| Revision as of 17:15, 1 August 2006 editPresN (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators79,188 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:21, 1 August 2006 edit undoPresN (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators79,188 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 120: | Line 120: | ||
| :::NM, I see how you did it. It's just cvgproj|class=Stub instead of cvgproj, if it's a stub. --] 16:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | :::NM, I see how you did it. It's just cvgproj|class=Stub instead of cvgproj, if it's a stub. --] 16:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Does this mean anyone can rate them? I thought you had to be on the Misplaced Pages 1.0 team or something like that. --] 16:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | ::::Does this mean anyone can rate them? I thought you had to be on the Misplaced Pages 1.0 team or something like that. --] 16:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| 273 pages and 142 edits later, all of 2002 is done now. I just tagged them, not rated, as I'm not sure about whther I can or not, per above. I think that anyone can rate them, but frankly, I dont' care, it would take way too long to do this if I actually had to read the articles I'm tagging. As a side note, it's weird which ones are already tagged and which ones aren't- some random disney game will be, but Warcraft 3 wasn't. --] 18:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| Line 132: | Line 133: | ||
| :I don't think there's a standard for this, but I'll bet either way is fine; whatever the screenshot comes in (in the case of website-retreived ones) is what you get I guess. -- ] 06:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | :I don't think there's a standard for this, but I'll bet either way is fine; whatever the screenshot comes in (in the case of website-retreived ones) is what you get I guess. -- ] 06:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ==Project box== | ==Project box== | ||
| I noticed that the box over to the side there was pretty out of date, so I fixed it somewhat. The Peer Review and Cleanup sections are now up to date. --] 17:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | I noticed that the box over to the side there was pretty out of date, so I fixed it somewhat. The Peer Review and Cleanup sections are now up to date. --] 17:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:21, 1 August 2006
 WikiProject CVG Archives | |
| List of archive topics by section | |
Sega hybrid name
There has been a proposed move to move Sega CD to Sega Mega-CD/Sega CD, and the issue of the rather awkward hybrid name has been brought up again. After a protracted war on the Talk:Sega Mega Drive page, the article was finally moved to Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis. I wanted to bring the issue here because it shouldn't exist - we should pick one name and stick with it. How awkward is it to type Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis and having to pipe that link in? I would rather do ] so I would only have to write it out half the time. Same with the Sega CD. Hbdragon88 07:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- That is pretty ridiculous. Unless I missed it, though, no one actually cited hard numbers to determine which "system" was actually more popular worldwide (though I strongly suspect it was Mega Drive). Not that I want to open up another can of worms, but was this ever taken to RfC or other arbitration? --SevereTireDamage 11:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well yeah, the Google test has problems. And while the Mega Drive probably is more popular - as it was the name in all territories except the U.S. - I think the "Genesis" defenders made a persusasive argument, saying that just naming it the Mega Drive would confuse U.S. readers. This resembles the gasoline title war, except that it appears that that war was solved without RFC or Arbcom involvement (but I'm not sure). Hbdragon88 16:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Super Metroid
I'm making a strong effort to greatly improve the Super Metroid article and I wondered if anyone might be interested in helping. I've done a lot of work on it in the past, but it had become very jumbled up and full of stuff that was totally off-topic both for the article itself and for Misplaced Pages. It breaks my heart to see this article with a B classification; my goal is for it to be in tip-top shape.--QuasarTE 09:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Resident Evil
There is discussion ongoing at Talk:Resident Evil about the role of dab pages when disambiguating between a game and the series named after it. A third opinion would be appreciated. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 10:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Bulbasaur
Bulbasaur is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 14:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- What?! It's been what, two days since it appeared on the front page? Hbdragon88 16:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- True, although it's been featured for at least a month or two now, right? It's succesful, drawn-out 3rd nom was made back in February, so it was a bit of a delay. Which also means that's several months worth of change to the article. It's had a rough life it has. Three FACs, two peer reviews, and now it might end up on the chopping block if it doesn't pass it's Review. Heck, if it doesn't pass it's review, it seems like a guarenteed removal, considering the whole community worth of Pokemon haters out there. -- gakon5
Wario
Wario has been nominated at FAR, here. Please leave comments. Highway 18:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
An online peer-reviewed ludology journal
People here might want to check out gamestudies.org, which appears to be a peer-reviewed scholarly game journal. Browsing a bit, I was able to find articles on The Sims, Grand Theft Auto, Halo: Combat Evolved, Lara Croft, Counter-Strike, and others. The CS one is particularly interesting in that it covers behaviors during multiplayer — the type of stuff that traditionally has not been well-sourced or has been outright deemed unverifiable here on Misplaced Pages. There's a lot of interesting material to use. — TKD::Talk 00:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Interesting link, thanks for posting it. --SevereTireDamage 07:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Who wants to work with me to make RuneScape a good article?
Having recently joined the Computer and Video Games WikiProject, and as a member of the Good articles WikiProject, I have a goal of making RuneScape a Good article.
The RuneScape article has previously failed a Featured Article nomination and failed a Good Article nomination. I sent it for Peer Review, raising several concerns, but received no significant responses.
If you wish to collaborate with me to make RuneScape a good article, please read and reply on RuneScape's talk page. Thanks.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 06:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Working on the AdventureQuest article.
Having recently joined the Computer and video games WikiProject, my first task will be to work on the AdventureQuest article.
The article desperately needs a rewrite and cleanup. Although I will help with that, one of my main tasks will be to provide in-game screenshots, as well as to play the game to check facts provided (in some cases, in-game screenshots may be used as proof of concept).
However, as a level 58 non-Guardian, I stopped playing AdventureQuest several months ago due to the Guardian Only Login feature. I recently tried to log in, and discovered a new survey which non-Guardians could take in order to gain unlimited login access for 24 hours. This allows me to log in to play the game, take in-game screenshots and fact-check.
Therefore, I need someone to give me the green light, before I take the survey and log in. In addition, I hope you can offer me advice (for example, style) I should bear in mind when making my very major edit(s) to the article, which may take several hours. I will probably do this next weekend, possibly earlier depending on my real-life situation.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Started a Death, Jr. 2: Root of Evil article
I just joined the Project and Misplaced Pages. This project convinced me that it was time to join Misplaced Pages to start contributing.
The game is still under development, so not much is known. I could put in some screenshots, but there is no cover art for the infobox. All the information was from Gamespot.
Some questions Re: Browser-based games
I have an interesting question for the brains trust here.I'm working on an article, Nexus War, which is a browser-based MMORPG. While there's some useful information on the project page regarding computer and video games, there doesn't seem to be a lot of useful information for this style of game.
So, I'd like to ask people here - how should I be going about structuring an article on something like this? I suspect that the article could be made into a very good article, but I'm not sure what aspects of a browser-based game are worth discussing. Obviously there's Gameplay and Story, but I'm not sure how much of Story should be in the teaser, and whether I should be splitting Gameplay into sub-headings, and if so what these sub-headings should be.
Can anyone give me any ideas as to where I should be going with this article? -- Kirby1024 05:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- I looked at the page, and I would suggest giving up on adding to it. It doesn't seem that notable, and will probably get deleted. RobJ1981 05:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Even if this article gets deleted, this genre of games has a few noteworthies (Urban Dead being the major one), so even some general guidelines on this sort of genre would be nice. -- Kirby1024 05:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
StarCraft storyline and its child pages
We currently have no less than 18 pages describing (I can't even call it "summarizing") the story of StarCraft (all linked from StarCraft storyline), and that's not counting character, race, and other plot summary articles. This is absolutely excessive for one game.
So what do we do about it? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Ouch. It looks a novel adaption of Starcraft, practically. Not knowing anything about Starcraft, admittedly, I don't see how the main storyline page is lacking in sufficient detail. There also seems to be some original research problems. A gentle approach would to give editors some time to consolidate any needed context into the main storyline page before nominating the auxiliary pages for deletion, but the need for consolidation seems to be minimal. I agree that, one way or another, though, the auxiliary articles should go. — TKD::Talk 06:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Normally I'm against massive AfDs, but considering that even the Final Fantasy games don't have this much exposition on their fictional world, it's pretty hard to argue that all of these belong in the Misplaced Pages. --SevereTireDamage 07:41, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- You should see the number of subpages RuneScape has. Someone tried to AfD all of them. However, the AfD failed. I think it should be trimmed to about 5 sections. Does anyone wish to collaborate with me to make RuneScape a good article (please read sections I posted above)? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 06:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Formal tone
The article Walt Disney World Quest: Magical Racing Tour has been tagged. It was mainly written by myself and I was wondering what exactly is right and wrong. If anyone could correct the article that would be very much appreciated. I do not understand how this is poor writing. If you could put up a paragraph and then correct it for me on here that would be great. Thanks. --Thorpe | talk 11:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- "For whatever reason" is what you'd call informal, and the use of the second person ("you") is a no-go. That's all I can really see. -- gakon5 15:41, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
FAC
I added a featured article candidates section right below the featured articles section. Thought that those articles deserved some recognition, and it's not too hard to keep on top of. --PresN 17:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
CVGProj tag
I just added the {{cvgproj}} to around 200 articles, so everything that was in the "Games in 2003" catagory is tagged. This is just to remind people about the message on the top of this page- tag your pages' talk pages! --PresN 19:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, I'm bored. All articles in "Games in 1980" through "Games in 1983" are tagged.
- I've been tagging games whenever I have time. Fun, isn't it? ;) RandyWang (/review me!) 21:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Everything in List of Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis games is tagged and rated. Nifboy 02:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- Rated too? Wow. How do you go about rating them? Like, physically making the box show the rating? I should start doing that as well. --PresN 16:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- NM, I see how you did it. It's just cvgproj|class=Stub instead of cvgproj, if it's a stub. --PresN 16:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- Does this mean anyone can rate them? I thought you had to be on the Misplaced Pages 1.0 team or something like that. --SevereTireDamage 16:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- NM, I see how you did it. It's just cvgproj|class=Stub instead of cvgproj, if it's a stub. --PresN 16:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- Rated too? Wow. How do you go about rating them? Like, physically making the box show the rating? I should start doing that as well. --PresN 16:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
273 pages and 142 edits later, all of 2002 is done now. I just tagged them, not rated, as I'm not sure about whther I can or not, per above. I think that anyone can rate them, but frankly, I dont' care, it would take way too long to do this if I actually had to read the articles I'm tagging. As a side note, it's weird which ones are already tagged and which ones aren't- some random disney game will be, but Warcraft 3 wasn't. --PresN 18:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
WPCVG/New
I have created a new page, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Computer and video games/New article announcements, where people can announce their new articles related to video games. I'm not great at writing articles from scratch, but like fixing up stubby articles, so I thought this kind of page would be nice to have. I've added a link to the page on the WikiProject page, hope that's ok. Ajaxfan 19:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, I just noticed that there's a Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Computer and video games/Noticeboard. It's not really clear what the purpose of that page is to me, and it doesn't seem to be used much. Perhaps it should just be a redirect? Ajaxfan 20:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- It can be used to call any sort of attention to an article, but generally it's been used to call for third opinions to disputes, since expansion pushes for GA/FA go to CVG Peer Review, the weekly collab and the also inactive CVGI. I cleaned it out recently, though it still doesn't get much attention, not much more than a posting a month. It's another case of things that generally get brought to this talk page instead. --SevereTireDamage 20:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Color of GameBoy game screenshots?
Should there be a standard for the color of GameBoy game screenshots displayed in articles? Although emulators are default black and white, most people probably are more familiar with the yellow-green monochrome colors, and the BGB emulator allows for a setup like this. The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening shows the yellow-green setup, while Final Fantasy Legend shows black and white. Which is more ideal? Personally, I prefer yellow-green. --Tristam 04:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think there's a standard for this, but I'll bet either way is fine; whatever the screenshot comes in (in the case of website-retreived ones) is what you get I guess. -- gakon5 06:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Project box
I noticed that the box over to the side there was pretty out of date, so I fixed it somewhat. The Peer Review and Cleanup sections are now up to date. --PresN 17:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Category: