Talk:Thatgamecompany

This article was nominated for deletion on 23 February 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Business Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Video games Stub‑class Low‑importance

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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-class on the project's quality scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Gaming Benni (12 participants)
Cobra (game engine) (5 participants)
Jeffrey Johnson (actor) (2 participants; relisted)
Endor AG (3 participants; relisted)
Flash Element TD (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

The name of thatgamecompany

I am just wondering why it says ThatGameCompany. I have never seen it used as "ThatGameCompany," and I cannot find anywhere that lists it as "ThatGameCompany." I am going to change it in a couple weeks if no one gives me a response. Amish Gramish (talk) 01:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found that it has to be Thatgamecompany, but the capitalization of the "G" and "C" in the name don't make sense, and CamelCase doesn't apply to this name, as nothing in the middle has been capitalized. Because of this, I'm going to correct, to as much as I can, the name of the article. (thatgamecompany would be the most correct, but in accordance of Wikipedia's rules, I will just change it to Thatgamecompany) Amish Gramish (talk) 02:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was written ThatGameCompany because it makes it easier to read and easier to understand how the word it meant to be read. I'll get a second opinion on this before I change it back. Cheers. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 23:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We're not supposed to make things up on Wikipedia. That's not to say there's no room for creativity, but it doesn't extend to inventing a capitalization that no one else has used.

WP:MOSTM says:

CamelCase may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable (emphasis mine)

Here, you seem to be missing on the first criterion — the CamelCase version does not appear to reflect general usage. --Trovatore (talk) 09:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks for clearing that up. Some notable sources (such as Gamespot and CNET) have referred to it as ThatGameCompany but yes, I suppose it doesn't really constitute "general usage". ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 10:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gamespot has also referred to them as thatgamecompany a few times I think. I guess it depends on the writer and who's editing it. -- クラウド６６８ 14:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, just how PriceWaterHouseCoopers is written like that on Wikipedia, so it's easier to read. Oh wait, it isn't. It's written as PricewaterhouseCoopers. PricewaterhouseCoopers Amish Gramish (talk) 07:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History of thatgamecompany's Games

Since it's four in the morning, I can't think much of fixing it up to look better. I'm thinking that the history of their games should be part of history, but then that would mean that we would have to break up the current History part and give it it's own sub-section, i.e. history of the company. Another thing we could do is have this be it's own section, but I just want to know what others think, because I'm just one guy here. And please don't just delete that information, as if it has to be deleted, we can surely switch around some of that information into "History" or something else, so my time hasn't been completely wasted. (I'm talking to you, ChimpanzeeUK - Wikipedia:Trivia "If they must exist, they should in most cases be considered temporary, until a better method of presentation can be determined.") Amish Gramish (talk) 10:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Company Positions

So Chen created flow AND Cloud (he released the source code after all), yet Santiago is President? That's pretty flawed thinking right there. I know it's all about playing to one's strengths, and Chen would probably be too distracted if he were President, but come on, without his work this company wouldn't exist.