Talk:DayZ (mod)

help

I am fairly new to editing wikipedia. If anyone can help with the article it would be appreciated. I have been having trouble formatting the reference links but I think it is okay now. Canwin87 (talk) 18:27, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

So happy that you have an interest in editting Wikipedia! Just make sure when you're editing that you add Wikilinks to make things clear for people who may not understand as much as you do. (Help them by leading them to other articles to explain what things mean). Also make sure you site all of your information. So great to have you helping to improve this article as it is constantly changing do to all the news about it becoming it's own standalone game.

Thanks, Ken Hollingsworth (talk) 12:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Significant fixes

This article requires significant edits now, as information is quite widely scattered across the various sections - I'll be doing significant cleanup in the next few days to rectify this issue. I will also be adding an Alpha section under the Development section, to describe the major changes during development. If anyone has any suggestions for additional sections that they think should be added, feel free to post them here. ;) Mromson (talk) 12:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Leader Not Lead

Under the stand Alone it keeps being changed everytime I put leader and then a period. He is not the project lead that makes no sense he is the leader of the project therefore the project leader grammatically lead is not correct here — Preceding unsigned comment added by K.Hollingsworth486 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

The leader of a project is the "project lead", see Lead developer. Mromson (talk) 16:25, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of "lead", the gameplay and plot are not descrtibed in the lead. --Niemti (talk) 20:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

There is no plot? besides, it is notable not for its plot but because of the industry impact. E.g. Minecraft Canwin87 (talk) 20:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Every game has a plot. Here it is something about a zombie holocaust. --Niemti (talk) 21:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Quick fix. --Niemti (talk) 21:08, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Now eliminate references from the lead. --Niemti (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Also turn the "Sources" references into inline refs. --Niemti (talk) 21:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement

B assessment

Overall, the article looks pretty good. The only problem is the "Sources" section. Why is this a section? Why aren't the two sources listed cited in the article itself? Inline cite those sources in an appropriate place in the article and just remove that section. I'll assess as B once that's done.

Since the above issue was taken care of, . --JDC808 ♫ 02:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Importance level

As for the importance level, I'll require another opinion. The accomplishments seem to merit this a High Importance article, but at the same time, I don't know the actual impact it's had on the industry. --JDC808 ♫ 19:48, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

It's too early to see the impact this will have on the industry, and for that matter, the world. Mid is the absolute highest I could see this go. --Teancum (talk) 13:49, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Needs a better screenshot

The current one is not showing the HUD system. --Niemti (talk) 10:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

True, I will try and get one. Also, you have done an amazing job with the article, it reads so much better now. if I knew how to award you those barnstar things i would :) Canwin87 (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I feel as if the wiki-code isn't working. I see the actual code. Please, tell me if it isn't. ♠♥♣Shaun9876♠♥♣ ^Talk 01:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Warning

Just a warning, when the real game comes out in 2013-ish this article will require MAJOR Reworking to describe the information in the actual game. So heads-up! ♠♥♣Shaun9876♠♥♣ ^Talk 21:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually, more like just a new aticle (it's about a mod). --Niemti (talk) 21:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

As eager as one may be

The gameplay section describes the consequences of the mod's gameplay, rather than the -actual- gameplay. Sections can be more clear and specific, or moved entirely to reception/impact.

The stand-alone game

If you want to split it off already, you can do it anytime. --Niemti (talk) 03:09, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Has this already been discussed? I just came across this article and was wondering why there wasn't any information about the stand alone game. It seems unnecessary to have a wikipedia page for the mod and stand alone game. Since the stand alone game isn't planned to be significantly different from the mod most of either article would be interchangeable with the other. I can't think of any mods turned commercial products that have separate pages. Skeith (talk) 01:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Now that I look at the games I thought of (Counter Strike and Garry's Mod) they don't really have top notch articles in the first place. So maybe it's not a good example. But I still feel it'd be confusing and a duplication of effort. Skeith (talk) 01:17, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

There are several Counter-Strike articles for the different releases. --Niemti (talk) 01:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

What I meant was they didn't feel a need for separate articles while the first game went from a free mod to a commercial product. Because of how much the Day Z mod and retail will have to have in common there must be a sensible way keep them together. Skeith (talk) 02:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Dev blog/twitter

Not an error. I removed them because the Dayz Mod and Dayz Game webpages link directly to them. In fact, the only content on the Dayz Game site at all are the twitter and tumbler feeds. The external links section in this article is a bit long listing every possible social media site that they partake in. -- ferret (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree the number of links was excessive. But I think the Youtube one left was pointless as it is not used by the development team. The twitter and the development blog are the two updated sections so it would make sense to have them, at the very least the development blog itself. Canwin87 (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

In retrospect, I would have removed the youtube one as well, but at the time my mindset was "Wait, this is Dean's youtube, it should be in his article not this one." -- ferret (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth removing external links if they're useful and have a purpose. That said, I do think that the Facebook, Youtube and Google+ externals links are rather worthless. However, the development blog and twitter links are constantly being updated and serve a purpose (despite them being linked to via the official mod/game link). Mromson (talk) 23:39, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree the facebook, youtube and google+ don't really serve any purpose. But the twitter and devblog ones are good inclusions regardless of them being on the main game website (which contains very little). Canwin87 (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Works for me. Removing the social medias, leaving the devblogs. -- ferret (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)