Jump to content

Talk:Magnetica

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

Page Move Request

[edit]

Whomever set up the move request should make sure to indicate such on the article page.

In any case, as to move the spaming of ALTTP's talk page:

Technically there's the same problem with "Elebits" which is released LATER in Europe as "Eledees". The problem is handled by having the main page at the English title of first release, with redirects from the other names to that page. Same with "Bully"/"Canis Canem Edit" (the latter following the former in release). (Unfortunately, I can't find an example of a game which hit Europe first then came out stateside) Since "Magentica" is the name released first in the English world, it makes more sense to have that as the main page, with "Shunkan Puzzloop" redirecting to it, but using both names in the article proper. (and referencing any reason for the name change). Also as per WP:UE pages should named after their English names, even if localized and not translations. --Masem 23:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS to move article. -GTBacchus(talk) 21:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No more moves, please. Let's take a strawpoll.

Keep at Magnetic

[edit]
  1. A Link to the Past (talk) 00:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. TJ Spyke 23:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Shunkan Puzzloop

[edit]

Discussion

[edit]

If any choice gets 80% of the votes, I'd call that a consensus. Please don't move it again till everyone has a chance to vote. --Uncle Ed 00:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say this is entirely a question of which name is most common in English. Does anyone have any evidence on that point? If no new information comes to light, I'd say we go with the release title in the largest English-speaking country where it was released.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 00:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that we focus on which came first. And just so you note, I have no preference to which name should be used - for instance, I moved Trace Memory to Another Code: Two Memory (the latter being the European name). - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No. In conflicts like this, we use the most common name, not what "came first". ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 01:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Google hits = anecdotal evidence. We can't show that Trace Memory was more POPULAR. All you are showing is that more web sites mention Trace Memory than Another Code.
However, do a Google search on "Another Code" +Nintendo +DS. Even with all of those specifics, it outnumbers Trace Memory's results.
Regardless of this anecdotal evidence, being released in Europe first DOES mean something. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as a point of note in the article. Not as a determinant of the title. Regardless, Searching only English pages gives less results for "Another Code" +Nintendo +DS than for Trace Memory. With the lack of other indicators for popularity, Google is sufficient. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 02:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So your only reasoning is anecdotal evidence? You're saying that you can boldly move an article even though you know it's disputed based exclusively on Google hits? The fact that it came out first in Europe DOES matter. Just because you don't like that being a fact does not make it any less of a fact. Google results only give us a vague idea of what's more popular. The video game media industry is stronger in North America than the UK (SO much so), so it's not even a fair comparison. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Boldly move"? As I recall, you moved it in the first place based on the fact that it was released in Europe first. (Why would I like or dislike this? I've never played the game, nor intend to. Please don't misrepresent my position.) Do you have a better method of determining popularity if you find Google unacceptable? "First released as" isn't good reasoning for moves. Would you suggest Robinson Crusoe be moved to "The Life and Strange Surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe of York, Mariner: who lived Eight and Twenty Years, all alone in an uninhabited Island on the coast of America, near the Mouth of the Great River of Oroonoque; Having been cast on Shore by Shipwreck, wherein all the Men perished but himself. With An Account how he was at last as strangely deliver'd by Pirates. Written by Himself.", because that's what the novel was originally released as? Venus de Milo to Aphrodite of Milos? ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 05:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was no dispute. And your system would basically set it up so that the naming conventions for video games would be biased towards North American titles. We have little sales information, Google search doesn't take into account that the strong majority of video game websites are based in North America, including almost all of all major video game websites. Why wouldn't the North American version get more Google results, since Google results for video games are tilted towards North American? The best we have is which came first. Also, might I add that the Nintendo DS is far more popular in Europe than North America? - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If the naming of a particular thing is divided straightforwardly between different English-speaking countries, then the most common one will usually be the American form. That's just a fact of the "use common names" policy. Americans are more numerous. It's neither a feature nor a bug.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 05:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"More popular in Europe" is irrelevant. English Wikipedia is concerned with English-speaking countries, meaning the only country out of Europe that's in our concern is the UK. Is the Nintendo DS more popular in the UK than in North America? ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 05:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The fact remains that we can't verify how well the UK version sold. We can't verify for a certainty that the NA version is more popular or the EU version is more popular. However, we CAN verify that on average (ie, number of DSes sold compared to the population of the UK), the DS is more popular in the UK (significantly more popular even), and the EU version came out first. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Google isn't good enough, but assuming that Nintendo DS sales have a direct effect on sales of the game is? ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 06:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The popularity of the Nintendo DS DOES influence the sales of Trace Memory. How could it NOT? - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, you haven't proved that the correlation between NDS sales and Another Code: Two Memory sales in the UK is high enough for AC:TM sales to surpass sales in North America of Trace Memory. Either you provide sources for UK AC:TM sales being higher than NA TM sales, or this argument ends. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 07:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's funny that you would demand sales from me about the European figures... when I know you don't know how well the NA version sold. - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My argument was Google. Your argument was assumed sales. Please don't assign your argument onto me when you can't defend it. Furthermore, you're the one who moved it in the first place. The onus is on you to defend your actions. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 08:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We cannot verify Trace Memory to be more popular. There are no sales figures in existence for Another Code: Two Memories (that is, sales figures that Chart-Track or Nintendo have shown). Google results do little to show its popularity, merely its coverage. The fact that it came to Europe first says that not only should it cater to the market Nintendo focused on initially with the title, but it should be written in the Queen's English - ie, gray --> grey, color --> colour (examples). - A Link to the Past (talk) 09:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Google is sufficient when there is nothing else to indicate popularity. Your continued insistence of "first, first, first, first" doesn't change that, nor is it better way to base names on. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 09:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anecdotal evidence is not good enough, so I contest the idea of using it as the only factor. You have constantly dismissed the fact that it came to Europe first, why? It IS a factor in what it should be called. Nintendo felt that Europe was a better place to put it first. It existed as Another Code: Two Memories first, and no, the Robinson Crusoe example is not a good one. You're comparing an obscure name that few people would know to a different name for a different region of a game that may or may not be more well-known. In all intents and purposes, the game originated in English as Another Code: Two Memories, NOT Trace Memory. You would have an argument if we could confirm that Another Code: Two Memories was noticeably less common than Trace Memory, but you cannot. I can confirm that Trace Memory was a pretty significant disappointment in North America. In light of this, I see no reason to dispute using Another Code: Two Memories based on it existing first and not being an uncommon name. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ALTTP, the game came out in North America 6 months BEFORE it released in Europe. BTW, queen,s english is outdated and behind the times (but that is an argument for message board. It release in North America in June 2007 and just released in Europe last month. 23:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This is an argument about Trace Memory/Another Code (albeit an off-topic argument). - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Magnetica. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Magnetica&oldid=1200792670"