Talk:Landmaker

the title, also paging atlan

recently user:atlan sent me a message concerning this article, and i came over here to find they had reverted everything i had done even beyond the title issue. i also now see that they're reverting various other edits with no explanation given.

apparently some edit filter won't let me edit atlan's talk page and what i have to say is more relevant here anyway. atlan, what and who are you talking about? this is just like shadow land.

just like shadow land, this was originally an arcade game. obviously, the article should prioritize the original work, just like so many other game and nearly all the anime articles do; that's policy. just like shadow land, there's a japanese version and a prototype for an international version. the difference is that they both use "land maker".

with regards to the port, it should actually be at builder's block, because that was the first title in an english-speaking country; again, policy. on top of that, the european port known as "landmaker" actually uses "land maker" in the game itself anyway; that version is simply builder's block with the land maker title graphics added back in.

even aside from all of this, all of my edits were fine and in no way "sloppy". your reverts are now conflating the original arcade phrasing versus this port phrasing, and you've removed what little information on the actual game i've been able to find, which has made it way more sloppy. i'm sorry, but that's simply wrong.

and why are you off reverting edits that have nothing to do with this article, edits that would otherwise be encouraged by policy? 75.177.119.25 (talk) 22:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I intended to restore the rest of your edit but didn't. I will fix that. I called the edit sloppy, as it changed the name throughout the article without actually changing the article name. As for policy, which policy says the first English speaking country that gets a release, gets to have the title as the article name on Wikipedia? If it were that simple, we would never have had that long and acrimonious discussion about Mega Drive vs Genesis. Anyway, it is clear that the game's creators were inconsistent with the game's name, but we have to settle on something. --Atlan (talk) 23:25, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

oh, thank you! i guess that's fair. i can't exactly move articles as an ip, though. i figure i'd change the text, see if anyone notices, and then maybe we'd start a discussion about it. people treat article names as a bit "weird"... sometimes i'll see article bodies that are very different from the article title. maybe because people are too afraid to discuss it, i don't know.

i remember that mess. that situation is a lot different, though... they had to turn down a number of policies because everyone else was, basically. they went with a fairly neutral policy (and one i somewhat approve of) and hoped for the best. i'm sure the discussion will be (seriously) revived in a year or two, though.

here, we have a fairly obscure arcade game that would technically be known as "land maker" everywhere; again, per shadow land. there's no need to make an exception for what is at least a standard, if not policy. if this had just been a playstation game, things would be different, as "landmaker" "playstation" tends to get me more results than the other two combinations. on the other hand, part of that may be due to wikipedia influence (which is a very real thing).

even aside from all of this, if we still use this specific title (which would be a bit silly with the inconsistency), we should at least mention the original arcade title and we should definitely have the katakana as per every single japanese product that has a katakana title. 75.177.119.25 (talk) 05:19, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I'd move the article to Land Maker, but it already got moved/redirected to Landmaker back in 2011 after an Afd. The katakana are already there.--Atlan (talk) 10:45, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

sometimes you can move over a redirect... not entirely sure how that works, though. and of course there's always that requested moves page. well, that is, if you're serious about this. i really do think "land maker" is the best title for this article... 75.177.119.25 (talk) 23:14, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. The merge result of the AfD makes little difference here. There was nothing bad or deserving of pure deletion in the old Land Maker article. The content was simply unreferenced so there was little reason to copy it over. Nobody here mentioned any Google results or linked to any reviews to argue for the presence or absence of a space; if they had done so the case for moving might have been stronger. Swapping of histories is routinely done if there is a reason for it. If there was previously an arcade game called Land Maker that might affect the result but it would need a source, and ought to be mentioned in the article. All the article says is that Landmaker is an 'arcade puzzle video game.' EdJohnston (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

---

Landmaker → Land Maker – hm, well, i kinda wanted to avoid talking about page moves, being an ip. anyway, the above discussion has made clear that "land maker" is a good possibility for this article's name. i may have been wrong in my judgment of comparing it to shadowland; the thing is, i remember mame referring to that dump as a prototype some time ago... though it's kinda hard to trust their work anyway, and they often refer to bootlegs as legitimate alternate sets for some time. regardless, from what i understand, we try to prioritize articles around the first "form" of a work as a base, e.g. we prioritize manga/anime articles around whichever version came first. i figure something similar would happen here, but maybe not? the key thing is that even this european version of the playstation port still uses "land maker" in the game itself, and surely an article is about the game itself before it's about whatever packaging material it came in? that's two out of three ports for "land maker", let alone the aforementioned "base work" bit, and this isn't exactly mega drive vs genesis... --Relisted. ^walk victor falk ^talk 00:21, 24 May 2014 (UTC)75.177.119.25 (talk) 13:24, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Support per the discussion on the talk page.--Atlan (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose the cover image [1] shows "LANDMAKER" without a space. If you want a space, please provide evidence. And the cover image appears to be in English, as it doesn't have Japanese text but does have an English sentence and a PAL indicator (so UK release?), so WP:UE -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 05:46, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
• Comment If this is moved, then the edit histories will need to be swapped between this title and the target title because of WP:MAD needing to preserve contribution history -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 05:46, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
  • The title screen shows it with a space between land and maker. The European box art is weird in that it was custom designed with different font than all the other releases. The target can simply be deleted first, it's just a redirect.--Atlan (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Land Maker indicates a MERGE result. So, the edit history would need to be moved. On your contention of weird artwork, you require proof. The only reference in the article is in Japanese, and the cover art itself which is in English, since the English resource on the article indicates no space, contending that the English version has a space requires proof. The Japanese reference's box art also does not contain a space. -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 04:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
      • No, that's just bureaucracy for the sake of it. The Afd wasn't even followed up on. The outcome was to merge the relevant data into 1 article but in the end it was just redirected without merging anything. Deleting the target without a histmerge is standard practice when there is nothing useful to keep, and otherwise a histmerge would be the solution. Your idea of swapping the edit histories, I've never seen it done in 11 years of editing here. Anyway, I've captured the European title screen and uploaded it to Wikipedia here: EU title screen.--Atlan (talk) 14:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
        • Though you may have never seen an edit history swap, it's clearly been performed many times, as it is part of the closing instructions for move requests WP:RMCI. Investigate the page history of the target page title; if minor, it may be deleted; if major, perform a history merge, history swap, or archive and place a link on the talk page; Indeed, looking through the archives of various Wikipedia processes, it happens though not frequently, still a whole lot of times in the last 11 years. With your screenshot, I will concede that the spaced form is also used. -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 05:05, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
          • Yeah, I know it is there in the instructions, and I should have been clearer. I meant I have never seen this done for an article that is nothing more than a redirect. The history swap is useful to preserve talk pages. But we digress. :)--Atlan (talk) 08:28, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
            • As it was the subject of an AfD-merge, I'd say it qualifies. And I have seen redirects with edit histories swapped around more than once, in the past few weeks at WP:RM -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 05:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.