Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Video games: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 02:21, 13 August 2014 editLucia Black (talk \| contribs)Pending changes reviewers17,382 edits →WP:AN, campaign to get rid of me permanently: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:23, 13 August 2014 edit undoSalvidrim! (talk \| contribs)Edit filter helpers, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors28,655 edits Reverted 1 edit by Lucia Black (talk): Revert WP:CANVASSING. ·Next edit →
Line 218:		Line 218:

	I have started the article for ], as we have some solid sources now, feel free to add any input at the article page. ] (]) 23:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)		I have started the article for ], as we have some solid sources now, feel free to add any input at the article page. ] (]) 23:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

	==WP:AN, campaign to get rid of me permanently==
	I'm tired of this....it bothers me very much that there is always a specific group of admins and members attempting to ban me indefinitely. ] which for some reason, they want to change to an indefinitely site ban. Which really bothers me. I'd like someone to analyze the situation because theres more to this than meets the eye. And i know members have recently been recognizing my good contributions. ] (]) 01:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

	I was advised to bring this up to ] as well. So i'm sorry if this isn't as convenient/beneficial for you all. But i still welcome more opinions. ] (]) 02:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:23, 13 August 2014

This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Project

This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates

List of generation II Pokémon (nom)
Kim Kitsuragi (nom)
Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures (nom)
Ethan Winters (nom)
Fallout: New Vegas (nom)
The Legend of Dragoon (nom)

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

Sun Haven

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates

List of generation II Pokémon (nom)
Kim Kitsuragi (nom)
Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures (nom)
Ethan Winters (nom)
Fallout: New Vegas (nom)
The Legend of Dragoon (nom)

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

Sun Haven

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Shortcut: WT:VG

WikiProject
Video games

Main page

talk

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2014

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 7, No. 2 — 2nd Quarter, 2014
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2014, the project has:

Content

No feature this quarter
Interview: CR4ZE

Project Navigation

VG Project Main pages
- Main project – talk
- Project category – talk
- Portal – talk
VG Project Departments
- Assessment – talk
- Cleanup – talk
- Peer review – talk
- Reference library – talk
- Newsletter – talk
- Video game images – talk

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

Calling all reviewers!

While I'm not too keen on doing reviews, it doesn't mean no one else can't. So let's see what we have in store this time around:

For Featured Articles we have seven on the board: Development of Grand Theft Auto V (nom), Squall Leonhart (nom) , Ancient Trader (nom), Thief II: The Metal Age (nom), Sonic: After the Sequel (nom), Secret of Mana (nom), and Lost Luggage (video game) (nom) while in Featured Lists we have List of Bleach video games (nom) and List of accolades received by Grand Theft Auto V (nom)
We have a Featured Article Review for Midtown Madness (nom) . An important thing to note is that FAR is stalled in general. So this would be very much helpful.
13 Articles nominated at GAN. All of which not being reviewed. Dragon Ball Z: Attack of the Saiyans (nom), Development of Deus Ex (nom), Puzzlejuice (nom) Gasketball (nom), Greg Wohlwend (nom), Saints Row: The Third downloadable content (nom), Enter the Dominatrix (nom), Development of Fez (nom), Resogun (nom) ,Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis (nom), Mikengreg (nom), Mordin Solus (nom), Development of L.A. Noire (nom)
And finally we have three Articles up for Peer Review: Sonic X (rev), Jumping Flash! (rev), Deus Ex (rev)

On the plus side, this is a reminder that we are an efficient group of individuals on this site. Go us. GamerPro64 04:00, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

As for the FACs, Squall's is the most urgent: it doesn't have a single review and I don't feel I'd do a good job as it's on a character. Development of GTAV's sitting pretty at 4 supports, Thief and Sonic: AtS are doing alright with 2, and Secret of Mana and Lost Luggage only have 1, while Ancient Trader has an oppose while Hahc21 hammers things out. Sonic X's peer review I think is the least urgent; I mainly need someone to look over the sources and tell me how (I assume in some way) the Plot section should be condensed. The other two need attention more. Tezero (talk) 04:21, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

If Hahc doesn't come back from his wikibreak soon, Ancient Trader is probably going to be archived. For efficiency's sake, it would probably be best to focus on other articles. I'll hit GTAV with a prose review today or tomorrow, and anyone with experience in character articles (i.e. someone besides me) should review Squall ASAP. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 08:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd hate to see Ancient Trader get archived when the issues are so clear-cut (as opposed to the frequent "get a copyedit"/"find sources that are better in some way"/"read my mind because you're not worth my full attention" comments), so I've done some of them and can keep going if you're okay with it. Tezero (talk) 13:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Go right ahead. I don't think there's any guideline against it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 20:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Where's Hahc? It's been a few days since he supposedly left for Wikimania or whatever. How long does that take? (I can't fix some of the points because I don't know the subject matter or sources like he does.) Tezero (talk) 14:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it's safe to consider AT a dead nom. I expect it to be closed shortly. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd love to get some feedback on List of accolades received by Grand Theft Auto V's FLC, seeing as the peer review was such a roaring success. It's a goal of mine to one day make GTA V a featured topic. CR4ZE (t • c) 05:55, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't usually do lists, but why not; I'll try to take a look tomorrow. (For now I want to finish writing a chapter of a story and then it's off to bed.) It's worth noting that GTAV isn't far from FT status now, so "one day" may come quite soon for you. Tezero (talk) 06:29, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I am taking a look at all the video game articles at FA since I nominated mine, just to make things fair. I will be doing After the Sequel next. Taylor Trescott - + _{my edits} 15:49, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll be happy to take some of those GA reviews. If anyone has any requests I can always review them? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll take on the Development of Deus Ex. I need a break from doing article revisions. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:58, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

More reviews of Thief II would be greatly appreciated. I know lengthier articles aren't the most attractive review projects, but the nom's sitting with just 2 supports and a comment after almost a month. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Lost Luggage just needs a source review and it is good to go. Indrian (talk) 21:54, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Sonic: AtS has a cool four supports with zero opposes or remaining comments, but it does still need an image and source review. I'll take a crack at Lost Luggage's. Tezero (talk) 15:28, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Look needed: Tales series

I've been doing extensive work on the article, the latest in several large pieces of editing. Can someone take a look a see what class the article is at at the moment? --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:34, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

B-class, definitely. My only major concern from a very quick look is that History could be expanded. Tezero (talk) 22:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. You took what I had done and really took it to the next level. Thanks ProtoDrake. Sergecross73 msg me 22:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Marge Be Not Proud GAR

Marge Be Not Proud, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GamerPro64 20:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

This is a stretch.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 00:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I know. Just slapped this notification on here just because its tagged for this project on its talk page. Personally, I don't think it should be part of the project. GamerPro64 00:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Tezero tagged it this morning for the project, and added it to our good articles page; I also disagree that it's a VG article but not strenuously enough to do anything about it. --Pres N 01:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Eh, remove it if you want. I figured, if Wreck-It Ralph is in our scope despite real video game characters having only an ephemeral presence, why not this? (Mario, Sonic, and I don't remember who else appear in one of Bart's visions.) Tezero (talk) 02:03, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

So all media that features video games is within this project's scope?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:40, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

...Well, that isn't quite what I meant, but actually, why not? I mean, as long as it isn't just, say, a Pong machine appearing in the background of one scene of a That '70s Show episode. We are WikiProject Video games. Tezero (talk) 16:03, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I find that Wreck-It Ralph be have more merit to be part of the project than this Simpsons episode. The movie is about a video game character and has actual characters from video games in it too. In "Marge Not Be Proud", the use of the video game is just a plot device. GamerPro64 15:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

The pervasive video game setting of Wreck-It Ralph could be the key factor, but as I said, existing video game characters don't have much more of a presence in that film than in this episode. It's just short cameos in either case. Tezero (talk) 16:03, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Duplicate article weirdness

While editing, I stumbled upon this: EA Los Angeles and EALA. I have no idea why this happened, or how to fix it, so I figured it should be mentioned here. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Probably the work of my evil twin, Zetero. She loves driving hapless Wikipedians to madness through bizarre stunts like this. Sometimes I wonder if half of Misplaced Pages's users are her socks or extremely convincing bots she's set up. All par for the course for a Mario fan, of course - last I checked she hadn't eaten anything but mushrooms in years. Tezero (talk) 06:14, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Redirected EALA to EA Los Angeles. The article expander (Akatkin) copied what he wrote in the latter to the former for some odd reason. 23W 06:15, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I reverted to the last viable version, a disambiguation, and added other uses of the acronym. I think it could be moved to EALA (disambiguation) and a new EALA created to redirect to EA Los Angeles with a hatnote since it seems to be the primary topic. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

While you're on the subject, a brand new user has prodded Iron Warriors: T-72 Tank Commander after creating an almost identical article with a different name. It's all good-faith stuff but there's some sort of fix needed and attribution issues as well. Would try to fix myself but don't know what the hell to do and haven't the time to learn. MarvellousMeatpuppet (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

System Shock TFA

System Shock is likely going to run on the main page on Sept. 22nd, to mark it's 20th anniversary of release. The article needs a copy edit and various improvements. It would be appreciated if anyone were to give it a look over. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Feedback request - Path of Exile vs. permanent death

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Permanent_death#rfc_ADF653E. Please help us determine whether of not Path of Exile belongs on the list of games featuring permanent death. Thanks. I really need that username (talk) 19:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)Template:Z48

Mass Effect chronology

Hello people, I would like to hear some thoughts on Template:Mass Effect chronology as I am considering to list it at Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion. In my opinion, the template has many issues, including original research, fancruft, the fact that most of its pages do not exist or are mere redirects, and redundancy as we already have Template:Mass Effect. Besides that, the template is ridiculously huge and its size will increase further as the series keeps growing. What do you think? Thanks in advance. --Niwi3 (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, we've deleted chronology templates before (eg for Assassin's Creed). If the chronology is the subject of discussion, as the case for Legend of Zelda, a prose section or a separate article may be appropriate. But if users have to guess at the order, it definitely is original research and should be nixed. Particularly at that level of detail (eg with all the extended universe works). --MASEM (t) 20:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Exactly what Masem said. That's really far too excessive to be put into each article. Nomader (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd say add the hide/show contents button & set the template's contents to be hidden by default until we figure out a way to make it more visually appealing. Removing it completely seems even more excessive than keeping it the way it is now. I really need that username (talk) 21:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Original research and fancruft are the two major issues in the template, not its appearance. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

The template contains useful information that the reader might be looking for, and as such is worth preserving in some form. Deleting the whole thing without providing a suitable replacement for it first is something I'd have a hard time justifying, but that's just my two cents. I really need that username (talk) 23:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

It looks like Wikia stuff. There need not be a replacement for it because half of the entries don't exist on Misplaced Pages and it's pretty obvious that 1 is before 2 which is then followed by 3.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 23:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Chronology doesn't always correspond to the order of publication. ME might've been released before ME2, but there's no real way of knowing if the events portrayed in it precede or follow those in its sequel just by looking at the title. And as for the missing articles, who's to say they won't/shouldn't be created at some point in the future? I really need that username (talk) 00:02, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I really agree with Ryulong on this one, there's already a template for all of the Mass Effect universe at the bottom of all of these pages. The chronology order is way too much for an encyclopedic entry. Nomader (talk) 23:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

The form in which the template is preserved can be discussed and a consensus reached. Nobody's saying anything about keeping it exactly the way it is now. At least I hope not. I really need that username (talk) 00:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Don't we have templates for other game series chronologies, like Metroid? Tezero (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

True, but it doesn't include that level of detail (like any outside Metroid manga or comics) and the Metroid series has a number of major installments in it. Mass Effect has three that are easily numbered in order. Is it really necessary to have a list of this kind of detail? Nomader (talk) 00:03, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know. Is it necessary for Misplaced Pages to exist? Some things are just nice to have I guess. On a more serious note, I hope the creator(s) of the template we're planning to delete will be given a chance to weigh in on the dispute before any decision is made. I'm sure they didn't create it the way it is for no reason. I really need that username (talk) 00:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

We are trying to write about video games to the non-video game reader, which means the nitty gritty of the details of the ME chronology - itself not the subject of discussion from other sources - is not helpful for us. But there are plenty of other game wikis where that information can be placed for the game player to read. --MASEM (t) 00:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Really? I thought we were writing for everybody, i.e. both gamers and non-gamers. I really need that username (talk) 02:48, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

But if we're writing for everyone, then that means we should assume that we're writing for folks who only have a basic grasp of what the video game is. You'll notice that even for a series as widely varied as The Legend of Zelda, we list only the video games in the chronology section and even then, the chronology section only exists because of the amount of attention that has been used to discuss it in outside sources. The Metal Gear article also has a similar template but it only lists the video games as well. But with only three major storyline releases which are part of the same trilogy, it only serves to add extra information that can just confuse a layman and really isn't needed. Nomader (talk) 03:05, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

The way I see it, we are mostly gamers writing for non-gamers, recognizing there are sites outside of WP that do a much better job at documenting the gamer's experience for a given game than we could do as an encyclopedia. --MASEM (t) 01:39, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

That being the case, I don't see why it roasts so many behinds to include fan wikis in external links. It's just a provision of more in-depth, though less verifiable, knowledge, bam, gloves off, right? Tezero (talk) 02:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I listed the template at tfd here. Thank you for your feedback. --Niwi3 (talk) 18:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I jut check it's not there.--67.68.22.129 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

mentioning unofficial fan made way of playing an old game

The most popular of the three mentioned "has over 50 players in any given time of day." Meanwhile this article has about a thousand views a day, and the game sold millions of copies. Anyway, I don't want to waste time edit warring with this person. Someone else want to explain to him why this is a bad link to add? Dream Focus 23:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to jump in out of nowhere, but you might mention that this hasn't been covered by secondary sources. And really, that's the pertinent objection here, not the mod not being popular enough. JonTron's YouTube channel has over a million subscribers, but that didn't allow him to survive AfD. Just goes to show that you can't rely on Misplaced Pages for getting a truly accurate picture of the video gaming world, only a five-second glimpse through the periscope of the almighty notable publisher. Tezero (talk) 00:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Tezero's bitterness aside, the basic idea is correct. Whether a reliable third party reports on it is the typical inclusion criteria for this sort of thing. Sergecross73 msg me 00:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

If it is covered by secondary sources (eg such as SCUMM VM being able to play most old LucasArts games, or various emulation platforms for standalone game units), then yes. But if it is a port without any attention by other sources, it's not our place to document it. --MASEM (t) 00:55, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Finding there was an article listing all of the ports at List of Doom source ports, I just put that into the article instead. Dream Focus 02:40, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Mass category changes, Dystopian Fiction versus subcat Dystopian video games

Will someone glance over User:Allen7054's contributions? He's making mass changes to categories and replacing the Dystopian video games category with it's parent. I've fixed several but don't have time to check all of them. It appears this has gone to SPI as a possible sock as well. -- ferret (talk) 01:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Note that Allen7054 is a suspected sockpuppet of CensoredScribe, who was topic banned from making mass changes to fictional categories, later topic banned form making any changes to categories because he was WP:GAMING, and eventually indefinitely blocked for repeated violations of his topic ban. An SPI case has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/CensoredScribe. —Farix (t | c) 02:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto V TFA?

At WP:TFARP I indicated interest to have Grand Theft Auto V as TFA for 17 September 2014, marking its one-year anniversary. Now that requests are open at WP:TFAR, I wonder if it's better to hold off. For one, the upcoming next-gen/PC version could release around that time. There's also System Shock likely to be TFA on 22 September, only five days later, and I'd happily give it to an article whose TFA date is much more significant (20 year release date anniversary). What does everybody else think? CR4ZE (t • c) 09:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd be tempted to hold off based on the next-gen version releasing around then. Sam Walton (talk) 09:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Wait, the next-gen version will be released around then and the article could/will become unstable for a while. - X201 (talk) 10:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Even if System Shock is having the 20 year anniversary of its floppy version (which no one played), Looking Glass still had a TFA just last month. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:11, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games/Requests and its backlog

Most likely there are some potential articles to be made from in requests list, so why not take a look at some of them on here. Would really help out the four year backlog it has accumulated. GamerPro64 00:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Wow. That backlog is huge. I'll start chipping in there on the regular if I have time. Is there any sort of process for deleting requests that are not notable enough? Nomader (talk) 00:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Not really. Usually if someone points out that its not notable I just remove it from the list. GamerPro64 01:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Assassin's Creed games article titles

I was wondering if I could get some input on some of these article titles. Specifically Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Assassin's Creed: Revelations, and Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag. The question is if the colon should be in the title or not. I was wondering what others thought or a way to officially find out. I thought of going to the rating sites (ESRB and PEGI) to see how they are submitted there. I have also checked, for the record, the manuals that come in each of these games and all do not use the colon. (Figured that was an official writing of the title in these). I've been wondering after working on the two new titles, Assassin's Creed Unity and Assassin's Creed Rogue, both of which do not use the colon, and I believe to be correct in not using it. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

What about reviewers and other online articles? I wouldn't really trust official depictions of the title; we could be getting stuff like "ASSASSIN'S CREED™ Brotherhood® ©2010", which is by no stretch of the imagination suitable for Misplaced Pages nor information extractible from it. Tezero (talk) 00:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I think the problem with reviewers is they sometimes use their own formatting, so I may find some with the colon and some without. For films, we have classification sites that are good to check how titles are submitted for ratings, so I didn't know if there might be an equivalent for video games. I can see what review sites give me to start. And just for comparison with the manuals again, I checked my game of Batman: Arkham City, and the formatting throughout does show it with the colon, so I think that may be of some help to see how the Assassin's Creed ones are done. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

We go with what the RS use. From my cursory searches, I say it's right to use the colon with Brotherhood and Revelations, and wrong to use the colon with Unity and Rogue, at least for now. czar ♔ 04:32, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

1Up alert

Attention all editors: 1Up.com appears to have finally ceased to function. Please remember to archive all references. Also, it might be best to treat the original urls as dead. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

WTF? Even archived pages from 1UP don't work. What gives? Tezero (talk) 14:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I went on Archive.org to archive a link involving Deus Ex and it worked. GamerPro64 14:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Archive.org seems to still work with 1up content, but that's just spot checking. --MASEM (t) 14:58, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The archive references are being slow for me, but I haven't actually encountered one not working. It's only the original URLs that aren't working when I try them. --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The one on Pokémon Channel doesn't work. Tezero (talk) 15:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, can confirm, though I see it is archived here (and it is not much of an review in the first place). --MASEM (t) 15:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Well we can hardly use that. From what I remember, Archive.today is now a no-no. I remember having to go through several articles to restore archive references and update urls after a massive deletion of those urls. I was going to try WebCite, but it's down at the moment. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:02, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

It was down for me, too. Nice to know I'm not just nuts or in possession of egregiously poor Internet. Tezero (talk) 16:27, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I've carefully avoided citing 1Up because of its robots.txt exclusion policy, just in case something like this happened. Unfortunately, this is going to cause major problems outside of the handful of articles I've worked on. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The main site appears to be up though some things don't appear to be there like the Pokemon Channel. It it possible that this particular removal is a glitch since not all the remviews are gone.--67.68.22.129 (talk) 03:36, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I can see that since a few weeks ago, almost all the 1UP.com links are dead except the Main Page. Same thing happened with the PALGN website. Since over a month ago, the entire website has ceased to exist altogether. Its game reviews now live on in old archived links. And towards the end of June, the U.S. version of the Official Xbox Magazine website, formerly OXMOnline.com, is now the UK-only TotalXbox.com, with reviews only from Official Xbox Magazine UK! Its U.S. reviews still live on only in archives, but what gives? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

This has happened a lot with other sources in the past. It's the price of editing for a medium that's still in its relative infancy compared to a lot of the other subjects on here. Not much we can do but try to archive as much as we can. Nomader (talk) 03:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

RS question

Would the official blog of the Library of Congress be a RS? It's a blog, which tend to be unreliable, but then again, it's the Library of Congress. This page describes the preservation of an unreleased Duke Nukem game for the PSP titled Duke Nukem: Critical Mass, at the Library of Congress. --benlisquare_T•C•E 09:41, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

If it's officially from the Library of Congress, I don't see why not, as long as you're not using it for in-depth video game information, which they're unlikely to be experts on. (I relish these rare opportunities when I can do the reverse of "such-and-such a video game journalist isn't an RS for talking about government, politics, literature, etc.") Tezero (talk) 14:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

In this specific case, having seen other third-party bits about the discovered game, it's sufficiently fine as an RS. --MASEM (t) 14:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Remember, Misplaced Pages goes by verifiability, not truth. A primary source being corroborated by more reliable sources doesn't make the primary source more of an RS; it means you should use the others. Tezero (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Eurogamer have covered it. Tie the Primary with a secondary. - X201 (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely useable. Some blogs are useable. (Andrisang, Joystiq, Siliconera), its just these non-notable ones run by a random person unheard of person with no credentials in the industry. Library of Congress is obviously not falling in that category. Sergecross73 msg me 16:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Marvelous AQL name change

On July 1, 2014, Marvelous AQL changed their name to simply Marvelous , and the Misplaced Pages page for them should reflect that. I'd do it myself, but Misplaced Pages's rules on image copyrights make zero sense (the Marvelous AQL profile picture says it lacks copyright protection because it "does not meet the threshold of originality", even though it is trademarked by a major company)

If somebody does that for me, I'll edit the rest of the page and any new product released after July 1 to reflect the name change. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Misplaced Pages's copyright rules (well, copyright in general) are complicated and can be pretty overzealous, so I usually refrain from uploading anything. I also updated the article to reflect the new changes, but it's in a pretty bad need of a re-write (seems like it was just copied over from the Japanese article) ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:06, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

The new logo is definitely copyright free; I've moved it to Commons. 23W 00:17, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Merge discussion closure request

Hi there- could someone who was not involved in the discussion (and preferably someone with some experience in these things!) close the merge discussion at Talk:Development of Fez#Why was this split? so that we can have a clear conclusion of the issue? J Milburn (talk) 14:07, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Article Infobox code cleanup

You may remember a tale from many moons ago, about tidying up the template code on articles and removing all of the defunct fields... Well, WikiData have taken what they wanted, and over 1000 user pages have been removed from the category, any possible errors from the way hidden list works have also been removed, as have numerous other potential mine fields. Until now, we're left with an easy to work with category and we're ready to start the clean-up proper. Please trust me on this, I've already edited over 3000 articles during the above preparation and the AWB semi-auto human in the loop way is the best way to do this. There is stuff out there you wouldn't believe, plus having a human look at a low view/edit count article is worthwhile. All of the info and the AWB script is at Template talk:Infobox video game if you want to join in. There is no rush to get this done, take your time with it and enjoy the odd side-journeys it will send you off on. - X201 (talk) 11:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Sourcing guide

I've written a guide to sourcing video game articles, so I thought I'd post it here to get outside input. What do you guys think? And did I miss any research tools? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:08, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

This is pretty good at showing ways to source in our area of articles. Though I do think that some parts of it, like the "Fake It" section", will prove to be controversial. GamerPro64 18:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I've Faked It before. You might add using the table of contents in a Google Book or the Metacritic snippet of a print review as examples - I know I'm not the only one who's done this. Nice job, though. Tezero (talk) 20:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I can't possibly imagine that more than a few dozen (dozen) prolific VG editors have ever "faked it", or left in a pre-existing reference to a source they've never seen in an article they're rewriting, or surreptitiously downloaded scans of magazines. Anyways- great guide! As far as adding to it- for some articles (companies, hardware products) some google scholar searching or lexisnexis/highbeam can turn up some arcane sources- I would have been SOL on List of Sega video game consoles without it. --Pres N 21:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I suspect that downloading scans of magazines or manuals does happen quite frequently. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I've used Sonic Retro tons of times. If it's not considered too specific, that'd be a helpful resource to mention. Tezero (talk) 22:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The stuff about scanned games is really great for older games. Not been able to find anything about Vampire the Masquerade sadly, but it's a really great bunch of resources of hard to get material. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. And yeah, Sonic Retro, LexisNexis/Highbeam and Google Scholar are great. (Actually, they're all mentioned in there already, in one form or another.) As for Vampire, it would definitely be in the CGW Museum, and the reference library search engine says that User:Thibbs has a PC Gamer cover story on it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 00:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- Yep I see that there's a feature on Bloodlines. I also have some coverage of Redemption in Games Magazine and there's more of both games in NextGen too. I'd be happy to make what I have of these materials available. Nice guide, by the way, JimmyBlackwing. -Thibbs (talk) 13:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
  - Thibbs, any material you have on Bloodlines would be appreciated as I've run dry on online based sources. I think I managed to find a review in CGW but that was all I was able to find from some cursory searches. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Game Studies/Video game research

It seems like the general topic of Game studies is not really on the radar of this project. This is the (mostly) academic research field of studying gameplay activity, gamer behaviors, etc., which is encompassed by people in the WP category of Game Researchers - Nick Yee, T. L. Taylor, etc. It's linked to - but not the same as - game usability, game testing, etc. Likewise for game user research, much of which is more marketing -oriented. I believe that the roles of games in education is pertinent, and Educational video game is on our list, but Video games in education is not. There are probably other articles that are relevant, such as DIGRA, which might also bear some coordinated attention. Any thoughts about refining this overall topic area? jxm (talk) 21:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Rise of the Tomb Raider article is started

I have started the article for Rise of the Tomb Raider, as we have some solid sources now, feel free to add any input at the article page. Chambr (talk) 23:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Categories: