Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcut: WT:VG
Gamepad.svg WikiProject
Video games
Main page talk
Archives
1 - 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107
Threads older than 10 days may
be archived by MiszaBot II.
Manual of style
Article guidelines talk
Templates talk
Sources talk
Departments
Assessment talk
Reference library talk
  Print archive talk
Newsletter talk
  Current issue Draft
Articles
Article alerts talk
Pages for deletion talk
New pages talk
Article requests talk
Essential articles talk
Most popular articles talk
Featured content talk
Good content talk
Recognized content talk

viewtalkeditchanges

Request for rewrite/cleanup help - Xbox One[edit]

I've been having writer's (editor's?) block for a while on this. There are some major issues with the article that I'm having a hard time writing about. I'm requesting for some people with extra time to have a jump on it. Here are some of the major issues I see from here.

  • The article is outdated. Several references to stuff writen in future tense have already come to pass, such as Twitch.tv integration.
  • The release reception section is too short, which is pretty sad.
  • Software and services section is missing some features, such as the idea of applications. The software developer in me wants to hammer in the idea of Universal Windows Apps (This is really a thing) as some apps and games are already using the idea (Halo: Spartan Assault and Skulls of the Shogun are two comming to mind.)
  • The pre-release reception section is excessively long and too much in focus of the article. This represents the biggest problem the article has, as it focuses too much on the controversy of the console before it even came out rather than the hardware itself. I have trimmed it down as best I could but I find it hard to determine what is notable enough to include. (Or in this case, not include)

This is what I see for now. I own an XOne so I can check just about anything if needed too. Comments? Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 13:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I lost interest in the article when the anti-Microsoft and pro-Sony forces took over the article and insisted on including every single Microsoft misstep. I may get back into the article to see if we can reduce excessive coverage and make the article more neutral. I've got a One as well and can double-check. I've been finishing up the creation of Ori and the Blind Forest and could use some more eyes on that one, too. --McDoobAU93 13:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hive the pre-launch stuff off into a launch article, Microsoft's daily gaff from the initial reveal through E3 and up to launch is a notable phase in the life of the console. - X201 (talk) 14:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Agree with separate article on the launch woes. The highlights (lowlights?) can be covered in the main article. --McDoobAU93 15:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm on the fence, leaning against. To me it kinda seems like bashing out said article might exacerbate the problem, since it might just expand and bloat even harder. On the other hand, it does shrink the pre-release reception in the main article. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 15:50, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
It worked with the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360. Hiving off the launch, controller info, system software updates etc, makes room for the main article to be the general overview that the average person would expect, the specific articles then go into detail for users that need to research a specific aspect. - X201 (talk) 16:15, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
How about an article genericly labeled "Controversy"? It could also allow us to cut out some of the Kinect requirement and bundle stuff. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 19:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Sounds terribly POV to me. This said, the Xbox_One#Pre-release section is way too long and goes into way too much minutiae—just needs to be cut back, not spun out czar  23:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with you Czar, but since the idea came up I thought I would throw the compromise ball into the air. I'll try harder to slim down the section some more and try for a master rewrite, provided I don't get a nice writer's block again. *Groan* Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 03:49, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I personally disagree with a cut, but am on-the-fence about a page split. I think we have to accept the fact that, basically, the entire launch was an unbelievable fuck-up. Don't get me wrong, I got an Xbone at launch (and a PS4 early this year), and love both, but the negative backlash was so widespread that trying to edit out some of that out would be sailing closer to POV than having it all there. I think the section looks disproportionally long because the rest of the article is outdated and in need of expansion, namely Critical reception. We could solve that with a page split, yes, and I think the Xbone's controversy in and of itself would meet the GNG. CR4ZE (tc) 04:18, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Application List[edit]

Which leads me to a different point. I think we should have an article for the available apps. Half the work is done here. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 16:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

(Goes to check article)... For gods sake, do it yesterday. - X201 (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Done! (Started, really) Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 18:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Good stuff, I'm a big contributor to the Xbox One games list, and create the List for Xbox Original Programming, so I'll help with the app list as well. --Mordecairule 11:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mordecairule (talkcontribs)
Do you use any special software to edit grids? Generating such a large list by hand looks daunting. Advice? Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 12:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
I can't speak for Mordecairule, but I use Excel and the concatenate function. You can import the table data into Excel and then create the table code around it by dragging cells.- X201 (talk) 13:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Can you go into some more details? I'm not exactly Mr. Excel over here. (Developer by trade, but not for Excel) Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 18:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Zero Serenity: Yep, no problem. Just remeber to prod me if I haven't got back to you soon. - X201 (talk) 09:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Outside input here: Why not merge both List of Xbox One games and List of Xbox One applications into one article and name it List of Xbox One software, like it was done on List of Wii U software some time ago? Keeps things all in one place. No pun intended ;) ~ Arkhandar (TalkContribs) 01:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Xbox 1[edit]

I am assuming bad faith on the part of this Crosswords person. His...insulting edit summaries coupled with how little his argument makes sense irks me. Can I get a third opinion on this article going from a redirect to Xbox One to anything else? Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 02:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Blocked him for edit warring...though you had your fair share of reverts too. Please be careful not to get blocked yourself. Sergecross73 msg me 02:45, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
I shall await consensus on this page before taking another stab at fixing it. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 02:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Seems he's not getting the message. Getting him to come to a discussion without insulting people/groups is challenging. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 12:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2014[edit]

Gamepad.svg

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

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


Content


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

Milestone discussion[edit]

750 Good and A-Class articles: 99.9% complete
(749/750)

As of this posting, we have 741 Good/A-class articles under the projects belt. Which means that we are close to reaching the milestone above. Since we are about to cross said goal, its probably best to discuss what new milestone we should have next. Any ideas? GamerPro64 02:27, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I vote for 5% of articles/lists GA/A/FA/FL class. --PresN 03:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
5% of articles and lists GA-Class or better: 64% complete
(991/1547.4)
I like it czar  04:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

How many new WPVG articles are created per day/week/month? Switching to a percentage based measure could mean that you are paddling furiously just to stay still. - X201 (talk) 05:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, we could make it just out of 1500, instead of the currect 1544.85. Not sure we'd actually be outpaced by the rate of article creation, but it did seem like the 250 FA/750 GA bars got completed easier than the percentage ones, though it may have just been that the numbers were lower. --PresN 21:44, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
1500 articles and lists GA-Class or better: 66.1% complete
(991/1500)
The flat number bar is more practical, but the percentage one is more impressive. It's a tough decision, but I think I prefer the percentage. 5% of your project's articles being GA class or higher feels like a huge accomplishment, and I don't think that we create enough articles for it to be an unreachable goal. My two cents. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I don't want the looming threat of dishonoring your tribe by creating articles you can't GA to dissuade us from creating pages that ought to be around. Really, what it boils down to is: do we care more about getting things done for the reader or looking spiffy for other projects? We're already one of the most active projects on the site. I mean, look at WP:FA and see how many we have compared to, say, mathematics, linguistics, or even physics/astronomy. (Granted, those fields require a certain level of scholarly know-how to write about, but on the other hand, I feel that we have stricter demands for accessibility.) Tezero (talk) 22:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Assuming I understood your meaning correctly, it's not like we don't also have "75% of articles start-class or better" and "20% of articles C-class or better" as goals as well. --PresN 00:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Video games produced in collaboration with Walt Disney Animation Studios[edit]

Some games like Disney Infinity are produced in collaboration with the studio. Could someone help finding an RS for the information? Thanks!Forbidden User (talk) 14:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

There is a WikiProject-wide help page on that topic located at WP:VG/RS#Locating reliable sources. If you are interested in using the custom google search engines that are linked, I'd recommend excluding the New York Times because it has a broader focus and you will get a lot of information on Disney's animated films instead of its games. You can exclude these from your results by searching on "Walt Disney Animation Studios" -nytimes. -Thibbs (talk) 13:53, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Another joyous reliable sources discussion[edit]

Crisco 1492 has made the helpful step of reviewing Sonic: After the Sequel for FAC nearly as soon as I put it up. I have fixed, or tried to, the rest of his non-prose concerns, but I'd like to get input on the following sources that are not used now and whose reliability is unclear: GenGame, RetroCollect, Flayrah, TrenchPlay, DSO Gaming, Gaming Momentum, ScrewAttack, GamesReviews (the name Mat Growcott rings a bell) Tezero (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Flayrah, looks pretty lowbrow. A "furry" fansite that accepts user submissions? Not sure they'd meet the requirements of an RS, or that they'd especially be much of an authority on video games either... Sergecross73 msg me 16:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I haven't looked at any of these in more detail; I just pulled them up and slapped 'em in. Tezero (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • DSOGaming when last discussed at WP:VG/RS was unreliable. -- ferret (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • The ScrewAttack source is just a random userblog written by a "MrLange". That wouldn't be useable either. Sergecross73 msg me 23:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Wait a second. I knew that name sounded familiar; Mr. Lange was one of the composers. He even refers to himself and LakeFeperd as "we". ...Granted, I don't know how useful this source would be. Tezero (talk) 00:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Flight Unlimited II TFA[edit]

I don't really understand, but the TFA Protector Bot just dropped by Flight Unlimited II in preparation for its upcoming TFA. I didn't nominate this article for TFA, and no one told me that it was nominated. On top of that, I can't find the nomination archive. Something similar happened with Terra Nova: Strike Force Centauri a few months back, and that mystery is still unsolved. Can anyone fill me in? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:07, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

You must be one popular guy with the bots. *giggle* I heard TFA Protector Bot and SineBot gushing over you in study hall; I couldn't even concentrate on my Referencing homework. Man, I'm never gonna pass Mr. Koavf's class at this rate... Tezero (talk) 07:41, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Ha! I got a laugh out of this. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

@JimmyBlackwing: only about half the TFAs that appear are actually nominated. The rest are picked by Bencherlite from a list of them that haven't appeared - these ones are not nominated. If you don't want it to appear you can ask him. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 14:25, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up; never heard of this before. That must have been what happened with Terra Nova, too. I won't tell him to remove it from the queue—I think the idea of a flight simulator on the front page is awesome. Flight Unlimited would have been a better and more interesting TFA, but I can't complain too much. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Quick question, would this affect Thirty Flights of Loving which is currently nominated for the 20th?--67.68.162.111 (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
That's a good point. Someone should probably bring that up on the articles request section. GamerPro64 18:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, that depends. How serious are they about the whole "no two articles of the same topic too close" deal? How important is it to them? Tezero (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
FWIW, I selected Flight Unlimited II in full knowledge that 30 Flights is nominated for later in the month and I'm quite happy to select that too. There's normally one VG TFA per month, but July missed out, so think of 1st August as being 32nd July and the pattern continues.... BencherliteTalk 21:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Mmmm. July 32nd. The date every one will remember. But getting back on track, as long as it doesn't a huge stink all around, this will work out fine. Also, having two VG articles related to flight is a fun coincidence. GamerPro64 02:04, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Using Boxart that Already Exists in Another WP[edit]

Taiko no Tatsujin: Don to Katsu no Jikū Daibōken and zh:太鼓之達人 咚和喀的時空大冒險

The English article could use a boxart, which the Chinese article happens to have one. Fair-use rationale looks a bit malformed there IMHO, but it can be probably easily reworked when used here. So could it be borrowed/taken and what steps should be done? Thanks in advance for any help :D --Nigelliusnitrox (talk) 11:38, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

You can download the file to your computer and then re-upload it to en.wikipedia at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. That will walk you through the fair use portions. That's a good start you've made on the article, but honestly the most important thing you have to do at this point is to find some third party sources for the game to demonstrate that it is a notable topic. I'm sure there would be coverage of the game in Japanese sources like Famitsu because it's a popular series, but unless reliable third party sources can be found the article is in risk of being nominated for deletion... -Thibbs (talk) 13:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. That was easier than I thought, surprisingly. As of notability, the nice Mika1h has brought to my attention on other Taiko pages, and I will be working on that too. --野郎院ひさし//Nigellius Nitrox (talk) 15:20, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Elite series[edit]

A novice editor (HyperspaceCloud) started a draft for an article on the Elite series of games. I did what I could with it, as did McGeddon. I'm not sure it's ready to be moved to article space yet, as there are huge gaps in information, such as development, reason for the gaps in releases, consistency in the universe, etc. I know next to nothing about the series, having not played any of the games. Does anyone think it can be moved into article space (under the name Elite (series)) in it's current state or does it need a lot more work yet? Are there any editors here who could take a stab at improving/expading it? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 14:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I can't help (never played it), but given how this is "critical" for the upcoming "No Man's Sky" (which gives credit to the Elite series) I think this does need to happen. Suggestions would be to add a summary of the basic gameplay concepts, and if possible a reception table. I realize the sourcing won't be easy for it, but it's on the right track to get there. --MASEM (t) 15:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I think that all the Elite articles already almost contain all the necessary content for the series article. The current series draft look like a good start, but shouldn't go live yet, because it's missing stuff about the planetary landing and shift to more realism in the sequels, also Elite: Dangerous isn't exactly the same as the original Elite 4 idea. I will try finish the article in the coming days. HyperspaceCloud (talk) 17:27, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
My opinion is that as long as the article demonstrates its notability (which I will not comment on, as a rule), it can go live. The average reader probably isn't going to care that much if it's not complete as long as it exists. Tezero (talk) 18:29, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Disney's Aladdin[edit]

I am trying to find reliable sources for the Disney's Aladdin (1994 video game) article, and I am finding it particularly difficult. The search is complicated by the fact that two better-known video games with the same title were released in 1993 (one by Virgin Games and one by Capcom), so most of the reviews I can find are about the 1993 games. If anyone is able to help me find sources, it would be greatly appreciated. Even if you know the citation information for a review in an obscure magazine, if you let me know that information, I should be able to request the article through my local library. Thanks in advance! Neelix (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video games Reference library lists a "Making of" for this game in games TM issue 57. Sega Force Mega and Electronic Gaming Monthly have reviews in the RL, too. Grab the GamePro review here and Mean Machines Sega review [here. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I see now that you're working on the Game Gear version. Scratch the above. I'll see what I can find. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
The Game Gear version should be reviewed in one of the 1994 issues of GamePro listed here. I should be able to find the EGM review in my magazine collection, too. However, given the dearth of sources on this version, it would be a good idea to merge it into one of the other Aladdin articles. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 18:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for responding so quickly! Please let me know if you find any reviews through GamePro, EGM, or any other magazines. The 1994 Game Gear game is a completely different game than the 1993 games; it had a different developer, it has very different gameplay, and it is simply entirely different except for the title and the fact that it's based on the same 1992 film. Because it is a different game and not simply a different version, a merger isn't an option. I appreciate your help in finding sources. Neelix (talk) 18:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Merging is almost always an option when it comes to games in the same family. For example, Destruction Derby 64 was made by a different developer than the original, many years after the first game's release. Plus, it featured totally new graphics and gameplay. But it got merged because there wasn't enough material for a standalone article. I guarantee you that an obscure Game Gear game is going to be in the same boat. I'll look for a review in EGM (no guarantees that I'll have it), but I think it's a lost cause to make this more than a subsection of the main Aladdin game article. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Found the EGM review. Issue 58, May 1994, page 40. Reviewers (in order): Ed Semrad, Danyon Carpenter, Al Manuel, Sushi-X. I have no other magazines from 1994, so that's all I'll be able to provide. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for finding that review! If the article were to be merged elsewhere, the only appropriate location would be List of Disney's Aladdin video games. Neelix (talk) 15:34, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I've checked my back issues of Sega Power and can't find a review or a mention of it. Only thing I found was a review of the Master System game. - X201 (talk) 16:06, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Ion Storm Improvement[edit]

I've been expanding and reorganizing the Ion Storm article. It's a really important company in the history of video games and more importantly, there is a large variety of sources out there for it. It could, if one were interested enough make it to FA status.

Much of the article can re-use material from other articles. The section on Deus Ex for instance can use material from Development of Deus Ex. So if you are improving an article on an Ion Storm related page, please think about giving the Ion Storm article itself a look over and possibly port over some of your additions. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 08:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

What a coincidence. User:Czar, User:JimmyBlackwing and I are trying to get a Ion Storm topic made. Starting with Deus Ex. That's good to know. GamerPro64 14:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
While you fellows are on the subject of Ion Storm, I think Dominion: Storm Over Gift 3 could use some work. DARTHBOTTO talkcont 19:52, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Again, some of us are trying to get a Featured Topic made for all games involving Ion Storm. If you would like to get involved as well it could be helpful. GamerPro64 20:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I've collected a bunch of sources on Dominion's talk page already. There's more than enough for the article to be written. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:20, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

For sources, be sure to check out Masters of Doom which covers the Dallas office of Ion Storm in detail. It does not really focus much on the Austin office much, or Tom Halls game. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

New Yorker archives[edit]

While the New Yorker is not a usual spot for video game details, it is a high quality source that if it has covered a game we have an article for, we should have that as a source. They have recently opened up their archives for free for everyone (yay). Polygon has highlighted some of the bigger stories they've had here [1] but there may also be more there. --MASEM (t) 15:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

As a note, this appears to be only for the summer (eg for a few months from now), so if you do include them, please make sure to webcite the article as well. --MASEM (t) 19:54, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikimania needs consoles.[edit]

https://wikimania2014.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikimania_Games_Corner Nathan121212 (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Some help needed at Let's Play (video gaming)[edit]

It might be one editor or a couple, but there are edits trying to override the generally accepted fact (something I just found a good source for) that LPs came out of Something Awful, by pointing to a random video playthrough that was posted a few years earlier by a random website. Smells like COI or similar. --MASEM (t) 16:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I will keep an eye out. Do not forget to also start a SPI, considering the edits from these "users" are copy pasted. NathanWubs (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Could use a few more inputs here. This editor refuses to acknowledge a book and a GameInformer article that note that the name "Let's Plays" started at Something Awful (to the point where the editor is demanding we include the images of the GI table of content to proof the article was published in it). We have tried to write the lead to explain better that the concept of such videos did not actually start at SA but this editor rejects this. --MASEM (t) 00:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, Masem's discussion with the editor is only going in circles, to the point of IDHT. The editor has even threatened legal action and has called other disagreeing editors in the discussion "cohorts." It is reasonable to assume that this discussion is not going to go anywhere soon. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 00:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Threatening legal action? That doesn't even make sense. On what grounds would legal action be a thing? I myself have read this GI article so I know the facts are straight here. What exactly is his problems besides denying SA started Let's Plays? GamerPro64 00:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

M wikifacts (talk) 01:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC) The legal action was in regards to the individual (Masem) being accusatory and stating I have a conflict of interest in regards to the information posted, which is demonstrated to be not the case. The accusation was defamatory in nature and manipulative on the editor's part to draw a conclusive result. We are beyond that now. I recommend that if you decided to discuss another editor in a passive sense within this resource, you inform them. M wikifacts (talk) 01:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  • So now the "wikifacts" individual is indefinitely blocked for making legal threats and such. Hopefully we can all now continue with our lives. GamerPro64 02:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Just a quick note that there were at least two other SPA users, NevermoreJames and some IPs, that were engaged in the initial edit war. They may or may not be sock puppets of wikifacts. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 02:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming so, but as long as the socks stay dead... I also supposed he might be unblocked after discussion with whichever admin patrolled his unblock request, after agreeing to some conditions, but seeing his unblock request makes me doubt any admin will be inclined to offer much help or guidance. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  03:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I'll just list them here so I can find them later if needed; if either of these edit again, we need to think about a potential SPI: 212.69.51.241 - AHiFi - NevermoreJames. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  03:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Already made an SPI when the issue was ongoing, so the socks will probably be blocked in a week or two NathanWubs (talk) 09:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Just an FYI for everyone, making legal threats is an instantly-bannable offense - WP:LEGAL. While it's technically for "the duration of the legal threat", in practice, like this time, it's indefinite, and then the user has to request an unblock while withdrawing the threat and de-escalating. WP takes threats to sue either WP itself or specific editors very seriously. --PresN 04:06, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Can someone take a look at this?[edit]

I've created an article for Drakengard and Nier director Taro Yoko. Could someone give it a rating? --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:30, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Quick check shows it's pretty decent for a new article, meets BLP, and thus should be fine. It's at least C-class, though I'd say it's low-importance. You might want to consider creating a DYK nomination since it's a new article. --MASEM (t) 21:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. To hit B-class, it needs a lead and some more biographical detail- right now it's almost entirely about what he's worked on, rather than him personally. It's hard, since game dev work is what he's known for, but compare to Jenova Chen (GA), where it doesn't even get to his first published game until the middle of the third paragraph, while Taro only has two paragraphs to begin with. +1 on nominating for DYK. --PresN 21:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
To be brutally honest, I'm not that interested in working much further on the article, mainly for the simple reason that the information referenced there was all I could find. I think I was lucky to find the information on where he studied and what companies he worked at before Cavia. All I wanted to do was create a modest article on him. I can look through his blog. And what kind of DYK could I do, and how could I phrase it? I've never done one before. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The details of the process you can find at WP:DYK. As for the hook something like "Did you know ... video game developer Taro Yoko usings a "backwards scriptwriting" to craft the stories for his games" would work. Basically something that would catch a viewer's eye, which I think that backwards scriptwriting concept would catch. --MASEM (t) 22:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Is this link appropriate?[edit]

A single purpose account [2] has added in mention of an unofficial way to play a game online to two articles [3] [4]. Their only reference is a page on the steam community which they created themselves using the same username as they did on Wikipedia. [5] Dream Focus 05:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

It's not a reliable source, so it doesn't belong in the body text, but I wouldn't object to it being placed in External links. Tezero (talk) 05:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Input wanted[edit]

I have raised a question on the Square Enix WikiProject talk page about the recently created page for Rinoa Heartilly. Imput is needed and wanted. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Help with writing gameplay summary for Loved (video game)[edit]

I've finished writing the draft for my first video game article, Loved (video game). The subject is about a browser-based platform game that was released four years ago, and I would like to submit it to DYK, but the "Gameplay" section is empty, and I'm not sure how to approach it. If anybody could possibly write it out or make an outline of what to include based on the sources given, that would be greatly appreciated, and I'll give you credit on the DYK nomination. Thank you. 23W 08:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I took a crack at it. It's not great, but it's something. I welcome others to edit mercilessly. :) Cheers! Woodroar (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much! :D It's great, although unsourced; I'll tweak it in the morning, but again, thanks! 23W 10:06, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Activity[edit]

So, what projects are more active than us other than Military history? That's the only one I really see brought up. Tezero (talk) 05:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)