Portal talk:Role-playing games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Role-playing games (Rated Portal-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing 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.
 Portal  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Video games (Rated Portal-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Portal  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Maintenance Plan?[edit]

What is the plan for regularly updating the RPG portal? Is there one? We have quite a few articles that can be featured - not so many so we can make a change every day, like the main page, but certainly every month, and probably every week. GRuban 20:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I think a monthly update would be about right, given the activity at WP:RPG. So! What are people's suggestions for FA, FP and DyK for May? Percy Snoodle 15:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Let's set some standards. I propose that a featured RPG article needs to have:
  • A complete RPG infobox. (image, date, system, designers, etc.) ISBN.
  • Sections describing game system, setting, and publishing history.
  • Bonus points if there are good related articles about company, supplements, and designers. (Probably won't apply for 1-person-1-game companies.)
  • References and/or external links required, and described (1-liners).
  • Bonus points for reviews, criticisms, etc., showing how the community not directly connected to the game co takes the game.
  • Section on the impact it made - what new features did it introduce? Reviews are good for this.
  • If the game has supplements, the article needs to talk about them, listing them with ISBNs if there are less than 20 or so. A cover of one or a few of those would be good too.
  • All images need to be use-tagged appropriately. Free images are, of course, better than fair use images, but that may be too much to ask.
  • Categorized appropriately.
  • Correct spelling and grammar.
  • Naturally, no stubs.
Yeah, it would be nice if the portal was used a bit more. Monthly updates sounds about right, but I guess we need some formal system for choosing what to feature. Can anyone suggest some kind of voting system based on what's used elsewhere on Wikipedia, or is that kind of democracy overkill? Jonas Karlsson 18:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article Candidates[edit]

I'm going over the games by Genre sections, and will list a few candidates, with notes.

  • Paranoia (role-playing game) - nice long article, many images. Could use 1-liners on its many lists of adventures, secret societies, etc. Images could use better descriptions.
  • Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game - Quite good, long, thorough. I couldn't find anything to complain about! Strong candidate.
  • The Dark Eye - Good long article, but more images, more review commentary, more on impact
  • Dungeons & Dragons - what can I say - by far the longest we've got, thoroughly rewritten by committee. Strong candidate.
  • Earthdawn - good setting section, but not enough on system, and a bit hyp - "enjoyable", "richer, more realistic"?
  • Exalted - good, could use more on impact, system, reviews.
  • Shadowrun - good, needs a spellcheck, a bit hypy "It is impossible to detail Shadowrun and give only a cursory mention of magic"; "A shaman CAN fight against his/her Totem, but in the end, it is fighting against oneself."
  • Nobilis - good, but I think it's been featured already, no?
  • Poptropica - good, but might not be formal enough. It's a lot better than it used to be, though.

Did You Know candidates[edit]

Requirements: no stubs, spelling/grammar, info box. The other sections can be skimped on.

  • ...that the James Bond 007 (role-playing game) was the lead Espionage RPG from 1983-1987, but stopped print when the license couldn't be renewed? (self-nom)
  • ...that Dead Inside attempts to reverse the typical "Kill monsters and take their stuff" path to power found in most RPGs and replace it with "Heal people and give them stuff"?

Fair use image[edit]

I removed the image in the selected article section, as it was a violation of Wikipedia's fair use policy. Please remember that fair use images can only be used in the article main spaces (the main page though is an exception)--TBC (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 12:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

News Section[edit]

Wouldn't it be practical and even advisable to put actual role-playing news (such as the recent death of Gary Gygax, the imminent announcement of 4th edition, Paizo striking out on their own, WoD's new system, etc) in this section, instead of just yearly updates on how long the portal has existed? I would be interested in helping out with that, I get a lot of RPG-related news while hosting several RPG-related web sites. --Brandon (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

RPGs articles and notability[edit]

I'm having trouble with Wikipedia's notability guidelines concerning role-playing games. According to the Wikipedia criterias for notability of books probably no RPG is notable enough to have an article here. I'm asking due to that the article for the RPG Aces & Eights: Shattered Frontier have been deleted but as it won the Origins Award for Roleplaying Game of the Year 2007, I re-added it as it now is notable. Wikipedia users think otherwise apparently as the article again has a notability template slabbed on it. --claes (talk) 17:11, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Hijacking of wiki page and infringement of copyright[edit]

Some time ago I created a page for the Historical Maritime Society.
It is a modest start up site which I've added to in order to make it credible and with appropriate reference (as per editors' advice).
Not only has a recently-formed society adapted our name and use of the abbreviation, but it has also decided to hijack the wiki making the information ambiguous - all without permission or other notification.
I have notified the miscreants and will remove their edit - could anyone clarify the postion over copyright infringement etc?

At best this is cheeky and is quite against the protocols and courtesies found elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain McVitie (talkcontribs) 15:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Importance rankings are messed up[edit]

Pathfinder is currently the highest-selling RPG there is, having overtaken D&D over the past year. It's rated low-importance. Hackmaster was a significant game about ten years ago but seems to be treading water, with no major core releases since Basic almost four years ago. It's rated high-importance. WTF? (talk) 18:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC) (Both articles are crap, by the way.)

RPG Barnstar[edit]

proposed RPG Barnstar

I just proposed the RPG Barnstar. Please let me know what you think. Aguy2014 (talk) 02:03, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Proof reading of Character race[edit]


I wrote the article Character race. I'm sure it needs some improvement, for a simple reason: I'm not a native English speaker. And several secondary sources are French sources; I'm sure readers would appreciate sources in English.

So, I would appreciate if some of you could have a look at it.

Thanks in advance

cdang|write me 20:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Please Peer Review me.[edit]

I am Japanese and use wrong the English language. I tried translate ja:サイコロ・フィクション.

(cf.[1] SInobigami's rule, it is one of game that use Saikoro Ficthon.)


Please Peer Review me.

--RJANKA (talk) 13:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

It is moved → Saikoro Fiction.

--RJANKA (talk) 12:59, 13 April 2016 (UTC)