Talk:Dolphin (emulator)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Free Software / Software / Computing  (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Free Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of free software 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.
 
WikiProject Video games (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


3rd party refs[edit]

A few days ago I added something this article mostly lacked: 3rd party refs. If any of you add new info, check if 3rd party sites also covered that feature. PC Gamer may be a good place to look. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 23:49, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dolphin (emulator). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

  • Attempted to fix sourcing for //http:/www.dolphin-emu.com/news.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dolphin (emulator). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dolphin (emulator)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jd22292 (talk · contribs) 16:09, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    I notice a lot of words that should be avoided per the Words to Watch guideline. Perhaps looking into them will help.
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    The one violation I found through Copyvios is a backwards copy via Wikia.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    The only issue I have is the use of certain words which should be avoided per WP:W2W. I will place this review on hold until the issues are addressed. If nothing is done in this time, I will fail the review. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 16:09, 13 December 2017 (UTC)


I have started skimming through the WtW page and seeing what words I can find- do you perhaps have at least a few specific examples that you happened to catch?? (I am not the nominator, by the way, I'm just here to help out.) TheDisneyGamer (talk) 17:51, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
@TheDisneyGamer: The only few I have found in particular were puffery words such as "great" and "leading" (not sure if they're used in a way that's not described in W2W), an expression of doubt in the use of "so-called", and finally the use of "notably" is not of impartial tone, as described in W2W's Editorializing section. Perhaps I might be looking at this MoS wrong, but I'll leave it up to the editors to decide. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 17:59, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I think I might've removed most of the W2W-y things?? I couldn't find "so-called" anywhere, though I might've missed it (or I removed it and don't remember doing so), but I got rid of some that I found how does such as "critically acclaimed". How does it look?? TheDisneyGamer (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
This is also for KAMiKAZOW, who made this edit, but in the section about Ishiiruka, I notice the use of "unique," another peacock word. "So-called" is still present in the phrase "The solution that the so-called Ubershaders...". A quick Ctrl+F can help with that. See WP:EDITORIAL about the use of "notably" in the lead where it says "most notably the ability to play games with...". That's all I can see for now. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 17:54, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing my errors. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 13:29, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Not a problem. I can now say that the Words to Watch issue has been addressed and the article is now good article status. Congratulations! jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 17:23, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Reception[edit]

I fail to see the relevance of the story about some man hacking the dialogue in The Wind Waker. He didn't mod the game with Dolphin, he merely used it to test the mod, which he could as well have done with the real hardware. Should we include every possible example about someone using the emulator to play games as well? Bluest Bird (talk) 17:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

“which he could as well have done with the real hardware”
– But he didn't. He used Dolphin and major IT news publications picked up the story (quick web search found that Kotaku and Eurogamer covered the story as well).
“Should we include every possible example about someone using the emulator to play games as well?”
– If that someone is so newsworthy that major publications pick it up: Yes – at least until the section becomes insanely long. The Wind Waker gender change thing is only one sentence and the overall length of that section is two short paragraphs. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 19:09, 4 February 2018 (UTC)