Talk:Pac-Man

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Cscr-former.svg Pac-Man is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
WikiProject Video games (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
e·h·w·Stock post message.svg To-do:

Make this a good article[edit]

This article needs the following issues fixed to meet the good article criteria (see Talk:Pac-Man#Good article nomination has failed):

  1. There are too many facts that are not cited. Many of the items that are cited do not appear in the References section of the article.

Twin Galaxies has not verified a 7th player for a perfect game[edit]

The following appears in the article, "On October 28, 2009, Kevin Ruhnke of Esko, Minnesota became the seventh person to achieve the perfect score of 3,333,360 points in 5 hours, 23 minutes, and 38 seconds..[22]"

This is news to me and if true, Twin Galaxies has not verified it as of yet. I am the 6th person to achieve this feat on an arcade unit. The link given for this 7th person is simply a link to my press release. There are at 3 other players who have achieved a perfect score on the MAME(Multiple Arcade Machine Emulator) platform: Neil Chapman, Douglas Loyd and Peter Gatland.

It almost sounds like someone decided to simply insert their name without any justification.

My time was 3 hrs 41 min 22 sec. It was achieved on August 11,2009 and officially posted on September 11,2009. My time was bettered on October 14, 2009 by Rick Fothergill of Canada. It was verified on January 1, 2010. His time was 3 hrs 35 min 43 sec.

I also am the 2nd person to achieve a perfect score on Pac-Man turbo(w/speedup chip at location 6f), the first being Donald Hayes. This was accomplished on December 21, 2009 and posted on January 1, 2010.

So, to the powers that be, I respectfully request a correction concerning this matter.

Thank you,

David Race —Preceding unsigned comment added by Proveall (talkcontribs) 06:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}}

These are non factual statements, the link for #22 takes you to the David Race announcement at Twin Galaxies and Kevin Ruhnke is not even a member of Twin Galaxies nor is he the 7th person to get a perfect score. The following links takes you to the page of people who have actually obtained a perect score on arcade and MAME emulator platforms.

http://www.twingalaxies.com/index.aspx?c=22&pi=2&gi=3229&vi=5273 http://www.twingalaxies.com/index.aspx?c=22&pi=46&gi=3229&vi=11853

NON FACTUAL On October 28, 2009, Kevin Ruhnke of Esko, Minnesota became the seventh person to achieve the perfect score of 3,333,360 points in 5 hours, 23 minutes, and 38 seconds..[22] 22. ^ Twin Galaxies Announces Seventh Winner, Twin Galaxies, October 30, 2009


86.159.116.195 (talk) 22:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed; fails verification; removed. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  00:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done

"Monsters", not "ghosts"[edit]

The enemies in Pac-Man are monsters, not ghosts. They only started being called ghosts when the Atari 2600 version came out, with its flickering pale-white enemies (and I believe the Atari manual used the word "ghosts"). The article should be changed to use the word "monsters" instead of "ghosts". - Brian Kendig (talk) 16:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

And I've made this change, along with some additional explanation of how they're "monsters" in the arcade game, "ghosts" in the Atari 2600 game, and "ghost monsters" in the TV series. (Additional evidence for them not being "ghosts" are the intermissions, where the red one is clearly furry.) - Brian Kendig (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I have an Atari 400/800 copy from 1982 of Pac-Man that refers to the enemies as "goblins". 171.67.132.93 (talk) 23:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Fastest Perfect Pac-Man[edit]

Greetings,

My name is David Race. I am the 6th person to achieve a perfect Pac-Man on an arcade unit. Under the section which talks about perfect Pac-Man it still has my time of 3hrs 41 min 22 sec as the fastest. I would like to say that this time has been improved upon twice. The first time was in October 2009 which was later verified on January 1, 2010 as 3hrs 35min 43 sec by Rick Fothergill of Canada. On February 11, 2010 I improved the time by 1 min 35 sec. The new fastest time became 3hrs 34min 8 sec. Since it appears new things keep getting added such as Google's 30th Annivesary interactive Pac-Man I figured that the fastest time should also be updated.

Thanks,

David Race —Preceding unsigned comment added by Proveall (talkcontribs) 16:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

David, would you please provide links or references to outside sources with this information? - Brian Kendig (talk) 17:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Also, this raises a question I've had for a long time. How do you get a "perfect" game of Pac-Man? I've heard it said that people are able to eat all four blue monsters every time, but on some boards they turn blue for less than a second - do you somehow manage to get all four of them on top of each other right next to the power pill? Or how do you manage to eat all four of them in the fraction-of-a-second that they're blue? - Brian Kendig (talk) 20:10, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Here is the link to Twin Galaxies verification of Rick Fothergill's time of 3hrs 35 min 43 sec.

http://forums.twingalaxies.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=18554&p=132806#p132806

Here is the link to the current world record time

http://forums.twingalaxies.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=20461&start=0&hilit=David+Race — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proveall (talkcontribs) 05:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Pac-man Google is NOT flash[edit]

Who said google`s pac-man was flash? Well, it isnt. 189.35.248.34 (talk) 23:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually it used flash for sound only. The main game play is NOT Flash-- Probably should just remove the reference to the technology being used as that doesn't relate to the original article topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.195.201.88 (talk) 23:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Google version non-notable[edit]

Removed. Bongomatic 23:52, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

There are hundreds of reliable sources covering this [1], so this is notable Wikipedia-wise. Cenarium (talk) 01:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

It's all over the news, even TV news! < Redacted. Cenarium (talk) 02:20, 22 May 2010 (UTC) > Hwatewzs (talk) 02:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Wilsongilley, 22 May 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} Under the Music section there is a Song by the Bloodhound Gang called Mope that features pac-man music. It's pretty funny what pac-man says too. A reference could be the youtube video for it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2NFl86LX3Q

Wilsongilley (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

YouTube does not constitute a reliable source. Moreover, it is unclear what you wish changed. Intelligentsium 19:49, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Google Version[edit]

There are a couple of issues with the Google Version

- "The Im feeling lucky button has been replaced" => "The "I'm Feeling Lucky" button was replaced" - "Pac man 30th aniversary [sic]." => "PAC-MAN 30th Anniversary"

At a bare minimum.

71.139.167.28 (talk) 03:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

To add:

- If you click "Please add coin" button instead of "I'm feeling lucky" the game began inmediately, if you insert another coin you can play simultaneosly with both Pacman and Ms. Pacman both having their unique sound effects and music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.168.191.222 (talk) 04:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Magazine Covers Delight![edit]

One of my coolest memories of Pac-man was how parody became reality in 1981. I may or may not still have both these magazine covers around, but someone may be able to verify them.

From my faulty memory, the October 1981 cover of MAD magazine was done in the style of TIME magazine (with the TIME logo replaced by MAD), and with the traditional TIME "Man of the Year" banner present, over the name "Irving Pac" and a large portrait of Pac-Man.

To my delight, the December 1981 TIME cover echoed this almost perfectly and did in fact declare Pac-Man Man of the Year, with an awfully similar cover.

If I'm not in fact making this up, it needs sources and pictures and should be in this article somehow, right?

Ancient Steve Rapaport (talk) 12:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually it was the September of 1982 edition. Here is the cover: http://www.tias.com/13464/PictPage/3923700736.html Xonus (talk) 23:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Japanese folklore[edit]

Isn't Pac Man supposed to be based on a creature from Japanese folklore that ate ghosts? Serendipodous 07:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Bakanovse, 24 May 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} It's my first edit post at WIKI.Please don't beat me. I thing current link to filehosting to offline version is irrelevant in version. Most relevant version is permanent located at web-site (http://github.com/macek/google_pacman/) man who created this and shared offline version. Difference is great: current WIKI-linked version has no sound control, but finalized version has it. Link for finale version of offline GooglePacman is Name: macek-google_pacman-701c732.zip URL: http://github.com/macek/google_pacman/zipball/master Size: 204073

Sorry, for my bad English, I am from Russia. I hope you understand me.

Bakanovse (talk) 11:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done:being a third party, I would have to say that this does not belong in the article. Maybe the External Links section, but not the article. The original sentence in the article with the link to the one without sound has also been removed. Spitfire19 (Talk) 14:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Not done:I do not believe that it is wise to link to a personally managed file sharing site that allows downloading of executable code. This could be exploited by malware and viruses. -- Matthew Glennon (T/C\D) 14:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

30 years of ghosts chasing a little yellow thing[edit]

A few weeks ago the 30th anniversery of Pac-man was celebrated. Its been a long time.. I will bold everything I contribute if it has something to do with video games Gamerhead (talk) 00:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Gamerhead

Gamerhead (talk) 14:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)Gamerhead

Edit request from Oscar690, 17 June 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} Add a link to a online game for spectrum: http://www.relaxate.com/emuladores/sinclair/jugar-spectrum.php?id=2649


Oscar690 (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: possible linkspam. SpigotMap 15:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Adding original design sketches?[edit]

Could we add this (from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C5%8Dru_Iwatani)

== Original Drawings == On June 2, 2010 just before visiting the [http://www.festivalofgames.org Festival of Games], Toru Iwatani was photographed showing the original sketches of Pac-Man. This photograph was later published by Dutch developer magazine [http://control-online.nl Control] on June 22, 2010<ref>http://control-online.nl/gamesindustrie/2010/06/22/iwatani-toont-gamesgeschiedenis-in-meest-pure-vorm/</ref>, making it the first public appearance of these designs.<ref>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1289239/Japanese-inventor-Pac-Man-reveals-original-sketches-iconic-video-game.html</ref> <gallery> File:Toru_Iwatani_-_Original_Pacman_Sketches.jpg|Original Pac-man Sketches </gallery>

Original Drawings[edit]

On June 2, 2010 just before visiting the Festival of Games, Toru Iwatani was photographed showing the original sketches of Pac-Man. This photograph was later published by Dutch developer magazine Control on June 22, 2010[1], making it the first public appearance of these designs.[2]


Except you don't have permission to reproduce said photograph here. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 12:18, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 207.161.122.198, 2 July 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} The PacMan concept is implicitly based on a 2-Dimensional playing surface, with motion along the X and Y axes. On June 26th 2010, an iPhone game (DejiCube) was released on the apple app store. This game is recognisably based on the PacMan model, but extends the model by enabling players to move along the X, Y, and Z axes, effectively making it a true 3D PacMan. This is the first time this capability has been present in a PacMan game. References required. Deji akadiri (talk) 22:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Unless it's actually attached to the Pac-Man property, there's no notability from the 100's of other clones to be mentioning it here. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 22:55, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Not done: Per Above. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 01:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Monsters[edit]

I changed instances referring to the non-playable characters as "monsters" to "enemies." It's really confusing for people who still know them as ghosts. Namco seems to at least retroactively refer to the enemies in the original as ghosts (see http://pacman.com/en/about) as does Toru Iwatani (see http://www.ng-gamer.nl/game-nieuws/11117_pacman-wereldrecord-beklonken-en-het-hele-verhaal/) - I'm not sure what they were called in Puck-Man. In any case, whether you call them monsters or ghosts, they're still enemies. --Jtalledo (talk) 05:32, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

And this American flyer refers to them as "ghost monsters." - http://arcadeflyers.com/?page=flyer&db=videodb&id=765&image=2 --Jtalledo (talk) 05:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Weird Al / Pac-Man Song Citation[edit]

There is a citation needed mark under the Impact and Legacy section of this article. The second-to-last paragraph states that Weird Al recorded a Pac-Man song to the tune of the Beatles' Tax Man.

The FAQ at Weird Al's official site does confirm that he recorded a song entitled "Pacman". This can be found in the last section of the FAQ, entitled Where can I track down Al’s really old stuff? While it does not state that the song is a parody of any other work, it confirms that Weird Al did record a song with that name. StarDrifter (talk) 19:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Power-Pill[edit]

Richard D. James had produced an album titled "Pac-Man" based on the game under the pseudonym "Power Pill" which included samples of sound effects from the game. I would like this to be added to the In Pop Culture section of Impact and Legacy. - http://www.discogs.com/Power-Pill-Pac-Man/release/345

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 August 19[edit]

A redirect to this article is currently being discussed at Redirects for discussion. (The redirect is Fuck man). TFOWR 20:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Pac is Back[edit]

Pac is Back is a newly-created article purposed for deletion. As mentioned on its own discussion page, I believe that a merging would be better than complete elimination. Your thoughts? --96.251.177.93 (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

There's absolutely nothing in that article that asserts notability. The only source is a link to the E3 trailer. Has a release date been announced? Is there any third-party coverage of this thing? If not, it's not suitable for Wikipedia. The primary reason for the PROD on that article is WP:CRYSTAL - Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Articles on unreleased games and media are only generally allowed if there is a decent amount of press coverage on the subject - otherwise, the articles tend to have nothing but speculation in them.
That said, if there is some notable information about it, it's likely to only be enough to put a single sentence in with a reference. Something along the lines of "Such-and-such company is developing a new TV show and video game tie-in called Pac is Back.[ref]" — KieferSkunk (talk) — 03:12, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Offered without comment[edit]

http://no-sword.jp/blog/2010/11/eggs_and_eyeballs.html Shii (tock) 14:41, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I fail to see the relevance. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 03:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedians often do. Shii (tock) 07:16, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I added the disputed tag to the bit. That link leads to a blog, but GameSpy is hardly a reliable source for facts about Japanese culture either. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Request to add an "External Link"[edit]

I was thinking that there should be an external link under 'External links' for Google's playable Pac-Man logo. Google made this page because of the popularity of the Pac-Man Google Doodle back in May '10: www.google.com/pacman/

Edit by author:

Now I was thinking that it would be better if the link would be added as an external link in the paragraph about the Google logo itself, that is in the "Sequels and spin-offs" section of the page.

Lord Gorbachev (talk) 04:26, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

External links generally shouldn't be used intext, see WP:ELPOINTS. Besides, it's already in the References section. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from MrJoshbumstead, 15 November 2010[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}}


MrJoshbumstead (talk) 16:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC) Talk about how Pac-Man ether appered was mention or refinded on TV shows such as Family Guy or The Simpsons.

Not done for now: In order to do this, you need to give us much more specific information, reliable sources, and explain where it fits in the text. Theoretically it could go into the section "Impact and Legacy," but we can't list every single instance that Pac-Man has appeared in other media; 2 of the 3 music examples were top 100 hits, so are highly notable, but what makes random cartoons notable enough for inclusion? Furthermore, you need to give far more details--what episode(s) did it appear on, is it a running gag in the show, etc. That is, an edit semi-protected works the same as if you had actually edited the article--you need to state exactly what you want the article to state along with references to verify the addition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwyrxian (talkcontribs) 00:46, 16 November 2010

Japanese characters[edit]

Why does the first line of the article use Japanese characters? ("Pac-Man (Japanese: パックマン Pakkuman) is an arcade game developed by Namco...") I've noticed this in several articles. This is the English language article, so I don't get the point of this. Asher196 (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Because it's originally a Japanese video game. In general, while the article gets the English title, we include the name of the movie/book/video game in the original language in the lead as well. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Pop Culture section[edit]

Someone just added a pop culture section to the article, which I deleted. It was perfectly formatted, so my guess is that it was previously in the article but intentionally removed. We already have a section titled "Impact and Legacy" which covers this issue generally, without delving into too many specifics. Ultimately, this list could grow to enormous size, given the massive number of one-off, fleeting references to Pac-Man over the last 30 years. Such a list could never be complete, and, in my opinion, is not encyclopedic. Furthermore, none of the examples were cited--we would need a specific episode number and original air date for every one of those examples to include. I invite others to discuss, but please do not re-add until we achieve consensus that such a trivia section belongs in the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

While I agree on the citations needed, that's because we already have guidelines for the In Popular Culture section, which is a standard section we use in video game articles. The guidelines already take in to account your concerns, and the consensus that formed the guidelines would disagree with your opinion that having such a section is unencyclopedic. I would also suggest familiarizing your self with the video game article guidelines overall. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Ideally, a pop culture section in this article should look like Space Invaders#In popular culture, which is concise and properly cited. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Well then if someone else wants to source and add the info, then it seems to make sense. There's already related info in the article now in "Impact and Legacy" (the music info). Do you think that stuff should be moved out into a separate Pop Culture section, then, since it is already cited? Qwyrxian (talk) 23:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that could be a start. Most of the stuff that was listed in the recent revisions consisted of mere mentions and allusions, which doesn't appear to comply with WP:VG/POP. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Exactly, that's why I was saying I didn't disagree with the removal of them. Was just referring to his apparent objection of the section existing period. In pop culture sections are usually as a sub heading under Impact and legacy as you pointed out, and are almost always preferably in prose vs. long lists. And looking at what's here now, everything from "Pac-Man went on..." on down should be under an In Popular Culture subheader. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Just reformatted the article to go more in line with Space Invaders actually, which is an FA status article. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 00:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

TV[edit]

Pac-Man has appered in episodes of The Simpsons, Futurama, Family Guy & Robot Chicken & has been refinded in Phineas and Ferb, Tiny Toon Adventures, & shows by Jim Henson. Mention those! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.41.139.72 (talkcontribs)

Removed this. See the above Pop Culture section for more info. --Jtalledo (talk) 12:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The "expletive"[edit]

I do not agree with removing the "fuck" from the article. WP:NOTCENSORED specifically states that we don't make things "nice" by talking around "vulgarity". The concern isn't vandalism--it was a very specific concern that that a very specific word (puck) would be transformed into a very specific expletive (fuck). If they were generally concerned with vandalism, we would be talking about their use of special anti-vandalism paint, or something else about vandalism in general. But, according to our own words, they were concerned about a very specific word "defacing" their games. So I can't see any rational for saying "Change the P to the F and then make a common expletive." In any event, that type of bowdlerizing doesn't even make sense to me--is our article somehow more "nice" or "child friendly" because we make someone in their head do the linguistic arithmetic then actually spelling it out? Qwyrxian (talk) 00:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed extensively in the past. Check archive 2.Asher196 (talk) 01:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick recap of that discussion: The intent here is not to censor anything, but to put proper emphasis on the activity. Virtually every English-speaking person knows what you get when you combine F with UCK, so spelling it out doesn't actually add any value to the article. But furthermore, Marty made a very good point that the word itself is not what's important - it's the fact that Midway foresaw the high likelihood that people would deface the machines (properly called vandalism) to form the word. If someone wants to read more about that activity, they're better served by being pointed to the article on vandalism (which includes writing "fuck" on things and changing the meaning of signs, marquees, etc.) than to an article on what "fuck" means.
So it really isn't about censorship. The wording "changing the P to an F, forming a common expletive" is about as specific as it really needs to be, and linking either "common expletive" or "forming a common expletive" to Vandalism is a good way to make it clear what a person would be doing in "forming" such. It would be too wordy and too specific to say "forming the common expletive 'Fuck'", "vandalizing the machine to form the word 'fuck'", etc. - see what I mean?
Here's a couple of alternative points for you to consider: If the name of the game had been "Whit-Man" instead of "Puck-Man", someone could cross out the W and add in an S to make it "Shit-Man", but it would still be vandalism and the meaning of "Shit" would be no more important than the meaning of "Fuck" here. Also, to show that we're not trying to censor the article, consider the hypothetical situation where the Japanese version of the game contained the phrase "Blow the fuck out of the ghosts", or something like that. Midway would likely have removed that line from the game or caused it not to be displayed in the North American version. If this had happened and there were sufficient notability about this event, we would likely include the phrase in question and would NOT censor the word "fuck" from it. (We'd probably have a discussion about whether the phrase as a whole belongs in the article, but that's following five-pillars guidelines, not censorship.
Does that help? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 01:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
My concern is that we go to all of the effort to spell out the expletive, without actually saying it, in almost Sesame Street style, "You take the name, then you take off the P, then you and an F, and what do you get? An expletive!" Sorry, I'm feeling a bit snarky, for some reason. If we don't want to call attention to the expletive, I'm actually fine with that, but then I think we should go farther and make the sentence say, "For the North American market, the name was changed from Puck Man to Pac-Man because of vandalism concerns." That sounds a lot less nudge nudge wink wink to me. In other words, it's no so much that I think we need to keep the expletive, but that I think the half-way form of the article right now seems actually to call attention to the expletive more, not less. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. The main problem we've run into before is that there are probably a dozen different ways of saying this that span the gamut between the two extremes (not mentioning it at all, versus being quite explicit about it), and at the time we had the discussion the wording that's there right now was the best compromise we could come up with. I actually like your approach better, but I'd like to get a couple more opinions on it. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:13, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
(PS) I recall that one of the problems with "less" wording that was brought up was that, while it's easy to see how the vandalism would be offensive when you point out changing a P to an F, I think some people had concerns that not pointing out the action would then cause the reference to vandalism to be too general or vague. I don't agree with that personally - it seems common-sense to me, and I'd have a hard time imagining that anyone with even a tenuous grasp of English would have a hard time figuring it out. But I know that some people favor the "Don't make people think, spell it out" approach. So again, I'd like to get a broader range of opinions. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
"Don't make people think, spell it out" is the reason we are here editing. If we were in the business of letting people figure things out, we'd be building abacuses and blank notepads, not encyclopedias :-) (And no, the expletive is not obvious at all for non-native speakers). Diego (talk) 14:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't think the word should be spelled out either. Wikipedia isn't censored, but spelling it out definitely detracts from the fact that we're pointing out the vandalism. I agree with Qwyrxian's wording though. It focuses on the vandalism but doesn't seem condescending. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
I've put the term back in, as I do think it's condescending, breaks wp:notcensored and also wp:easteregg. Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


My issue here is that we are currently at a half-way house, neither here nor there. If there is a desire to point out the connection between "Puck" and "Fuck", then we should do so, and not censor. If we don't want to do so, then there's no reason to even mention "to form a common expletive". The fact that the name change was to avoid vandalism is already covered in the same sentence. There is mention that the sentence follows sources, but that's not quite correct, because the "to form a common expletive" is not in any sources - only the preceding sentence again.
I just propose that the term "to form a common expletive" is either unnecessary and should be removed, or it should not be censored, and say "fuck", as per the link. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I concur. I would go even further - either the fact that the name was changed is irrelevant and the whole sentence should be removed, or we should properly document everything about the name change (the reasons and the details) including the expletive which prompted the change. You can properly explain the vandalism without saying what constitutes such vandalism. Diego (talk) 14:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
If you're going to make the change, change to the version that says "fuck", not the one that doesn't explain anything. Diego (talk) 05:14, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Just want to say; as a casual user the "common expletive" thing made me cringe. Smacks of censorship and smells easter eggy. Either put the word "fuck" on the page unapologetically or not at all. 130.88.177.106 (talk) 12:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Removing unsourced "folk hero Paku"[edit]

I'm removing the unsourced "inspired by the Japanese folk hero "Paku" who was known for his appetite" line. I have no idea what this person is talking about, except maybe the mythic creature Baku (spirit). Either way, it's unsourced. Evan1975 (talk) 19:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

virtual cosole[edit]

please mention that pacman is on virtual console downloads for wii. david —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.19.94.245 (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Eric567, 22 June 2011[edit]

Please add the section heading, "See also" just above the section heading, "References. Then type "Ms. Pacman" in that section as a link.

Eric567

Not done: Thanks, but per WP:SEEALSO, links in the article body are generally not repeated under See also, and Ms. Pac-Man is already linked twice in the Remakes and sequels section. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 15:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

How will i let the japanese poster of PACMAN stay[edit]

Look i put the licensing on the video game poster and you people just delete it can't you at least let it stay by putting the licensing yourselves i mean you put first edition cover on the books wiki page so why not just put original covers of video games into the wiki page including the posters of where the video games originated from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belrien12 (talkcontribs) 04:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The image needs a valid Fair Use Rationale. See WP:FUR--Asher196 (talk) 05:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Then tell me HOW ! i dont know how to put licensing ALL i did was copy the image from arcade flyer and then insert the image into the wiki article! Belrien12 (talk) 05:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)Belrien12Belrien12 (talk) 05:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Specifically, you need to add a template - see the template section. If you don't know what to add, have a look at the already existing template for the other flyer and use that for inspiration. a_man_alone (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Take a look at {{Video game rationale}}. This template is specifically designed to help with game-related images. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 05:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Fruits[edit]

I am missing a section on the succesion of fruits (ie. cherry in level 1, then strawberry etc.) There is an entry at answers.com, but it is not sourced. Kjetilho (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Pac-Man nicknames[edit]

Noticed there's been a bit of back and forth on the issue of including Pac-Man nicknames in the article. I don't care either way right now, but I figured I'd get the discussion going before an all-out edit war. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:12, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Which software environment (language and os) is used to develop original pac-man?[edit]

Some one maybe wishes to know which software development language and environment used to develop original pac-man. That's all.

Categories[edit]

Why shouldn't Pac-Man be listed directly in Category:Namco games ? Ms. Pac-Man is there and technically it wasn't developed by Namco (it was developed by GCC and sold to Bally/Midway). Also there are entries in Category:Pac-Man which aren't video games like the movie Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade or weren't created by Namco like Professor Pac-Man so that category isn't a true subset of the Namco games category. Asmpgmr (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:DIFFUSE. The category is in there for the purpose of giving some sense of hierarchy to a large category (e.g. Namco Games). It is located in there because Namco owns the rights to Pac-Man, although they may not been involved in the development of all the Pac-Man games. As for the non video-game stuff, that is a completely different matter but suffice to say the category name is "Pac-Man" and not "Pac-Man video games." --Jtalledo (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough on the Pac-Man category but someone may look at Category:Namco games and notice Pac-Man is not there and add it back like I did. As it stands now, every other Namco Pac-Man arcade game is on that list so it seems strange that Pac-Man isn't there as well. Should the other games be removed ? Asmpgmr (talk) 22:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
I removed 'em... --Jtalledo (talk) 10:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Ms. Pac-Man is still in Category:Namco games. Anyway while I agree that the category is large it still seems a bit strange to omit a group of games especially when adding them increases the category size by about 3%. Ultimately we're talking about 6 games: Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man, Super Pac-Man, Pac & Pal, Pac-Land and Pac-Mania. Pac-Man Plus, Baby Pac-Man and Jr. Pac-Man don't count as those were done by Bally/Midway and the their specific rights weren't turned over to Namco. Asmpgmr (talk) 16:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Not just the arcade games. Don't forget Pac-Man World and the litany of spin-offs. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps a new category Namco arcade games should be created and all of the Namco arcade games moved there similar to Category:Atari arcade games. That would significantly decrease the size of the Namco games category. If such a category is created then the Pac-Man arcade games should definitely be added there in addition to being in the Pac-Man category. Asmpgmr (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. --Jtalledo (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Cruise Elroy?[edit]

What is Cruise Elroy and why does it redirect to this page?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.71.23.92 (talk) 20:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Cruise Elroy is supposedly a term that refers to how the red enemy (aka "Blinky") receives a speed boost after a certain number of dots are cleared from the board. --Jtalledo (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I've added a description at Ghosts (Pac-Man)#Blinky and changed the redirect to point there. See [2] for several longer explanations. Diego (talk) 01:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

"Vandalism"??[edit]

The article states, "Bally division Midway [...] changed the game's name from Puck Man to Pac-Man in an effort to avoid vandalism to the letter 'P'." Um, "Pac" still has a 'P' in it. How does this change "avoid vandalism to the letter 'P'"??— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.92.174.105 (talkcontribs)

Someone changed the wording so it's more ambiguous. It used to say that the change was to stop people from changing the "P" to an "F" and forming a "common expletive." --Jtalledo (talk) 02:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
See the last discussion above from 2011. It was done via consensus. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
The sentence arrived by consensus is unintelligible, so it should be tweaked until it actually says something meaningful. The best solution could be to use exactly the wording of the source, that way there will be no verifiability nor neutrality problems. Diego (talk) 16:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
P.S. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to explain the things it talks about, not to force users to play a guess game. If the name was changed because of possible vandalism, it's imperative to tell what is the nature of that vandalism, or rather not mention the name change at all. The previous version didn't even mention that the vandalism consisted of changing the letter P for an F. Also, it's irrelevant that the ugly word may be inferred by some audiences, in some time frames; what is obvious to a westerner in the 2000's may not be so to a reader from a different culture, or 100 years from now. Diego (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh geez, this discussion again? I'll just point to the 2008 discussion (admittedly, it's in the archives now and people generally don't go looking in those for consensus), where I said: "In a nutshell: The point of the passage is to point out that it could be easily vandalized, not to explain what the resulting word would be. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)" — KieferSkunk (talk) — 03:44, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll then point to my 2013 comment where I said (paraphrased): "the point of an encyclopedia is to explain things, not to not explain things". Diego (talk) 05:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
And I'll also point to my 2013 comment that if the word "fuck" is so irrelevent to the article, why do we include that segment of the sentence? As I pointed out in my 2013 comment, that part of the sentence isn't even in the quote. On the other hand, if the term "fuck" is relevant to the article - include it, and don't attempt to protect Ashers children - that's his job, not ours. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:04, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I had to go back into the archives to figure out what you were talking about. I argued against the word "fuck" being in the article five years ago for being a crude term used in an article about a children's game, and still believe it doesn't need to be explicitly spelled out. The piped link which was recently removed was a good compromise in my opinion. That version of the page stood for years, but is apparently under attack again as "censorship". I haven't changed my opinion, but if consensus leads us to "fuck" being in the article, then so be it.--Asher196 (talk) 13:12, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Pacman confirmed as character for Super Smash Brothers 4[edit]

Just what it says on the tin. http://www.smashbros.com/us/characters/pac-man.html Article (sorta) for confirmation 66.230.88.16 (talk) 07:15, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

At first I thought this was a hoax, but it apparently really is true. Interesting. Does this meet notability for inclusion in pop-culture, media references or legacy in this article? It's already been mentioned in the appropriate articles on the Smash Bros. series. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 03:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
This anon already tried, in good faith, to include the info in this article, and I reverted it. There is a separate article for the character of Pac-Man, which is where such info properly belongs in my opinion (and indeed where this info is already mentioned). Indrian (talk) 03:59, 18 June 2014 (UTC)