only person who lost out by taking sides in previous console wars was myself. I totally missed out on some of the greatest games ever made. I take a wider view of things now, yes, I have a PS3, but as soon as the new 360 motherboards become available in the summer I'll be getting a 360 as well. I've also learnt that in the Video Games industry the one word that means nothing is exclusive, Street Fighter II being a SNES "exclusive" until it appeared on the Mege Drive, Viewtiful Joe was a Gamecube "exclusive" until it appeared on the PS2.
The section headings on the were set simply as Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 to be fair to both consoles. By just having the console names it shows that Wikipedia doesn't favour one console over another. Both have their names as the section heading and the very first thing mentioned in the Xbox section is the exclusive content.
I hope this has explained the reason for you, if not please contact me. -
X201 (
talk) 16:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Again, read what I said. The Episodic Packs are confirmed by BOTH Rockstar AND Microsoft to be exlcusive to the Xbox 360. You don't want the world to know that and you keep deleting it. There was a similar act committed by this other guy on Wiki who kept editing the Final Fantasy 13 page and said the game is a multi-platform game. Distort the truth again and I will have you reported and banned from editing wiki.
First, please don't threaten people, it's not nice. I know that they are exclusive, it's in the article both the leader and the 360 sub-section, it doesn't need to be in the sub-section title. Please raise this on the talk page. -
X201 (
talk) 15:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Question
Just a quick follow-up. When you sent me the Edge review for the Crimson Skies PC game (Issue 91), you said the review was on page 1117. Is that a typo? --
Hydrokinetics12 (
talk) 16:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, ok. Thanks for letting me know. I'll go and fix that now if it hasn't been done already. ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 09:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Removing Disputed Fair-Use tag
Please refrain from removing {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}} without resolving the issue, as you did on
Image:GTAIV in-game screenshot.png. If you haven't yet read
WP:NFURG, you should give it a read. In a nutshell, each use of an image must have a unique (to a degree) non-free use rationale. Having two {{Information}} tags followed by one rationale does not count. If templates are going to be used, it's best to use two {{Non-free use rationale}}. If you have any other questions, please contact me, on my user talk.
Cavenbame parlez 15:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
It was the information template that threw me. Full reply on your page -
X201 (
talk) 15:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, they're pretty similar but have some important differences. Also, sorry if I appeared to harsh, I just can't stand policy vios.
Cavenbame parlez 15:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Sega Mega Drive GA
Thanks so much for the barnstar, X201. I really appreciate it. Anyway, about those references if we make an eventual push... if you read the peer review, Anomie mentions sources 9 and 11 (now 10 and 12 in the current form) as being questionable. I asked at
WP:VG/S, the Video Games project talk page, and
WP:RS/N, and I never got any response about it other than "I don't know". I think our GA reviewers thought it was ok (the first, who was the real stickler on references, just wanted some author and copyright info added), so we'll see. I've never pushed an article to FA status, having just completed my first GA—I got
Crush 40 to GA a couple of days ago, this is my second GA. Anyway, this article is probably close, so what would we need for an FA push? You can reply here or on my talk page, I'll leave that up to you.
Red Phoenixflame of life...protector of all... 03:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this message is in response to your edit of removing Euphoria. Even though you may be a classic gamer, Euphoria is not only an Engine, it's in the video game! I am sorry if you may have made a mistake. Although you may not like it, the 3 revert rule, violations to this rule may result in a block :*(. Just let it go, it's not worth a block, dude.
Ellomate (
talk) 21:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
If you look through the history of the article you'll find that I was the first person to add Euphoria to the Engine section of the Infobox, it was removed by another editor, after that I pondered the situation "Should every piece of middleware be listed in the Engine box?" If yes it means that we have to add Image Metrics to GTA IV, we have to add Havok to almost all Valve software, where do we draw the line as to what is and isn't allowable in the engine box? How big a part does a pice of middleware have to play in a game to earn it a place in the Infobox?. It's a question I've been meaning to raise at the Wikiproject for a while. -
X201 (
talk) 09:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Just hoping...
The magazines page says you have a full set of Edge, I don't know if you have issues this far back, but worth a question: E4 of Edge c. 1993, the Myst for Mac review?
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (
talk) 17:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and since I've decided to just run with the theme, do you have issue E52, the review for Riven?
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (
talk) 23:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
The Gameplay section is a crucial component of a good video game article. Although it may be relatively easy for an experienced gamer to write such a section, care must be taken to maintain an appropriate focus and balance. The section should be written for readers with little or no knowledge of video gaming and should not be filled with detailed information about weapons, levels, or other such topics that are only of interest to the video gamer or that might be found in a
game guide. Your goal for crafting a good section is to have people who have never picked up the game understand the basic mechanics. Do note, however, that it's safe to assume the reader has at least a minor knowledge of what a video game is.
This section often begins the body text after the lead, but is sometimes placed after the Plot section. Games with little or no story can cover the plot in the Gameplay section. When writing about a game, use your head and common sense about the ordering. Generally, start off with a broad stroke—is the game a
RTS or an
FPS, etc. Don't talk about why the gameplay is like it is; generally, that is better placed in the 'Development' section later on in the article.
Images can be added to better illustrate some aspects of gameplay. Generally, a single screenshot will suffice. Because of screenshots are
non-free content, usage should be minimalised. Multiple images can be used, but all images should add something to the article beyond what the prose states. All non-free images require a
fair use rationale to be used on Wikipedia.
Things to remember
Don't add in
cruft about weapons, levels, and minute details of trivia; gameplay sections should serve as a primer to the game, not an exhaustive list of every facet of the game.
Don't use gaming jargon which can be confusing to readers, such as "NPC" or "MMORPG". If you use these terms, state the full name and the abbreviation the first time it appears. For example, "Halo is a first-person shooter, or FPS."
Wikilink! So you don't have to describe what a god game is,
link it.
Talk about what makes the game different from others; if you only talk about why StarCraft is a real-time strategy game, then readers could just visit the article about the game genre and be better served.
Hi there. The
Blade Runner (video game) article has just been nominated for a
peer review. The article has gone through some major changes in the last month, and it would be appreciated if an editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the article. If you are interested in joining the peer review discussion, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help
Wikipedia:Peer review/Blade Runner (video game)/archive1. -
Nreive (
talk) 11:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Development content is very important to include in an encyclopedic video game article. It provides a history of how the game came to be and provides real world information needed for an article to claim comprehensiveness. However, writing this section can be difficult because the amount and type of information available will vary for each game. One of the best sources for such information is a developer interview. These can provide insight into the thought process of the designers and give examples of influences and obstacles encountered. Previews can also be helpful by giving a snap shot of the game before it was released and may mention development issues that were still being addressed.
When writing about development, common sense should be used to organize content to maintain a sense of flow for the reader. Most times, it is best to give the information in a somewhat chronological order—though information can also be grouped by topics like audio, promotion, graphics, etc. If one such topic gets large enough, it can be split off into its own subsection or regular section. For example,
Kingdom Hearts#Audio is a separate section from the rest of the development information because it focuses on the game's musical score and voice acting.
Portal (video game)#Soundtrack, however, does not have as much content and is a subsection of the main development section.
What to include about development
Who are the developers? Which company or studio developed the game, and are there any prominent designers involved?
When did development begin?
When and where was the game first announced? (e.g.
Tokyo Game Show,
E3 Media and Business Summit, etc.)
What influenced the game's story, characters, music, and/or gameplay ? (e.g. past games, movies, books, etc.)
Were there any delays?
Was anything excluded because of time or technological constraints? (e.g. extra levels, game modes, characters, story arcs, etc.)
Things to remember
Avoid
proseline. Though maintaining a sense to chronology is important, this section should not read like an ordered list of events.
Images in this section should be relevant to the information given and should add on to it.
Source everything to avoid information being tagged as
original research.
In many video game articles, the Reception section is the last main section of prose. As its name suggests, within the section you should summarize the critical reaction to the game. The section should provide a high-level overview of what the critics liked and didn’t like about the game; it is a summary, not a repetition of what publications thought. Therefore, don’t put in excessive, long winded quotes or have a paragraph detailing IGN’s thoughts on the game. To prevent cluttering of the prose with scores, reviews table such as {{VG Reviews}} can be used to organize this kind of information.
A good way to lead off the section is a by-the-numbers or at a glance snapshot of the game’s reception; you can use aggregate scores to suggest an overall critical response to the game, and can provide sales figures (if you have them) for the game’s release. Commonly, the rest of the reception is broken into positive and negative paragraphs. Entirely separate ‘Praise’ and ‘Controversy’ or ‘Negative comments’ or the like are strongly discouraged as troll magnets. If the game has won any awards, then listing them at the bottom of the reception section is an option.
Other things to remember:
Don’t list every single review in the reviews table; likewise, don’t mention every award the game has ever gotten.
Generally, talk about what the reviewers say rather than speaking for them; for example, “Reviewer X of Publication Y took issue with elements of the game such as X, Y, and Z” instead of “Review X said that “I took issue with elements of the game such as X, Y, and Z.” If a reviewer has a good comment which sums up the positive/negative/overall reaction, or a particular sentiment common in many reviews, it might be more appropriate to use.
If adding sales data, make sure to provide context; did it sell those 4.2 million units within three months of release or three years? If possible, break down the sales by region; did the Japanese like the game, but Americans not buy it?
Use reviews whose scores are outliers from the average ratings to find key points that were liked or disliked about a game. If all reviews except for one average around a 9 out of 10, and the one is a 7 out of 10, there is probably some clear negative points to be found in it; the same works with very positive reviews.
Perhaps most importantly, give proper weight and keep a neutral point of view. If the game received mostly negative scores, having three paragraphs on positive aspects and glossing over the bad parts in a sentence or two conveys the wrong impression to readers.
I still think a compromised title would've been better than one or the other for the console article, but I don't think we're going to get that with people citing against policy or opposing it outright. :\ --
Kung Fu Man (
talk) 16:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
SOCOM II
I wanted to thank you for helping with the SOCOM II article. I was prevented from editing on the article again, and that guy kept on adding OR. Thank you!
I'm trying to source the reception section of
World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade, and I'm wondering if there's a review from EDGE around January 2007 that I might be able to get some information from. I'm not sure if they did a review (I can't find any information anywhere) but if they did it'd be great to include it. Many thanks, Gazimoff 15:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
For helping to right the Reception section of
WALL-E (video game). Thatnks, and cheers.
Gearsof War2 19:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Magazine Request for Cool Beans Productions
Are you able to help with a magazine article requirest from issue 95 - 2001 March for
Cool Beans Productions. I recently started a stub and it needs expanding. -
Shiftchange (
talk) 01:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes I got your email with scans. Thanks again, very useful info, should be included in the article within a week. -
Shiftchange (
talk) 21:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The list of almost 700 articles has been checked and updated. Special thanks to
MrKIA11,
Dukeruckley,
JFlav,
FMF, and several other editors for checking the large number of articles.
Inactive project cleanup Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found
here.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Indie Game Developers
deleted.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Arcade games moved to page under
WP:VG. See new
Arcade task force page.
Feature: Reliable Sources
A common issue with writing video games articles is that it's often natural for editors to turn to the internet for all their information. However, using only online sources can be problematic, especially if editors are not familiar with Wikipedia's sources guidelines. First off, for every notable, reliable web site about gaming that exists on the web, there are twenty-five fan sites or personal blogs. As per Wikipedia's, content guideline about
reliable sources, a proper source that should be used in an article must meet the following criteria:
Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.
How do you determine if website X meets the criteria? Look around for information on who owns the website or if the website has a staff and established editorial processes; if the site doesn't have information posted online, send an email to the webmaster or editor. It can be hard to definitely prove the a website has a "reputation" for accuracy. Thus, it's probably easier to go with established sites to begin with, such as
IGN or
GameSpot. If you use a source with borderline qualifications, be prepared to justify the site at content review or to other editors. WikiProject Video Games has a partially-complete listing of vetted sources in print or online at
Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources, as well as more detailed information on what constitutes a reliable source.
To find sources on the internet, checking
Google News as well as simple web searches can help spot references you might have missed. Often, however, older news articles are locked behind pay gates or subscription services. A workaround is using a service like
ProQuest or
LexisNexis, although unless you have access to these through a college or education institution it will likely cost you money regardless. Libraries can have old newspapers and copies of magazines; to assist in finding print sources online, WikiProject Video Games has a
Magazines Department where you can contact users to get copies of certain reviews, previews, or features from old magazines. If you have gaming magazines of your own, add yourself to the list!
Newsletter delivery by
xenobot 22:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Image:Mybuzz logo.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,
Image:Mybuzz logo.png, has been listed at
Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the
discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 22:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: Edge, Sam & Max
Ok, got them. I hopefully now have enough to construct a critical reception section. Thanks. --
Sabre (
talk) 18:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Brothers in Arms - Hells Highway 300x351.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brothers in Arms - Hells Highway 300x351.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.
BJBot (
talk) 05:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind me doing this, but I've noticed you are pretty active on gaming related articles and since we've never had any contact with each other that I'm aware of, I was wondering if you'd mind being a neutral third opinion regarding this matter
[2]?
Nar Matteru (
talk) 04:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Infobox Magazine Fix
Just wanted to say thanks for the template fix
Lwangaman (
talk) 14:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thanks
Cool, thanks a lot for the help with the table on my user page. It looks a lot better. Now that I see how it's done, I can play around with customizing it some more later. Much appreciated! --
Jack-A-Roe (
talk) 16:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:LittleBigPlanetOfficialUKBoxArt.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:LittleBigPlanetOfficialUKBoxArt.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.
BJBot (
talk) 05:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: Images
Hey, no problem. Thanks
Salavat (
talk) 08:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Special note: The naming convention for the newsletter has altered. Instead of being labeled the month it is delivered, it is now labeled the month the content applies to. See
discussion.
Assessment Department: This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's video games articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the
WP:1.0 program, and more specifically in the Video games essential articles page.
Two new quality ratings have been implemented into the Assessment Department's scale. The new Wikipedia-wide C-Class rating (see
category) has been added to the scale between Start-Class and B-Class. Because of this, the criteria of the B-Class has been tweaked to better illustrate the difference between a B-Class and C-Class article. An older rating, List-Class (see
category), has been added to the scale as well. It is mainly used on pages that have very little prose and are primarily tables and lists of information.
Editors are encouraged to
submit articles for assessment if they feel an article has made significant progress up the assessment scale or has gained importance within video game articles. Assessed articles generally receive some feedback to further improve the article. Experienced editors are also encouraged to help with assessment of articles when the number of requests gets too large.
Peer Review Department: The Peer review process for
WikiProject Video games exposes video-game-related articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a
Featured article candidate. It is not a
academic peer review by a group of experts in a particular subject, and articles that undergo this process should not be assumed to have greater authority than any other.
Editors are encouraged to use the Video game peer review process, as well as the
regular Wikipedia-wide process, to improve the quality of articles. While a peer review can be done at any time, it strongly suggested to use this process before an article goes up for
Good article nomination and
Featured article or
Feature list candidacy as articles cannot be a candidate for GA or FA while at peer review.
Editors are also encouraged to leave feedback for articles undergoing peer review. A process such as this will not work if editors do not give as well as take. Feedback can range from brief comments after skimming through a page to a full blown dissection of grammar, structure, and references. Either way, every bit helps.
Newsletter delivery by
xenobot 01:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Video game magazine request
Hello there. I saw you post on
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Magazines and so thought that you might have a copy of a particular games magazine. I am looking for the March 2005 issue of PC Gamer (UK) for use as a reference in the
Awards and reviews section of the
Europa Barbarorum article. If you did have a copy and could provide me with details of it, that would be very much appreciated.
It Is Me Here (
talk) 09:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
LittleBigPlanet - ENGVAR
Hi. I notice you just reverted your own edit on the talk page to use the green div instead of the template. I was going to suggest we do this anyway as it's a lot more visible. The template gets a bit lost amongst the other headings. Do you plan to leave it this way? ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 13:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Yep, the wording of the template seems poor and might give people ideas. If you know what I mean. -
X201 (
talk) 13:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I do "know what you mean" but I agree. It made it sound as if the article was written my a bunch of purist Englishmen. Also, I think the Union flag is a bit much! ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 14:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
PSN
Hi. Don't like to talk non-WP but we run into each other a lot here and it looks like we play some of the same games. Feel free to add me on PSN. My ID is on my user page. You can delete this now you've read it if you like. ;) ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 10:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
OK. Will do. Do you want this deleted. I'll leave it here otherwise. -
X201 (
talk) 11:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not bothered. I just thought you might not want your talk page cluttered-up with non-Wikipedia stuff :) . Your call. ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 11:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi,It's nice to you to answer my question please!!
Q:Is there anything from pork in orbit chewing gum?
I have a question!! Is there anything from pork in orbit chewing gum? please if you know tell me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haminik (talk • contribs) 08:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
You'd be better off asking this at the Reference Desk - X201 (talk) 09:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
39 of 393 articles have been prepared and submitted. Come help us prepare more at the
workshop page.
Feature: Wikipedia 0.7
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of articles taken from the English version of Wikipedia, compiled by the
Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is designed for a DVD release, and the selection was put together using a
Selection Bot, based on the quality and importance assigned by WikiProjects.
The Video games Project and its daughter projects have multiple articles among the selection and are currently working on cleaning up the articles to improve their presentation. A
workshop page has been set up that is designed to assist and coordinate the effort. The status of and recommendations for articles is listed on the table. Discussion about which articles should be kept and removed from the list have been taking place on the
talk page.
If you have assisted in working on and improving a current Featured article, Good article, or A-Class article, please check the workshop page to see if the article is recommended for inclusion.
Articles will need an
id version submitted to ensure it is included. They will also need to be cleaned up if maintenance tags and other issues are present. Participation is not restricted, and if you can assist with the preparation effort, it would be greatly appreciated.
Things to remember for preparation
The workshop page has a notes section for each article. Clean up suggestions have been left for some articles.
Do a light sweep of the article to address any vandalism andclean up tags: citation needed, more references, lengthy plot, etc.
If you need help with an article, post on the
talk page.
Newsletter delivery by
xenobot 12:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
hey!
I added a thing on the LBP talk page, and you wrote in the wrong spot.
MidKnightHunter (
talk) 19:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
er.. no. You created a new discussion header right in the middle of a week-old discussion. -
X201 (
talk) 21:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
James Bond
Please do not revert the changes to the James Bond Films page, a universal table for all bond films is a much better resource than two segments after all, all films listed in that table are bond films, even if they are not licensed by EON
at least revert it so the unofficial table is back down the bottom again, seriously do your job right if your going to do it at all...
seriously it's not like you have to move your mouse much more...—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
115.166.40.234 (
talk) 08:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
PlayStation star
The PlayStation Star
Thanks for all your perseverance and hard work on video game articles, particularly
LittleBigPlanet. Your edits have really helped maintain common sense and integrity in the article amidst a barrage of vandalism and good faith (but inaccurate) edits. And of course you went a long way towards getting it off 'Start' class.
I was going to give you the Video Game Star but I see you already have one! I hope you don't find this patronising, I feel a bit weird giving a barnstar to someone with your number of edits! :) ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 11:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
It's not patronising at all. Its always nice to be acknowledged. Thank you.
Orphaned non-free media (Image:TombRaiderUnderworld.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:TombRaiderUnderworld.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on
criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.
BJBot (
talk) 05:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Ordinal Dates
With reference to your reverting my changes to the BBC page. Why is it Wikipedia policy to remove ordinals from dates? This is an American practice that hasn't been adopted in 'English' English where the established practice is to shorten "the first day of November" to "the 1st of November" or "1st November". Can I suggest that Pages about The United Kingdom, its people or institutions be allowed to use British conventions on Spellings, Grammar, dates and times etc? I have not corrected Americanisms on American related pages but I don't think it unreasonable to allow the Enlish to use their language in the correct way. Smart51. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Smart51 (
talk •
contribs) 08:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia date format was decided upon by users from all countries. The Americans use month/day/year, Britain and most International users use day/month/year and, as I, understand it everyone decided against ordinals. If you disagree with the guidlines you can raise the point at
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) and see if there is consensus for a change to the guidlines.
p.s. I am not American, as is visible by my numerous edits reverting users who have changed the dates in UK articles to US format and changed UK spellings to US ones. -
X201 (
talk) 09:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
PSN for LittleBigPlanet
As a regular contributor to the LittleBigPlanet article, just wondered if you wanted to add me for a game sometime - PSN ID is the same as my Wiki one!
SynergyBlades (
talk) 13:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
For some time now, the Video games project and the
Military history project have been cross listing their articles undergoing peer review in an effort to improve the quality of articles, as well as the copy editing skills of editors. The idea was first proposed by
User:Krator as a way to better prepare articles for
Featured article candidacy. After being approved by both projects, the idea was implemented under a trial period, and eventually approved as a standard practice.
New, cross listed military history articles are announced on the
Video games project talk page, and listed on the
Video games Peer review page under a
special section. Video game editors are encouraged to leave any type of comments that come to mind. If you don't know anything about military history, that's perfectly fine because that's the point. An editor lacking knowledge about the particular topic can provide a helpful point of view as a general reader—the intended audience.
A peer review process such as this will not work if editors do not give as well as take.
Peer reviews are meant to examine not just the prose, but the sources and images used in the article.
Feedback can range from brief comments after skimming through a page to a full blown dissection of grammar, structure, and references. Either way, every bit helps.
Reviewing another editor's article can help sharpen your writing skills, which in turn can improve the articles you write.
Newsletter delivery by
xenobot 16:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
BBC News articles
Hi, I was just wondering whether the BBC News programme articles (i.e. News at One/Six/Ten etc) ought to be semi-protected against new user editing for the time being. As you yourself noted, is persistent or older than a year. I'm not an admin so I can't do this, but I was wondering what you thought and if you agreed?
Lazyduckling (
talk) 16:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about the delayed reply. I've been thinking about compiling a case file for the articles because I think it needs something bigger than just simple protection. I've tried talking to the IP user, they ignore edit summaries and just seem hell bent refusing to accept that the date format should not be in US style. -
X201 (
talk) 09:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I requested semi protection but its still under attack by IP Vandals. I need to leave for now. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Sidonuke (
talk •
contribs) 13:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Article importance is an assessment of a topic's importance in understanding a specific higher level topic. Assessments are maintained by
WikiProjects and reflect the project's view of what is essential to understanding their scope. In the VG Project's case, all importance scales are in terms of understanding
video games.
Recent discussions at the
VG Project's talk page have called for revisions to the practice of assigning article importance. The
discussion began in mid-November with the goal of clarifying what level of importance should be assigned to certain type of articles. It eventually expanded to creating a standardized table of importance to serve as a guide for current and future editors.
The discussion has focused on and shifted to several topics including flaws of previous practices, new ways to view assessment, other project practices to emulate, and specific articles which are exceptions to proposed guidelines. A brief
pole and discussion determined most editors felt that the bulk of some topics—specifically individual video game, series, and character articles—were not essential to understanding video games, making them ineligible for top importance. The discussion then shifted to tweaking the wording and layout of the table.
The current proposed table is being
discussed on the project's talk page, and the
issue of whether some topics—specifically character articles—should be allowed to be rated importance has also been brought up. As always, member are encouraged to voice their opinions and engage in discussion to determine consensus so the new assessment scale can be implemented.
Hi. Haven't seen you around so much lately. You seem to be keeping busy, just not on my watchlist it seems.
Anyway, I've been hanging around the
PlayStation Home article a lot lately and have been watching
Ffgamera's many edits. I know the article still has a long way to go but because I've been looking at the article so much I've sort of lost track of everything. It all seems a bit of a blur with the volume of edits that have been made. If you have time, I was wondering if you could provide a fresh pair of eyes to give it the once over and provide some feedback. Maybe a checklist of what you think needs to be done to get it off Start class? No worries if you're too busy, I'll just submit it for peer review but I thought I'd ask you specifically as I know it's in your area. Cheers. ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs
I've been in "glance at it and point out anything that I think is wrong" mode with it rather than "actually read it and edit it". At a glance it looks like its progressing nicely. I'll have a serious look at it and see if there's anything really wrong with it, but nothing seems to be sticking out like a sore thumb. -
X201 (
talk) 09:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
This page is an
archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.