Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Unused000702 (talk | contribs) at 21:45, 11 January 2011 (→Mergers). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Orphaned non-free image File:Animal Crossing WW gameplay.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Animal Crossing WW gameplay.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion for The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past & Four Swords

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past & Four Swords, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Prime Blue (talk) 16:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Dog (Duck Hunt)

You probably expected me to say this...but this doesn't feel right as a stand-alone article. It's not so much on a video game character as a video game feature, and when you boil it down there isn't much to it or to say about it. There should be some way to work that reception and legacy into the parent game article, isn't it? Especially since it'll be impossible to cite such for Duck Hunt without going into all that.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

barnstar gallery

I'm just dropping a note to say that I really like the style of the barnstar gallery on your user page, and that I'm blatantly stealing emulating it on mine. Nick Number (talk) 17:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Mergers

As has been noted several times in the discussion, guidelines of the video game project dictate that there have to be substantial sections to split these articles – as it stands, the section criteria are failed and those in favor of keeping the article did not provide sources to establish a development section or anything greater than a few sentences length for the other sections except for reception, which is also the reason why I could include them in the parent articles with two to three paragraphs. The articles are not deleted, so you can split them if you find enough sources to establish the sections, most importantly a substantial development section. Prime Blue (talk) 05:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Had I known that we have established guidelines that prohibit such articles, I would not even have bothered with a merge discussion. Four people saying a separate article should exist against those guidelines without providing sources to expand them appropriately as a justification for the split is no consensus. Not even was your split against the project guidelines, it also substantially weakened the good article criteria fulfillment on A Link to the Past because it is not broad in its coverage anymore. Prime Blue (talk) 13:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Discussions are not polls and a majority does not mean consensus, especially not when it goes against community guidelines and no sources are given that would overcome existing problems. The guidelines are misrepresented by putting the focus on the reception section only: "If you can verify enough information to write a non-stub section about the distinct reception of a video game remake, as well as a non-stub section about its distinct game development or design, then the remake will qualify for its own article. There may be 35 reviews, but they don't help establish a development section that would come past stub status or even close to the already short one of the parent article, because they are not interviews with the developers and thus reveal no information on how development was. Also, the article on A Link to the Past has to cover the Game Boy Advance as it is still the original game being talked about. Neglecting information on the nature of the port and its reception substantially decreases the GAC fulfillment. I agree that individual legacy is excessive, though. Prime Blue (talk) 21:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)