Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Video games: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:35, 31 October 2024 editSceeegt (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,726 edits →PS Portal, anyone have it to photograph?: new sectionTag: New topic← Previous edit Revision as of 15:02, 1 November 2024 edit undoHahnchen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers12,014 edits →High traffic stubs: October figures updatedNext edit →
Line 72: Line 72:


:That's a good idea too. :) ] (]) 02:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC) :That's a good idea too. :) ] (]) 02:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

::High traffic stubs updated with October figures. I couldn't find a good way of comparing to data other than just skimming through them on multiple browser tabs. There is definitely commonality between months, these will be the articles where edits will make most impact. - ]]] 15:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)


Another page worth publishing periodically would be the largest pages in ]. This would require ] which I am not familiar with. - ]]] 17:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Another page worth publishing periodically would be the largest pages in ]. This would require ] which I am not familiar with. - ]]] 17:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:02, 1 November 2024

This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconVideo games
WikiProject iconThis 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
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 Good article nominations DYK nominations Reviews and reassessments
Articles that need...
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks
AfDs Merge discussions Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates Good article nominations DYK nominations Reviews and reassessments
Articles that need...
Shortcut: WT:VG
WikiProject
Video games
Main page talk
Archives
Archive index

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177

Guidelines
Manual of Style talk
Article naming talk
Sources talk
Search engine
Templates
Wikidata Guide
Departments
Assessment
Reference library talk
Newsletter talk
Current issue Draft
Articles
Article alerts
Deletion discussions
Essential articles
New articles
Popular pages
Vital articles
Recognized content
Good content
Featured content
Requested articles
Task forces
Esports talk
Indie
Nintendo talk
Sega talk
Video game characters talk
Visual novels talk
WikiProject
Portal talk
Project category talk
Project cleanup talk
Traffic statistics talk
Article statistics talk
List of active editors
Project watchlist

Goal: 7,500 or fewer Stub-Class articles

I have been wondering if it would be beneficial to have something like a project subpage or taskforce page to assist with the goal of expanding stub articles to get them to start or better. I feel like it would help have such a centralized place to list the stub articles with the most potential in terms of how many sources have been found online but are not currently being used (or used much) in the article.

For example:

  • Sources are listed on the talk page or in the External links
  • Sources are noted on trusted external websites such as MobyGames or World of Spectrum
  • Sources are listed in a reviews table in the article but not anywhere else
  • Sources were found in a previous AFD or merge discussion

This would specifically list just the stubs where known sources have been identified and found online but not yet put to use, which would help any users with the time and interest in building up articles (especially if they don't find the sources themselves) and such a list would give users a direction to focus on.

I for one would be super extra happy to start forming such a list, checking to see which stub articles for games have sources that need to be implemented and thereby de-stub the articles. BOZ (talk) 14:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

So to give an idea of what I am looking for, I started looking through the stub articles and found that the following articles about games have sources listed on the talk page or in the article itself, sufficient enough to easily expand the article beyond stub class or better:
I already stated that I wouldn't mind creating such a list, but the question is what would be the most helpful way to organize it? Alphabetically? By publication date? Platform? Something else? BOZ (talk) 08:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I actually made a for-funsies list of articles I was interested in improving as part of de-stubbification for whenever I'm in the mood for it: - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 10:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Oh nice, so a list like this could definitely be useful then. :) I'll construct it as I find the time, probably on a user page for now. BOZ (talk) 14:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure why I was expecting anything other than lust on the cover for 7 Sins... I opened it... currently in a sanctuary...
By platform seems the most helpful because I find people target articles to work on based on that parameter, but cross-platform and PC releases make this impossible to track. I suggest by publication date, which should give a rough idea to the user what generation of consoles they're in for example.
I like taking on stubs sometimes only if it's possible to greatly expand, because that's the most fun part for me. Games like Good Job! and Animal Crossing Plaza are games I have never played but were intriguing enough for me to work on. If a list were to exist I would definitely browse it, and whether or not I pick up something is up to what's there. I understand you're an absolute machine when it comes to this stuff BOZ, and like the machine you are you don't mind the labor(!, this would drive me nuts), but if I can help with anything let me know. We ought to give you a hand for all the work you do for the project. Panini! • 🥪 14:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
OK sounds good, I will aim towards listing them by age because some people definitely have a preferred focus on that. :) It may take some time to put this together, but we'll see. Thank you for the kind words! Good luck with the Donkey Kong GA review! BOZ (talk) 15:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I created User:BOZ/vg stubs to use as a sandbox page, listing the games in order by date of initial release, which would help draw people to the eras they are most comfortable working in. Anyone can feel free to make reasonable edits to this page. When I have finished it, whenever that is, I can make a page more like the one that Hahnchen listed below, and maybe we can link both from the main page or some other highly noticeable area? BOZ (talk) 06:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
I went through the Nintendo Task Force stubs and added the articles with sources on their talk pages. Most of them don't, so from that point I'll probably go back around and add the source lists myself before adding the entries to your list. Panini! • 🥪 17:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Awesome!  :) Thanks! BOZ (talk) 18:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
I found tons of sources for Action Fighter, added them to the talk page. BOZ (talk) 13:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
I've gone through the first 200 pages in the stub category, and added 72 of them to my sandbox page User:BOZ/vg stubs. Hopefully that gives an idea of what kinds of short articles can be more readily expanded versus those where hunting for more sources would be required. BOZ (talk) 22:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
I was working my way through this, but lack of access to the Internet Archive has slowed my progress considerably. :( BOZ (talk) 20:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Seems like the Internet Archive is working again? BOZ (talk) 05:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Well, most links still work if you already had them, but the search function remains down. :( BOZ (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

High traffic stubs

I published a list of the most popular video game stub articles over the last month at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games/High traffic stubs.

I recently returned to Misplaced Pages (not committing to anything, just dabbling again) and was thinking of where contributions would have most impact. Stubs seemed to be low hanging fruit, and coupled with traffic statistics - we can see where our readers want our attention to be. A lot of articles on that list probably aren't even stubs any more, so there should be some easy wins for a bit of admin. There's a lot of WP:RECENTISM in that list, but I'm sure there are some perennially popular pages that could do with some attention. For someone without clear editing goals, I think the list could be useful.

I probably won't maintain it, but if it's helpful, I hope someone can just refresh the numbers every month. Why not add it to the mostly empty left hand side of Template:WPVG announcements? - hahnchen 21:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

That's a good idea too. :) BOZ (talk) 02:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
High traffic stubs updated with October figures. I couldn't find a good way of comparing September to October data other than just skimming through them on multiple browser tabs. There is definitely commonality between months, these will be the articles where edits will make most impact. - hahnchen 15:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Another page worth publishing periodically would be the largest pages in Category:Stub-Class video game articles. This would require Misplaced Pages:Database queries which I am not familiar with. - hahnchen 17:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

That's something to consider. BOZ (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Review Thread: Help Wanted Edition

We are on edition number 50somethingsomething of review thread time! These are all of our outstanding reviews written out, and any reviews to lower the backlog would be greatly appreciated. A lot of them are really cool articles, too!

FAC

GAN

Peer reviews

I usually make these expecting a quid pro quo on my article, because I'm selfish, but I don't have one this time. I encourage people with outstanding reviews to give another user a review in return.
I will be taking on Donkey Kong before TheJoeBro goes ape. It won't be good for the project if that happens again. Panini! • 🥪 14:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Normally I would scoop some of these up in a heartbeat, but I'm super busy this week. If there's still any of these not taken in the coming weeks I'll see if I can try hitting up a few of them. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
I've been really busy lately too. But I am excited to see so many of these articles being improved. I will have more time for GA again soon. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Done Lego Indy. One down. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Wanted to do that one next but whatever Panini! • 🥪 16:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Okay, in case anyone is still able to, I need help. The GAN for Shin Megami Tensei V has thoroughly stalled. The current reviewer Cukie Gherkin is steering clear of the story section as they haven't played it, but due to no-one else taking it up, the GAN is in limbo. --ProtoDrake (talk) 23:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake:I did a check regarding the GA review for SMT V. It seems that Cukie and their friend (who played the game as well) came to the conclusion that the plot summary section is well done. Roberth Martinez (talk) 23:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I am willing to help review an article in exchange for a review of Puff-puff (onomatopoeia) - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Cukie Gherkin I'm down to review it if you'd review one of my noms in exchange. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 15:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hatsune Miku: Colorful Stage!

Good afternoon. I ask experienced users to look at the debates surrounding the article Hatsune Miku: Colorful Stage!. The fact is that the game has a popular otokonoko character, whose gender was expectedly the cause of frequent discusions and fan theories. And recently it caught fire with renewed vigor after a new Japanese event confirmed that the character was indeed a biological male. Now an anonymous user 50.122.124.241 is persistently adding an LGBTQ category to the article, considering it obvious and having read but ignored my attempts to start a discussion on his talk page (user pointedly called Mizuki an LGBTQ character despite my mentioning that we need more details and a response from the creators to make such conclusions), although all information about the event is known based on fan translations and interpretations, while any comments from the creators are either unknown, or simply missing (suffice it to say that this is controversial even among the fans themselves, since the event has not yet been translated into English and does not contain detailed information, opening up the possibility of interpretation and debates). In fact, there is so little accurate information that initially I even thought that the category was added because of fan ships and realized that we were talking about Mizuki only thanks to another user’s comment on the article’s talk page.

Considering that the anonymous author is ignoring the discussion and the dispute risks turning into a war of edits with a discussion through comments on rollbacks, I reverted my last edit (I don’t know how true the words about “one character is enough” are, so I don’t dispute this) and want to know what other project users think about it. My position is that given the nature of the information, such edits constitute original research and require sources as non-obvious information. This, as expected, is not mentioned in any way in the text of the article itself, both due to the lack of an official translation and the lack of sources as such. But I won’t mind if other users show me that I’m wrong or really cite authoritative sources that clarify the issue. Solaire the knight (talk) 10:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)


  • So what should I or we do? Should I contact any of the active project users? I'm afraid that with the lack of response here and the lack of desire of the other user to somehow participate in the discussion while maintaining his version of the article, it will simply stagnate at the current status quo. Solaire the knight (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
    Categories are a wasteland and full of CATDEF violations, and a lot of prominent editors are probably simply burnt out on trying to keep them tidy and applied correctly (Even before you take into account numerous LTAs that focus on pop culture and fiction categories near exclusively, endlessly dividing them into ever more granular groups). In theory this one should only be tagged to articles for games that have a very explicit theme and focus on LGBTQ topics. In practice, people throw it on any video game where any character, however minor or brief, is not cisgender heteronormative. Or is even suggested to not be. In short, I think your time is spent better elsewhere, let them have it. -- ferret (talk) 22:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
    I'm just a little upset about this. Both because I really dislike unfinished business, and because I actually am not against this category if we get the necessary authoritative sources. As you can see, the context of the development of the plot fully suggests such a possibility... But in this form, this is simply a very speculative original research from fan translation, which, moreover, is not mentioned in any way in the article itself (if you look at the history of edits, this has already happened with the addition of the “memes” category without any edits to the article itself). Not to mention the fact that people from the outside may perceive this as confirmation of some game ships (as I myself thought due to the lack of context in the first edit). But thanks for the answer, maybe we should at least wait for the event to appear in the global version. Solaire the knight (talk) 22:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
    Ferret is right on that regard, @Solaire the knight. But if this discussion stalls, the very least you can do is ultimately remove the category. You have made many attempts to engage in discussion with the opposing user. If they continue to add the category afterwards, that would be breaching WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and something would need to be done about it. Panini! • 🥪 16:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
    So, if I understand you correctly, you propose to wait a certain time and if nothing changes, simply delete the category again due to the lack of any progress in discussing its addition and development of the topic in the article itself? Fortunately, at the moment the question is only in a very vague category (at least until the translation of the event creates new original research), so I think that we can quite wait in a calm atmosphere. Solaire the knight (talk) 17:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
    @Solaire the knight Pretty much; if someone is fighting for a change that's controversial but chooses to not discuss why, then there's essentially no basis for why it should stay. You've done all you can to engage in a discussion, but if they choose not to discuss, you have the right to revert. Just to be safe wait a little bit; ~5-7 days is the norm. Panini! • 🥪 19:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
    I did as you advised in the end. Judging by the latest edits, this has predictably already started to mislead other people, since the category was too general and was not accompanied by any information in the article itself. Solaire the knight (talk) 12:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Soundtrack sections

Hey guys, I'm just wondering what the situation is on soundtracks getting sizable sections in game articles. I'm specificially thinking of here, where the soundtrack seems non-notable, and at least one of the three references is from a user-generated site. I've read the MoS section on this subject, and it seems like that section in the article is without merit as per the guidelines, but I wanted to be 100% sure. Cheers. Bertaut (talk) 06:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Soundtrack subsections are often fine, but full tracklists (and especially full credits) should be omitted in game articles per WP:VGSCOPE#15. I've trimmed and merged the Rygar section. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 09:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Much appreciated. Bertaut (talk) 22:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
I've stumbled onto the same problem. If there aren't any independent sources, it shouldn't have a section. If there are some sources, it might have a paragraph. We cover topics in proportion to what reliable sources have determined to be important. If I had to guess why so many poorly sourced soundtrack sections exist, it's because they see games that do have soundtracks that have been discussed widely by reliable sources, and want to give a lesser known soundtrack an (undeserving and unreliable) treatment. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

VGSCOPE issue at Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX articles

In case my thread at ANI fails, is there any chance we can get extra eyes on Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX (video game), Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX 2, and Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX 3? Since 9 October, there has been an anonymous user persistently adding riders and levels to these articles, all of which have violated WP:VGSCOPE 6 and 7, as other editors have pointed out. The latest IP has been off a 24-hour block since 14 October. Jalen Barks (Woof) 18:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

MyAbandonware game downloads and copyright

Raising this here as I think it would be good to discuss linking to MyAbandonware.com downloads in general, pinging @Vitaly Zdanevich: for their input. A download link for the game on MyAbandonware.com was added to Armies of Exigo by Vitaly Zdanevich to support the category of Category:Abandonware games, but I believe this is a copyright issue per WP:COPYLINK. As I understand it, 'abandonware' is a grey area and copyright is still a concern even if the game is no longer commercially sold anywhere, and I believe that we shouldn't be linking to unauthorized free downloads of games still within copyright. 'myabandonware.com game ID' is a property on Wikidata, but I don't engage with Wikidata and I don't know what it is used for. Input from other editors would be appreciated. Waxworker (talk) 20:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Completely inappropriate link. Whatever argument there may be for distributing abandoned software, it still remains a copyright violation until proven otherwise. Masem (t) 22:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I'd like to note that, in my personal opinion, almost any and every use of {{Internet Archive game}} is also a WP:COPYLINK violation. -- ferret (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
I agree with Ferret, and feel it may be best to either examine the uses of that template or nuke it outright.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
I agree as well. It's a WP:COPYVIO issue no matter how you slice it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
I understand you, yes this is a gray area, BUT note that myabandonware.com replaces the Download button to a store link if/when somebody (Steam, GoG) starts selling a game again, for example https://www.myabandonware.com/game/star-trek-voyager-elite-force-bbv
I respect myabandonware.com for their work, thanks to them.
Another point - I cannot image a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation that we have a link to a 20 years old game that nobody sells anymore.
Is Internet Archive actually remove anything? It looks like it is possible to upload anything to their servers, just asking.
Armies of Exigo such a good game, I love it, you should try. Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 03:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Also see related Wikidata discussion https://www.wikidata.org/Wikidata:Property_proposal/myabandonware.com_game_id Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 03:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Related link https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=500&offset=0&target=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.myabandonware.com%2Fgame Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 03:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Are a lot of the games there just ancient forgotten games nobody cares about? Sure, but that doesn't make it any less of a copyright violation. This is more of a strict yes or no legal question than an issue about the morality of the site's creators. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Pinging involved editors, @Vitaly Zdanevich, Masem, Ferret, Kung Fu Man, and Zxcvbnm: - thoughts on removing all links to game downloads from the site from articles due to copyright concerns? As Vitaly Zdanevich linked through linksearch, there are 57 instances of MyAbandonware game links, and I wanted to ask involved editors for their input before making the sweeping change of removing all of them. Waxworker (talk) 17:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
I would vehemently support it, as far as I know, none of the original game creators are profiting from MyAbandonware at all. If people want to find warez then let them look for it themselves, but there's no encyclopedic purpose for linking it. Links should be used when things are obviously in the public domain or similar. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Same. This is basically undrr WP:ELNO because the copyright aspect is very much in question and we default to assuming the worst. — Masem (t) 18:32, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm down with that.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
I agree with not linking to these on Misplaced Pages most of the time (there's probably some exceptions), but to be fair to your first point I don't think that's a good reason on its own compared to WP's own copyright rules – the original developers of a lot of games frequently don't profit at all from legit reissues either, especially if the rights to a game have been bought by another company. (Depending on their contracts with publishing companies a lot probably didn't profit much from initial sales past a certain point either unfortunately.) Ringtail Raider (talk) 02:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
It's not about profiting. It's about whether or not MyAbandonware has permission to host those copyrighted works. By the site's very nature, the answer to that is "extremely doubtful". -- ferret (talk) 04:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Xbox Series code

Hi all. I've changed the code on Template:GamePlatformKey/sub for the Xbox Series X and Series S from XSX to XSS/XSX as before the code only indicated/abbreviated the Xbox Series X and not the Series S, when games are released on both consoles, therefore leading to unnecessary confusion and misleading readers. Subsequently the code needs to be changed on pages where it states XSX to XSS/XSX. I've done this on 2024 in video games but it took a lot of work. Hence why I'm here to ask for your help. Can everyone please change any instances they see of XSX to XSS/XSX? If someone could please add this to the tasks on the main Project page that would also be very much appreciated (I'm unsure how to add this specific task myself). Helper201 (talk) 06:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps there's a bot that could be programmed to do this? Helper201 (talk) 07:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
If we're going to be changing the code, I propose that it be changed to XSX/S instead of XSS/XSX.
XSX/S addresses the confusion and ambiguity, is more compact, and fits with the widely used "Xbox Series X/S" nomenclature. Furthermore, it is already being used informally in a number of lists (List of real-time strategy video games, List of business simulation video games, List of city-building video games, List of survival games, among others). Yiosie 2356 08:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Was there some kind of discussion to arrive at this? It seems like a pretty major change to do unilaterally with zero consensus... ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
In reference to Zxcvbnm, I was following WP:BEBOLD. In regards to using XSX/S, I'm fine if others want to start implementing that in place of XSX. Helper201 (talk) 11:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Usually WP:BOLD only applies to situations that are easily reversible if someone actually objects. Asking for a bot to change vast amounts of pages without discussing the idea first, however, would fall under WP:CAREFUL due to the potentially controversial nature of the situation.
In this case I'd also prefer XSX/S so there is certainly a need for consensus here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
This should be immediately reverted and discussed first. An entire RFC was done over this code and label in the past, making this rather controversial never mind the sheer work of it. To be clear: Changing this first, and discussing and asking for help after, means every article using the old code is currently broken. -- ferret (talk) 14:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
I've reverted the edit, since it broke all the existing uses of the template. To be clear, I don't understand why this is being done. This is a technical parameter name in a template. It doesn't need to be 100% perfectly factually accurate. It needs to be clear, understood and easy to use, which it is. The existing Wikilink is also perfectly concise and used in consideration of it's shortness, and it's used all over the place in prose and infoboxes besides. So consider me also straight up Opposed to making a change. Putting a / into a template parameter name is uncommon and confusing, especially when a / often denotes subpages in Wiki usage. -- ferret (talk) 14:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Well, a follow up. I thought this interacted with the review table but that is separate, and this is just the template that forms a legend at the top of the table. All the same, it is controversial and was simply missed in the last RFC sweep. @Helper201 This template SHOULD be using XSXS as the abbreviation, as decided by a MOS:ABBR RFC. The use of XSX/X was explicitly rejected as "made up", and XSX/XSS would be construed as making up yet another new abbreviation. The RFC decided the appropriate, sourcable abbreviation is XSXS, linked as ]. It's incredibly important to denote the official marketing and naming of the platform is Xbox Series X|S. We simply replace the | with / because of technical reasons.
So if you don't oppose following the RFC, I will make sure this gets updated properly and everywhere it is used. -- ferret (talk) 14:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Ferret It was changed for two reasons. Firstly Xbox Series X/S is not an article on Misplaced Pages, it’s a redirect. The correct page name is Xbox Series X and Series S, so I fixed that. The second is what was used, namely XSX only abbreviated one of the two consoles (namely the Xbox Series X and not the Series S) when the linked article is about two consoles and games are specifically required to be able to operate on both if they are made for one (i.e. there aren't games that are exclusive to either console). The XSX abbreviation was previously used abundantly, despite the fact that it was being used where it should be clear the game in question can run on both consoles, yet only one was abbreviated.
To the point regarding XSXS: it’s better than simply using XSX, as it abbreviates both consoles, yet I think XSX/XSS and XSX/S are both better abbreviations. Also, you didn't link where this consensus you mentioned is. If we use XSXS this would also be "made up", as I don't see where this is in official use without an "/" or a "|", so we may as well use XSX/XSS or XSX/S, which are both clearer. I would however much appreciate help with remedying the errors that currently exist in this documentation and associated pages that I mentioned though. Namely the fact that the link Xbox Series X and Series S should be used in place of the redirect page Xbox Series X/S, and the use of an alternate abbreviation to XSX which clearly abbreviates both the Series X and the Series S. Helper201 (talk) 22:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
@Helper201: We use the redirect for brevity, especially when there is a lot of repetition as there are in tables like this. This is in line and supported by MOS. As far as XSX/S versus XSXS... I hear you. But an RFC ruled that XSX/S was made up by Misplaced Pages and therefore a MOS violation, and we're not allowed to use it. I had to change a lot of templates in response to that RFC, and this one got missed. -- ferret (talk) 23:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
@Helper201 Please also take a read of WP:NOPIPE. There is no point, especially on these huge tables, to convert all of the perfectly valid abbreviation redirects to long piped links. -- ferret (talk) 23:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
I have fixed this template in line with all others and the MOS:ABBV RFC outcome, and gone through page usages to fix them. -- ferret (talk) 23:18, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Ferret Can you please link what you are referring to regarding the specific MOS and RFC's?
Thank you for changing it from XSX to a variant that includes the Series S, though I think we should re-discuss this and come to a new consensus, as XSXS is just as "made up" as any of the other options, which are in my opinion better abbreviations. Helper201 (talk) 23:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
@Helper201 I've actually got it backwards and will repair. Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations/Archive_5#RFC_on_the_use_of_acronym_"XSXS"_to_stand_for_"Xbox_Series_X/S"_across_a_wide_range_of_articles_in_tables_and_templates is the RFC, and it was to remove XSXS in favor of XSX/S. It's been in such common use for years on Misplaced Pages that my brain short circuited. -- ferret (talk) 23:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
It should all be fixed to XSX/S now. -- ferret (talk) 23:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Last time I weighed in on something like this I was warned for being incivil. So no comment. Panini! • 🥪 00:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. naming convention

Hello everyone, I'm from the Polish-language Misplaced Pages and I want to ask you about the naming of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series. On my home Misplaced Pages, one user started a discussion thread expressing doubts about whether the series name should be used without the (artificial, after all) acronym and simply appear as Stalker (in line with the naming in the prose of the Strugatsky brothers and Andrei Tarkovsky's film). It appears that the current naming on your Misplaced Pages (the starting point for our discussion) was determined by a deletion request discussion from 2004, when one person redirected the entry "Stalker (computer game)" to "S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl." I would like to ask you whether there has been any other discussion on en wiki regarding the naming of this Ukrainian game series and whether the current one should indeed be used, considering that the acronym in the title is a marketing invention and doesn't have much in common, for example, with the F.E.A.R. series (where the title at least refers to a fictional police formation). Best regards. Ironupiwada (talk) 08:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

The devs have publicly stated the name is an acronym. Therefore, due to MOS:ACROTITLE, the name is not considered purely stylistic and remains an acronym in the title.
As far as the periods go, I believe they are allowed if the version with periods is the common name, per MOS:CAPSACRS, which in this case it seems to be. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
I don't really type acronyms with a dot after each one anymore due to lazyness and the fact its more common. However, I think the article should have the dots nevertheless if that's how sources commonly write it. A redirect STALKER has been made for convienence. JuniperChill (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
I've gone over the article, the backronym was only mentioned in the lead. Question is, how do reliable sources treat it? I see some use Stalker, some usage of STALKER, but mostly S.T.A.L.K.E.R. soetermans. 12:27, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
The primary source seems extremely consistent with the periods (god, imagine doing the social media for that game franchise. Just have "S.T.A.L.K.E.R." permanently on your clipboard I guess). Sources used on the series article mainly seem to go with the periods as well, so unless there's somesort of citogenesis going on I think it's probably fine to stick with the official stylization. I suppose it seperates the game franchise from the novel and film, which is not necessarily a bad thing. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
From a technical standpoint, it makes no sense for characters from the games to use the acronym “S.T.A.L.K.E.R.” and expand on it with English words, since English isn’t spoken in the Zone. I don’t know how it was in the English translation but in the Ukrainian, Russian (and i.e. Polish) versions of the games only the “stalker” / “сталкер” spelling was used and no information was given that this word was an acronym with any meaning. The game’s website for the Ukrainian and Russian market also makes no mention of the acronym and its meaning. Again, in the Russian version of this website only the form “сталкер” is used. In the English version, the spelling “stalkers” is mainly used; occasionally “s.t.a.l.k.e.r.s.” but no reason or meaning is given for this spelling. On the official website of the Heart of Chernobyl (in every language) only the spelling “stalker” is used; and again, there’s no information about the acronym and its meaning.
Information about “S.T.A.L.K.E.R.” being an acronym and what is stands for was first provided at the beginning of 2007 by the international publisher (THQ) with the launch of the Shadow of Chornobyl’s English-language official website and later was found exclusively in sources associated with THQ, not with developers or East European publishers. After googling the phrase “scavengers, trespassers, adventurers, loners, killers, explorers, robbers”, the oldest results are from March 2007, and the source of this expansion is given as the game’s website run by THQ. The game had been in production for several years at that point, but prior to that no website, no interview with the developers, no statement by the developers had provided any information about the acronym or its expansion (or at least after a long search of the Internet and scans of Ukrainian, English, Polish and Russian-language game magazines I found no confirmation of this).
To summarize: it looks like that the developers first created a logo with a stylized spelling of the word “S.T.A.L.K.E.R.” and only later THQ stated that it was an acronym and provided the words it supposedly came from, but the developers never acknowledged or used it. It seems that the developers only use the stylized “S.T.A.L.K.E.R.” when writing the title of the game/series (perhaps it has something to do with a registered trademark?) but don’t really consider it as an acronym with any particular meaning. Pottero (talk) 22:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Xsolla draft

Hello editors,

I am hoping to reach consensus about a draft I have proposed on the Xsolla article Talk page. Editors have reviewed it and voiced positive opinions, but would like more consensus before it is implemented. I thought editors on WikiProject Video games would have interest in reviewing.

If there are any questions, please let me know. I am an employee of Xsolla and therefore have a conflict of interest which is disclosed on the Xsolla Talk page. Xsolla Rep SR (talk) 21:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (October 14 to October 20)

Main page: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements 
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 21:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

October 14

October 15

October 16

October 17

October 18

October 19

October 20

Is Tomb Raider Legend a reboot?

This is becoming an issue on the article for Tomb Raider: Legend. An IP user (120.149.102.126) is insisting that Legend isn't a reboot, but a "continuation", and citing 20 Years of Tomb Raider (without using it as a source up till now). Since I don't have the book and can't verify whether it's actual developer confirmation, I'm asking here if anyone can actively confirm or deny whether the game--to quote the IP user's edit summary--"is factually a continuation". ProtoDrake (talk) 23:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

This article says that Legend "acts as a reboot and reimagining of the origins of Lara". The IP seems plain wrong, and even if they aren't, did not offer a coherent explanation in the talk page besides "I read it". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:24, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) The book does explicitly say that the developers considered it more of a reimagining than a reboot:

    To this day, the team doesn't consider Tomb Raider: Legend a reboot, rather a reimagining of an established franchise that modified but drew on pre-existing canon.
    — 20 Years of Tomb Raider (page 74)

    There's always more to consider than just the developer's perspective, though—if reliable sources consider it a reboot, then it's a reboot. That being said, it's only mentioned once in the article, and I'm not sure its reference really verifies that. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
    To be sure: Misplaced Pages doesn't go with what developers of a game claim their game is, but what it actually is. Kojima says that Death Stranding is a "strand-type game", but Misplaced Pages calls it an action game. This seems like another one of those times where it's obviously a reboot, even if the devs call it a "reimagining". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
    Obvious or not, it could certainly do with some stronger referencing in the article, especially if it's in direct contention with the developers' statements. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
    We don't use Kojima's "strand-type" game as that's creating a new genre out of nowhere and is somewhat along the lines of being too promotional. On the other hand, in terms of the narrative of the game series, Crystal Dynamics has full control of the Tomb Raider series, so if they opt to call it a reimagining and not a reboot, which affects nothing else outside the TB series, we should respect that. Masem (t) 00:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
    Not that it matters much, but their own terminology of it being a "reimaginging" does not really mean much unless they can expand on it, as on this site, reimagining redirects to Remake. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Thank you everyone, and thanks especially Rhain for finding the source (when the IP user reverted again, they only put a "this is absolutely true" post on the talk page). I've adjusted the article, and clarified that the sources don't specifically mention the word "reboot", so I've removed it. Still looks like playing with semantics, but hey ho. --ProtoDrake (talk) 07:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Pixels (2015 film)#Requested move 22 October 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Pixels (2015 film)#Requested move 22 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 01:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move talk at Talk:Lego Racers (video game)#Requested move 20 September 2024

A requested move discussion was initiated for Lego Racers (video game) to be moved to Lego Racers a few weeks back. A bot linked this move at WikiProject Lego (which seems somewhat defunct) but not here, and it's gotten very little discussion so far and has already been relisted once as a result, so I thought maybe manually posting this here might get it some more votes. Ringtail Raider (talk) 18:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Request for more comments/feedback for the FAC nomination for the "The Sims 4" article

Requesting for more comments and feedback from the WikiProject, for the FAC nomination for the "The Sims 4" article. Thank you! Theknine2 (talk) 21:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Ill be there! Panini! • 🥪 13:25, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Splitting parts of the Valis IV article into a stand-alone article for Super Valis IV

Okay so, this idea was suggested by fellow User:TarkusAB in 2021 at the talk page for Valis IV. I've played Super Valis IV and i've seen videos of the original Valis IV for PC Engine, and i've come to the conclusion that both are completely different titles altogether. I'm suggesting splitting parts of the Valis IV article containing info regarding Super Valis IV into its own article, much like how it was done with Rondo of Blood and SNES Dracula X. But i'm not familiar with how to put a splitting proposal at a talk page of an article (i've only done a merge proposal once for Ninja Gaiden arcade. If somebody could give me any advice as how to do it, then i'm all ears! Roberth Martinez (talk) 16:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Atari restructuring - opinions needed

I made a number of structural proposals for Atari last month but unfortunately not enough responses were made, so I am mentioning this again in a simple format. The history of Atari is complicated as we know and it is made worse by how the present day Atari is currently presented here. I have made many edits to improve the situation, but I have these proposals that I believe will further improve:

(Sceeegt (talk) 02:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC))

Atari SA (France) is the holding company that owns properties. Its US based subsidiary Atari, Inc. (1993-present) is the game publisher that's still around making Atari/Infogrames titles today. Atari Interactive is a legal entity that owns the brand behind the scenes and licenses it to the rest, hence the existence of this article called "Atari Interactive" only serves to complicate things further, therefore the article should be called "Hasbro Interactive", active from 1995 to 2001, serving that period and the games it published which are all listed in the article currently.

@Masem and Shooterwalker: re-tagging. Sceeegt (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm stumped on this one. But I'm following this discussion and hoping others will help us make sense of it.
Is the idea that Atari SA would remain unchanged? I'm concerned about the target for Infogrames which operated for a good couple of decades, half the time using the Atari trademark. I would sooner split the article into its pre and post-bankruptcy than try to merge it under an essentially unrelated subject. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested merge at Neo Geo Pocket Color

Looking for input on a request to merge Neo Geo Pocket into Neo Geo Pocket Color: Talk:Neo Geo Pocket Color#Merge NGP here. Sceeegt (talk) 20:01, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Super Famicom vs. SNES

I noticed that Japanese exclusive games on the SNES are generally described in articles to release on "Super Famicom". It's done that way in Mario's Super Picross. Isn't it the same system as Super Nintendo Entertainment System? WP:VG/PLATFORMS doesn't inform me why it should be done this way, so I'm asking here. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 02:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

As you said, it's because they're Japan exclusive, where the SNES was called that. The same applies for Japan-only Famicom games vs NES for games released elsewhere. I'd assume this applies to some other regions and consoles as well, I'm not sure to what extent but (Super) Famicom vs (S)NES and Genesis vs Mega Drive at least are well known. It should probably be mentioned in the guidelines if it's not. Ringtail Raider (talk) 04:04, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Japan-exclusive games were never released for a system called "Super Nintendo Entertainment System". Why wouldn't we use the more accurate term "Super Famicom", which is also an English-language title? --Mika1h (talk) 15:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
They're the same system. It's why Super Famicom is a redirect to Super Nintendo Entertainment System. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 13:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

AllGame wiped out from Wayback Machine

Something's terribly wrong with AllGame and the Internet Archive! When I try to get to an archived AllGame webpage, I always get redirected to an unarchived website that says, "404 Not Found", just like in this example link. It seems that the Internet Archive has completely wiped out all of the AllGame pages from its Wayback Machine! Now what? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 16:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Report an error to their email, ran into a similar problem where one reference was just completely nuked. They get enough pings they can look into it and see if a server is just working like it should. EDIT: Looking at it closer, it seems the pages are loading...and then forcibly redirecting to the website itself. This seems to be happening with a lot of articles that got redirected later on.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I doubt it was intentional, it's probably somehow related to the site being down the last few weeks. Allgame pages before 2007 seem to load fine at least. Ringtail Raider (talk) 17:05, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, but there are no archived pre-2007 AllGame reviews for games. It still sucks. Angeldeb82 (talk) 18:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I've seen this too. Interestingly, if I share the Archive links to them, like this Super Mario 64 review, in apps like Discord, the preview link still quotes the review in question even if Archive.org can still load the opening text of the AllGame review ("It's difficult to exaggerate just how good Super Mario 64 is. Mario's first 3D adventure is every bit as wondrous as his finest 2D outings....") but still 404s for me. Not sure if thats something on my end, but I would take it as a sign that its not all completely wiped, something is just having some issues. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Disabling JavaScript on the affected tab (in Chrome: F12 -> Settings icon -> "Disable JavaScript" way down in the section "Debugger") keeps you on the page. Someone programmed a redirect (lilkely on AllGame's side) and IA isn't suppressing it correctly. IceWelder 18:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks for the tip! When I see a 404 error on the forced redirect, all I have to do is disable Javascript and then go to the affected archived webpage in order to see it. Thanks! Angeldeb82 (talk) 19:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Zhongli (Genshin Impact) (2nd nomination)

Any opinions will be appreciated. It contains Chinese sources that must be verified for GNG purpose. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 11:37, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: nomination was closed as 'speedy keep' as it was withdrawn by the nom JuniperChill (talk) 09:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (October 21 to October 27)

Main page: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements 
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 12:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

October 21

October 22

October 23

October 24

October 25

October 26

October 27

Dispute at Assassin's Creed Nexus VR

There is an ongoing dispute at Talk:Assassin's Creed Nexus VR regarding how to list developers in the infobox. A user insisted on listing all Ubisoft co-development studios in the infobox. More input is needed. Thank you. OceanHok (talk) 12:03, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

That press release clearly put the matter to bed. Any revert from now on will be WP:DEADHORSE territory. - X201 (talk) 12:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for FreeSpace 2

FreeSpace 2 has been nominated for a 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. Z1720 (talk) 13:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Dispute at Game Science

There's an ongoing dispute at Talk:Game Science regarding the inclusion of sexism allegations surrounding the company. I've attempted to resolve it via discussions but I feel it's going in circles and that the discussion is no longer genuine. I would appreciate help resolving it, thank you. Snakester95 (talk) 16:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

The dispute is really lengthy, but I'm not sure this can be solved via debate at all. User:YuelinLee1959 should be taken to WP:ANI as they are not here to build an encyclopedia but only spread rumors supporting their Gamergate-style views by inserting info that is neither here nor there. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Unable to access Electronic Gaming Monthly via Internet Archive

This might have something to do with that recent outage, but lately I've been unable to access any issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly via the Internet Archive; any attempt to do so just results in a perpetual "Loading viewer" message. I'm bringing this up to confirm whether or not I'm the only one experiencing this. Example links to test this are here and here. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 19:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Several parts of the site are still acting wonky. Text viewing works on the pages manually, but text searching through the in-built search engine does not. Guessing whatever they've been upgrading is throwing a lot of things out of whack.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
PDFs, at least, are still accessible relatively speaking. Otherwise, they're fine. 2601AC47 (talk) 20:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't access a PDF (and others) the other day of a magazine so maybe not everything is fine yet. Sceeegt (talk) 20:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Just tested again. The archived PDFs now load within a few seconds, and they shouldn't be in a perpetual loading state anymore. 2601AC47 (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Potential to broaden the scope of the ninth generation of video game consoles

I'm going to put this proposal here. As I was saying, I disagree with the order of the home consoles within the ninth generation: PlayStation 5 → Xbox Series X/S. Like I said, I've come up with two options:

Reorganize
The Xbox Series X/S was already released before the PlayStation 5 was, so the new order will be as follows: Xbox Series X/S → PlayStation 5.
Do nothing
The PlayStation 5 was already announced before the Xbox Series X/S was.

I'm gonna need some opinions, so let me tell you what. Which options would you choose? One-Winged Devil (talk) 16:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's a reason the organization is what it is, but "changing it would be pointless effort" is a valid position to take on Misplaced Pages. If there would be no benefit to the reader or editors from such a change, then it shouldn't be done. Most people are too busy with content creation to bother doing vast tweaks based on a minor date discrepancy or console war-ism. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
@Zxcvbnm: Agreed. I really don't see the need to start a fuss over minor date issues. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

PS Portal, anyone have it to photograph?

The PlayStation Portal article doesn't yet have a photo of the device. (there had been one File:PlayStation Portal.jpg which is rightfully nominated for deletion because it is definitely not free). Just putting this out here for anyone who happens to own a Portal and has good photography skills to consider taking a free shot. Sceeegt (talk) 18:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: