Jump to content

User talk:ferret

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GizmoGladstone (talk | contribs) at 22:33, 1 September 2016 (→‎Your edit on 2K / 2K Games: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Unsourced Change?

Did you even look at the edit before rolling it back? I can assure you the source and number I added is going to be miles more accurate than one from an article posted the day of the games PC release... — Preceding unsigned comment added by KingKapwn (talkcontribs) 08:35, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I do see the new source this time, but I still stand by the revert. SteamDB is sourcing numbers from SteamSpy. Both are considered unreliable sources for Wikipedia as they are not hard sale numbers, simply ownership estimates. They include gifted/free copies in their estimates. -- ferret (talk) 14:46, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2016

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 9, No. 2 — 2nd Quarter, 2016
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2016, the project has:


Content


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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata property made

The archive date property was accepted. See P2960. @Thryduulf, Izno, Czar, and RexxS: Pinging other participants who may want to know this. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:33, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anarchyte: See test at Template:Video game review score/testcases#Archive URL test. If that looks good to you I will push it live. You'll need to go populate the archive date everywhere you have previously added an archive url. I did it for Far Harbor for testing already. -- ferret (talk) 12:51, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The [±] seems a bit obtrusive at the moment. Would it be a better idea to not include it and instead leave the message at the bottom of the template where it says "Edit on Wikidata"? Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:54, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's just the module's default. The main review template uses the pen style. The only change there is the archive date. -- ferret (talk) 12:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I've just finished adding the archive dates to some other articles. Feel free to push it, unless you want to wait for the opinions of Template:UThryduulf, Izno, Czar and RexxS. Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been following with interest - you just beat me to updating Fragments of Him (Q25264345) where I got an edit-conflict, but I can see that it works. It all looks good and I'd say go ahead: you can always iron out any small wrinkles as you get more feedback. --RexxS (talk) 13:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done It's live. -- ferret (talk) 16:26, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another problem has risen from this. To fix this, check out Wikidata:Property proposal/dead-url. @Thryduulf, Izno, Czar, and RexxS: Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:08, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Centralized discussion at Module talk:Video game wikidata czar 07:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Re your email: As Wikidatans, we strive to avoid data duplication. Thryduulf is just making sure that there's no other way to present the data. And also making sure that everyone else knows there's no other way. Incidentally, both of those goals are important. An "artist" property looks like it duplicates the other properties of which we communicated earlier. --Izno (talk) 11:17, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno: Just seems confusing that there's all these discrete properties that could be solved the same way as "artist" is being proposed. I have trouble with inconsistency. I.e., why not "creator" with "has role" "director". -- ferret (talk) 12:07, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Some of it is "ease of query" with a different level of refinement, and some of it is "director is applied in different domains, so it might have different meanings and thus need a more refined relationship". Example: A director in anime production is not the same as a director in video game production, I don't believe. --Izno (talk) 12:16, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So should we avoid using the director property...? If I were using creater and has role, I'd pick the same "director" item as the qualifier for both. I know that's just an example, but in the end it feels to me there's two approaches and Wikidata is inconsistently using them, or has shifted stances without an effort to rectify older forms. -- ferret (talk) 12:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, maybe I didn't understand the initial question. Can you rephrase? --Izno (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Let me use a different example. There is a property for Illustrator. We can't use it because its very narrowing defined, at least in textual context. It's for people who illustrate books. But why have it at all? There's two possible designs: Have discrete properties for a given role, or to have a generic property like creator that accepts a "has role" qualifier. It seems both designs are in use, but with new property requests being opposed on the basis of the "has role" model. -- ferret (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fallout 4

thanks for fixing that ref link on fallout 4 Optimusprimerotf (talk) 01:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NP. -- ferret (talk) 02:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon GO

You undid my edits that said "Pokémon GO is not just an augmented reality game, but also an alternate reality game," saying "Please provide a source. Reading over alternate reality, it doesn't appear Pokemon Go really has any of the hallmarks."

I admit that it is kind of an open question and a grey area, but so is calling it "augmented reality." The problem is, there's an "AR" switch that allows players to turn off their camera, and most players turn this off, for two reasons: battery life, and it makes the game easier. But if you turn off the camera, is it still an "augmented reality" game? No, not really.

There's a bunch of other terms that may apply to Pokémon GO: Transreality gaming, Alternate reality game, Mixed reality

We can't just call it an augmented reality game because the marketing departments of Niantic and Nintendo tell us to call it that.

Further reading:

Howrad (talk) 00:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Howrad: Please use the article's talk page so other editors can weigh in. Talk:Pokémon GO -- ferret (talk) 01:02, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferret: Done, thanks. Howrad (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon Go edits

Your remark that "Multiple editors have removed it due to prior talk page discussions" is not correct. My edits are being deleted with NO prior discussion. They are being deleted simnply because some don't like the content, regardless of it being properly sourced and documented. My contributions are supported by quality reliable sources. Please let me know ASAP if you are supporting the deletion of my edits without discussion. What you are supporting is against Wikipedia policies. Santamoly (talk) 06:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Santamoly: The "CIA Involvement" has been discussed before here if you're talking about those edits. There is also a discussion currently going on here. Your claim of there being "no prior discussion" is obviously invalid.
So far, the reverts have been:
  1. I revert you
  2. You revert me
  3. Dissident93 reverts you
  4. You revert Dissident
  5. Brianga reverts you
  6. You revert Brianga
  7. Ferret reverts you
I suggest you read WP:BRD and WP:3RR. Also, WP:UNDUE might work here too. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Anarchyte covered everything that needed said, really. The sources are not reliable, and "CIA involvement" has been prior discussed, regardless of whether or not you tweaked the content and use a different website to source it. Join the talk page if you want to argue for inclusion. Just because you use a ref tag does not make your content "unrevertable." -- ferret (talk) 12:14, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Oblivion

How isn't Nexus a reliable source?--Armanikoka (talk) 18:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Armanikoka: It's less about whether Nexus is a reliable source (which is questionable), and more that the source didn't support the statement. You can't say something like "Mods were created to address lots of bugs" and link a list of mods. All that shows is that there are (lots of) mods for Oblivion. The claims such as "high number of bugs reported" or "as an efficient solution" aren't in the source. It represents original research. -- ferret (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition - Approve of your recent edits

Just approved your recent edits; did a rewrite of it, but I accept and approve your edit that you did, although I did slightly amend that first paragraph. Anyway, is there a chance you could do the same to the Leads and Infoboxes of both the Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition article and the Icewind Dale: Enhanced Edition article, perchance?GUtt01 (talk) 13:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GUtt01: I'll give them a glance shortly. You may want to read over WP:LEAD. It covers the details of what I said in my edit notes, such as trying to avoid references in the lead, etc. As you continue editing I would advise doing the lead last. Build out the body and add references there first, then do the lead as a summary of the body. What I said about references in leads technically applies to the infobox as well. The details of the infobox should be in the article body somewhere, with sources. The best place to be verbose about when particular releases for each platform was made would be the Development sections. Sometimes there's a release section as well, but its less common. -- ferret (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on 2K / 2K Games

Hi there,

I'm still new to actually contributing edits on Wikipedia, so forgive my dumb questions.

A couple days ago, I updated basic information for 2K. Items that aren't editorializing or false. You, apparently, reverted my corrections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_Games

The name that the company has gone by for years now is "2K." We stopped calling it "2K Games."

The only other item I updated is that 2K Marin is no longer open as a studio. It hasn't been for years now.

And, yes, I work at 2K. But, again, that shouldn't hold any bearing on the above points.

How do we go about correcting this?

Thanks in advance.

Darren (darren.gladstone@2k.com)