Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 123

< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Odie5533 in topic In more Internet Archive news...
Archive 120Archive 121Archive 122Archive 123Archive 124Archive 125→Archive 130

Microsoft to release the Xbox One "Scorpio" in late 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago24 comments8 people in discussion

It says so on Polygon, The Verge, Kotaku, and many others, so I am currently working on a draft called "Draft:Xbox One "Scorpio"", and I am currently awaiting further news to be released. Currently, it would be inappropriate to review the draft and then declare it as "accepted", so we can only wait for more information (likely at E3) to be announced. This is just a notice. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 21:34, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

This isn't a new console, per se; we don't have special articles on the Xbox 360 slim, or the PS3 slim. Making a new article doesn't make sense here. --MASEM (t) 21:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
This sounds as though I were writing about the Xbox One Slim (which I am not), and I thought for sure that, based upon the data, it would be the new Xbox, but I guess that I will just wait and see what happens. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I guess that we both have different views. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 21:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

If Masem should be right and Gamingforfun365 should be wrong, could the entire "History" section be merged into the Xbox One article? Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL: "Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors". At the moment Scorpio is all speculation and rumours. --The1337gamer (talk) 22:09, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Later then if it should become notable and/or confirmed. (EDIT: Akin to the Apple electric car project, which is notable.) Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:11, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
And, yes, I have known the guideline. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
In the meantime, I will continue editing Doom and likely wait for more news concerning Scorpio. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Last thing: is the consensus that Scorpio is fairly notable, but just not notable enough to be included in the Xbox One article yet, given that the information is relatively new? Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

It shouldn't be added until officially confirmed by Microsoft. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:55, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Back to my point: the issue is that all rumors point to a reversion of the Xbox One hardware that will still be marketed as the Xbox One and play all Xbox One games, just with more powerful components. In the past, we have not had separate articles on hardware revisions within the same platform - the updated tech specs are included in the console article (once properly announced). --MASEM (t) 01:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, then, I do not know what to say other than that I have wasted a huge amount of time. Anyway, if the rumor were to be added to the Xbox One article, am I right that it would have to be notable (like the notable Apple electric car project) or confirmed? Gamingforfun365 (talk) 02:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I guess that that is all which I needed to know. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Question about the draft. Why "reportedly" being developed by Microsoft? And why is it listed as "ninth generation" if it's just an upgrade? JAGUAR  11:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I believe it's still not officially confirmed my MS, so that's why it's "reportedly". But 9th generation is definitely wrong for a hardware revision, in the same way that New 3DS isn't 9th gen, PSP Go isn't 8th gen, etc etc. Sergecross73 msg me 13:56, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia REALLY needs to stop being in the business of "calling" a new generation of consoles. Seriously. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:46, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Unfortunately, based on research I've done, I think we sorta created it. Nearly all sources that discuss the console generations lead back to WP, to the point that it's all now circular references. That said, going forward we'll have the press to help determine when the 9th generation starts; that said, for all the rumors about the new Xbox console revision, I've seen no one suggest its a 9th gen (heck, with the Nintendo NX, I see that still considered just nintendo catching up to 8th gen). --MASEM (t) 15:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
We tried, but after extensive arguments around the start of the 8th generation, there was no consensus to make any changes to it. I've given up on changing it - there's just too many differing thoughts on it to come to an agreement - and instead focused on doing the best on managing what we've got...because that's kinda what we're bound to for the time being. Sergecross73 msg me 16:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Naming the generations on Wikipedia was pretty much inevitable, since as far as I've seen no one in the gaming press was bothering to name them. They just said "the last generation", "this generation", or "the next generation", and while it's perfectly clear what they're referring to from the time the article was published, you can't name a Wikipedia article "The generation of video game consoles referred to by the gaming press as 'this generation' from 1989-1995".--Martin IIIa (talk) 23:02, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Post-announcement

Coming back to this, there were two announcements: Xbox One Slim and the 2017 reversion codenamed Scorpio. The former should definitely stay in the current Xbox One article, but as for Scorpio, there's no many extra details now that I can see a brand new article at this time - perhaps in time it might make sense but I think everything we know can fit in the current Xbox One article. --MASEM (t) 18:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. And with Scorpio too soon to split it out to an article now, especially since it looks like its going to be released "late 2017", not 2016. Sergecross73 msg me 18:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
That said, knowing that Scorpio is targeting VR support, I would not be surprised if we see a new VR gear from MS soon to go along with that, which would make the reasoning to have Scorpio as a separate article make sense. Not now, obviously. --MASEM (t) 16:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

E3 2016 - Nintendo Presser

Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion

Probably short, but whatever.

  • No female Link confirmed. (Worth noting - people have some strong feelings about this.)
  • RPG like elements added - number values for equipment, weapons
  • Has a fully 3D world map for first time in series.
  • Mario Party: Star Rush was announced.
  • Out November 4, 2016.
  • Paper Mario: Color Splash shown.
  • Out October 7, 2016.

Looks like that's it... Sergecross73 msg me 16:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Or why I didn't bother basically. I knew it was going to be too insubstantial to note. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 16:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I wasn't expecting anything either, I just thought I'd do it for completeness sake. In case someone's ever rummaging through the archives some day and wondering why there wasn't a Nintendo section. Also, thought there was a fraction of a chance for a surprise announcement. (EDIT: There was - the Mario Party: Star Rush reveal.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Finally, the article I made five years ago has a name ;-D JAGUAR  18:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I was excited for that too. No more arguments on how to disambiguate it's prior, overly generic name. Sergecross73 msg me 19:04, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
To be precise, there is no confirmation either way about a female Link. They did not confirm that there does not exist an option for a female Link. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
I feel like they've been pretty clear on it... Sergecross73 msg me 20:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Turns out there was a lot more than they originally said there will be. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 05:40, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Question about WP:JOBTITLES

Latest comment: 8 years ago14 comments6 people in discussion

Hi everyone,

Per WP:MOSCAPS, we try to avoid the use of unnecessary capital letters (like first-person shooter, not First-Person Shooter). Is there a reason why there's an exception for an executive producer? @Gamingforfun365: linked to WP:JOBTITLES, which in fact does say:

"Offices, titles, and positions such as president, king, emperor, pope, bishop, abbot, and executive director are common nouns and therefore should be in lower case when used generically (...) They are capitalized only in the following cases:
  • When followed by a person's name to form a title, i.e., when they can be considered to have become part of the name: President Nixon, not president Nixon".

Except for "executive director" these are all (elected) public offices; Queen Elizabeth II makes sense to me, Video Game Developer Shigeru Miyamoto or does not. The all-caps acronym CEO redirects to chief executive officer which also isn't written with capital letters. Isn't it odd that we maken an exception for directors/producers? Thoughts? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, we don't make an exception for "executive" producer/director - I've never actually seen that capitalized like that in an article. I think there's a much simpler explanation here- Gamingforfun365 is wrong in their interpretation of JOBTITLES here. It's not "(id Software) (Executive Producer Marty Stratton)", it's "(id Software executive producer) (Marty Stratton)". Executive Producer, unlike the White House Chief of Staff example in JOBTITLES, is not a named, singular position. --PresN 14:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I did read a GameSpot article written by a staff member, and it was capitalized. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
So, maybe, I am right after all. Also, I would rather not be called "wrong", but rather "mistaken". Gamingforfun365 (talk) 19:29, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
However, I would not capitalize words which would make reading look weird. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 19:36, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
And I would also not capitalize those in front of possessive nouns. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 19:39, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Lastly, MOS:JOBTITLES really needs to make interpretation clearer. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The capitalisation on a GameSpot article should have no effect on our guidelines. – Rhain ☔ 21:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Also, if this type of capitalization was common practice we should easily be able to find more than a single GameSport article that employes it.--67.68.29.34 (talk) 21:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
— Deor to Gamingforfun365 on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#MOS:JOBTITLES is misleading. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Also, I really do hate being called "wrong" because it makes me feel naive or unintelligent and is therefore offensive, so I would prefer mistaken in place of wrong, and, lastly, I thought that titles should be capitalized when they do not follow possessive nouns. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 00:15, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Try not to get offended by little things like that on here; our main goal is to improve the encyclopedia, not to tiptoe around people's perceptions of rudeness. There's a difference between being rude and being truthful. Besides, there's nothing wrong with being wrong, it's learning from your mistakes that counts the most. – Rhain ☔ 04:00, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't say @Gamingforfun365: was "wrong" in their interpretation at all; WP:JOBTITLES clearly says "executive director" and I think that's where the issue lies. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 07:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Question about order of franchise VG templates

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi everyone,

I came across {{James Bond video games}}, which orders the games by publisher; {{TMNT games}} does so too. {{Jurassic Park games}} first has the ones based upon films, with a separate group for individual games. {{Sherlock Holmes video games}} first has the individual games, then two groups of two series. {{Barbie video games}} makes a distinction between console, PC and LCD games. Lastly, the huge {{Star Wars games}} has them order by genre.

With PC, console and handheld games, canonical and non-canonical entries, reboots and spin-offs, I know that the order of templates can often be a tricky thing ({{Metal Gear}}, {{Assassin's Creed}}). What do people here think? What is a reasonable way of having these? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:49, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Case by case whatever works for the template in question. If a particular organization is not useful for a particular template, then change it. --Izno (talk) 13:15, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Move request input

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi everyone,

I believe that God of War (PlayStation 4 video game) isn't the correct title. Please see Talk: God of War (PlayStation 4 video game)#Requested move 15 June 2016. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Absolver

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

@Lordtobi is edit warring with me on Absolver, removing all references and expansions on an article I marked as in progress. Could use a third party. czar 15:57, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Lordtobi: I think you're in the wrong here, per WP:DATEVAR and WP:CITEVAR, and Czar's other items are generally better phrased than yours. Please step back from the article per WP:EW. --Izno (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
@Czar and Izno: Explanation at Talk:Absolver#Reverts. Lordtobi (✉) 16:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Others: Please respond on the talk page. --Izno (talk) 16:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

For Honor

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello everyone, I need some input on For Honor#Innacuracies from using vikings as a reference for the game. The discussion can be found here. Thanks. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:20, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Table of release editions

Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments7 people in discussion

Oh, another question, with the E3 announcements, we've got Watch_Dogs_2#Release now. Wasn't there a discussion a while back about the kinds of release tables? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Probably--which probably resulted in 'do any major diffs in prose' and ignore the others. We should remove that table. --Izno (talk) 13:16, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
To be honest I think the list is the most efficient way to cover these release editions. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Yea, I'm also not opposed to it. It'd be a mess to explain in prose, it's useful info, the table isn't unduly huge (especially when thinking of what the complete post-release article will be like), and there is (and will be) enough coverage to justify it. Maybe we could have it default to collapsed though. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:54, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The last major discussion that I'm aware of was regarding this monstrosity, on the first Watch Dogs game. I think the table at Watch Dogs 2 is fine for the time being (making it default to collapsed sounds like a good idea though), just make sure it doesn't get out of hand. – Rhain ☔ 02:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
We shouldn't collapse article content. If it's important enough to be in our articles, it's important enough not to be collapsed. --Izno (talk) 11:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Here's an idea. What if we... didn't exhaustively document every type/edition of the release? Should Wikipedia be in the business of providing minutia about the dozen different SKUs of a product that almost certainly will become unavailable to readers within months of the game's release? I don't think there needs to be a hard number above which we start omitting things, but something to the effect of "customers who preordered received X. Various special editions included items such as remote controlled robot, a statuette, and Marcus' iconic hat" might be the extent of what should be said in prose and then omit the table entirely. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I haven't worked on games with a lot of editions like this, but I don't think this would be "a mess to explain in prose", because I don't think it should be explained in detail. "Watch Dogs 2 was released in six editions, each containing different addons to the base game. These addons include additional missions, artwork, and figurines, with most addons, including a 64-page artbook, included in the The Return of DedSec Collector's Case edition." I feel like any more detail than that is running into a WP:CATALOG issue. --PresN 18:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

The Times archive search no longer lists any results

Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Something's terribly wrong in The Times' archive. When I try to type in a word for, say "Tourist Trophy PS2", for example, the search results no longer turn up with anything! This stinks! Now what?! --Angeldeb82 (talk) 18:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Now... just like all the other times, you wait for the search to start working again. the VG project has no insight or ability to fix the archive searches of newspapers around the world. Unless there was an announcement, I'm sure it will be fixed sometime in the next few days. --PresN 20:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm doing it differently, but it seems to be working for me. – Rhain ☔ 00:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Wow. I never noticed that you are "doing it differently". How so, since I'm in the U.S.? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
No idea; when I searched, it went to this URL. – Rhain ☔ 05:01, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I can see that the search may work in your country (Australia), but not in mine. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 15:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey, it works! Thanks, Czar. I will do that the next time I search for other video games that are reviewed by The Times. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 17:56, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Question about developer/publisher name change

Latest comment: 8 years ago11 comments7 people in discussion

As well all know, Sony Computer Entertainment is now Sony Interactive Entertainment (which just took effect a couple months ago). On older games that were released when they were still SCE, does that name remain on those older games' articles, or should it be changed to SIE? I've run into this issue with the God of War (series) article, and since a new game is coming, it will be SIE, but I'm not sure how to address that on the series page. Should I change all instances of SCE to SIE on the series page? Should I make a brief mention that the name changed and that all future games will be SIE? How do I list this in the infobox (Sony Computer/Interactive Entertainment; Sony Computer Entertainment (2005-2016), Sony Interactive Entertainment (2016-))?

I'm sure this also effects other first-party Sony franchises that have older games with newer ones coming out.

In a general question, how does this effect other games whose developer/publisher's name changed sometime after the game was released? Does the old name remain on the article or does it get changed to the new name? --JDC808 ♫ 22:52, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep old name. Whatever reliable sources called the company during its development/release is what should be used in the article. I don't think company name changes need to be mentioned on the game article unless there is a worthwhile reason. --The1337gamer (talk) 22:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • (EC) For a game wholely in the past, it stays as it is (SCE)- you say the name of the company as it was at the time. For an ongoing game/series, in text it would be something like "published by SIE (formerly SCE)" and in the infobox just "SIE", or possible SIE (formerly SCE) if there's space. For precedent, see Final Fantasy (Square -> Square Enix), and all other SE properties that got published on both sides of the company change. --PresN 23:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep the old name, and if there is new information that requires the reader to recognize the new name, then you can include it. On the other hand, for the series page of GoW which is now an ongoing series, it is probably good to start with the new name and note the old name. --MASEM (t) 23:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Should Category:Sony Computer Entertainment games‎, Category:Sony Computer Entertainment game studios‎, Category:Works based on Sony Computer Entertainment video games‎ and Category:Sony Computer Entertainment stubs‎ all be renamed accordingly? Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 06:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Besides the fact that two companies were merged into one, as well as it having a new headquarters, yes. But I don't see anything wrong with having a new category for games published under the new SIE brand, as we already do this for the example above. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 10:09, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I think moving all of them to Category:Sony games will be better, similar to Category:Microsoft games works. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:18, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao had already moved the parent cat and Category:Sony Interactive Entertainment games‎, so I did the rest. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 09:35, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Collapsible lists

Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion
  • Hi, welcome to the Video games project! Both of the issues you two are talking about have been discussed in depth before; while you can find articles that haven't been brought in line, the general rule is a) don't include emulated releases in the infobox; while they're fine for text, the lists get incredibly long if you include every platform that a game was emulated on without any changes such as virtual console releases. b) Similarly, if a game was released in 4 regions on 5 platforms, them you get a 25-line, 20-date list that's largely superfluous to most readers, so the standard is to collapse the list down to just one date, and have readers that are interested click on the "show" button to see more. --PresN 20:42, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • They are still doing it, even after being told by me and TarkusAB on their talk page and PresN in this thread to not do it without consensus, and without even acknowledging Tarkus AB's message.--IDVtalk 14:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Ping me if it happens again czar 15:55, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
@Czar: This user continues to remove collapsible list templates. TarkusAB 22:40, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Blocked for 31 hours czar 22:50, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Someone here has got to have one...

Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Can anyone grab a free photo of a Battle.net Authenticator keychain thingy and put it to Commons to be used on Battle.net? --MASEM (t) 18:31, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I've found this CC-BY-2.0 picture, which could be cropped and rotated a bit to be tigher on the authenticator; it's more of a depiction of the authenticator's packaging than the item itself. If nobody here has one, asking one of the most approachable pros on Twitter for a good freely-licensed picture might be an option. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I did see that box on Flickr but figured it should be really easy to get a picture of the keychain thing on its own. --MASEM (t) 19:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • The packaging designer would own the rights to that depiction of the product since they designed the packaging (regardless of the secondary photo's free use license) czar 19:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • That's always a thing with pictures of stuff -- wouldn't Blizzard still own copyright over the dongle's design and visuals (because each version has unique visuals) even if a CC-BY-SA-X.X photo was a taken? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:05, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
That would be my understanding. Otherwise who bother with copyrights if someone could just photo it. One exception is freedom of panorama. Яehevkor ✉ 21:15, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
If the image, say, this one [2], where the front was just the Blizzard logo (PD-textlogo), the unit itself is for utilitarian purposes and its shape and design thus cannot be copyrighted. The only copyright that thus exists is the photographer's choice of angle and lighting, hence why if someone here had one, that would assure a CC-BY or PD image. There are ones with different designs (like a Diablo III-based version) that the imagery would be of a same problem. --MASEM (t) 21:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Meanwhile, over at WWDC...

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Apple has rebranded "OS X" as "macOS". That is, a version going out today will be compatible with OS X, but now Apple can move onto larger changes with updated version numbers like macOS 11 when that comes. So macOS is not a new OS but a rebranding. This might affect more than just us, but right now I'm thinking that where we have used OS X to keep it that way (basically for any game already released on that platform) but any upcoming game can switch over to macOS as the term. Note that here OS X is still there, but leads off with "macOS". --MASEM (t) 19:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

As it's just a rebranding, won't the two terms become interchangeable? Although, I agree that it should be left as-is and games released for Sierra onwards should be classed as released for "macOS" instead of "OS X". Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:24, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The major problem is that macOS is easily confused with Mac OS, the more DOS-like Macintosh OS from pre-200(3?, 4?). Mac OS games, AFAIK, no longer work on OS X, but OS X will definetly continue running on macOS, as the OS core tree is kept (hence just a rebranding). For example, article for games that were released for Mac OS and now receive a port for macOS, would it list as "Mac OS, macOS"? That is ridicolous. As Template:Infobox video game says we shall use the Operating System family, thus we use Microsoft Windows instead of Windows 10, I would say we should keep OS X that way. Lordtobi (✉) 17:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Is it NOTE?

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

According to many, many sources, Dog Star Adventure is the first adventure game to be published in source code form - specifically in the May 1979 edition of SoftSide. As such, it spawned dozens (hundreds?) of similar games based on its basic principles. But the only sources making the "first"claim are modern web sites talking about interactive fiction. Can any of these be considered good enough to provide NOTE?

Interactive Fiction Legends IF archive

And there is of course the magazine. Normally one would consider a major multi-page article about a single topic to be pretty much the definition of NOTE, but that seems very wrong in the case of type-in games.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Both Computer and Video Games and PALGN websites are blocked by the Wayback Machine "due to robots.txt"

Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments6 people in discussion

I have a problem. I wanted to use either the archived CVG link or the archived PALGN link in the MotoGP (2006 video game) article. But now both websites are blocked "due to robots.txt"! It seems that the Wayback Machine is trying to censor archived links that we want to see for references in future articles! Now what? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 17:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Wayback is not censoring archived links. Computer and Videos and PALGN are. They have set the robots.txt on their web servers to forbid Wayback from creating archives. -- ferret (talk) 18:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh great. More sources that are unusable now. Thanks Future and whoever owned PALGN. GamerPro64 18:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Doesn't archive.is circumvent robots.txt? Only problem is that it's blacklisted... Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:32, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Archive.is doesn't do wholesale website caching as archive.org does; archive.is is more like WebCite in function in which you say you want to cache a specific page. Both ignore the robots.txt here because it's not doing the whole-site archiving, just specific pages which has legal justification to an extent. We just don't use archive.is as their owners have questionable motives and at one point they were using a botnet to spam WP with their links, while technically beneficial, not acceptable practice. --MASEM (t) 13:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Archive.is RFC 4 has resulted in archive.is being removed from the blacklist. Cyberbot II has already begun removing the blacklist notices that it placed about 2-3 months back. -- ferret (talk) 21:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, well I guess it's all we've got. At least for some of the URLs. Hopefully, Future and PALGN owner will switch back to allowing Wayback. This robot block happened once with IGN so only WebCite could archive it, but now it's the other way round. Maybe something similar will happen in time. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:VenturianTale

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please provide a comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:VenturianTale. --Izno (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Heads up on what looks to be another school project article

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Games and learning is by far not in bad shape and is well-referenced, but does have all the signs and some issues as a school project, particularly considering the talk page feedback. I think this article absolutely has potential (I was looking where to place news about a rework of Civ V for educations purposes just announced today), but needs some TLC and other fixes. --MASEM (t) 23:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

This also might be an opportunity to merge with Video games in education. --MASEM (t) 23:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Worth pointing out Gamification of learning as well. All three articles seem to cover the same rough topic. The early history of Gamification of learning is very similar to Games and learning and suggests it was a earlier class effort from another semester. Gamification might also bare reviewing, though its broader. -- ferret (talk) 01:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I added a message on the talk page. Let's wait for a response. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

A ton of similar articles

Per above, the article scopes of educational game, video games in education, games and learning, gamification of learning, gamification#education and g-learning are all rather too close for comfort, and susceptible to content forking (assuming there's none already). Educational game can stay where it is but the others should be all merged imo. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 11:18, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I would argue that educational game is a stand-alone topic - there are games made to be educational but not necessarily as any structured learning program (eg Carmen Sandiego titles). Gamification is also a different aspect as it applies general game theory (but often using video game concepts like achievements) towards education. But video games in education and games and learning (at least, with the latter's focus on video games) are very much overlapping. --MASEM (t) 13:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

What will become of Eurogamer now that Brexit has taken place?

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

I read that this morning the United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union. It kinda breaks my heart that these yahoos would do something so cruel. Here's the story coming from Eurogamer. Speaking of Eurogamer, what will happen to the website? Will it change its name? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 17:30, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

My guess? Nothing. Nothing will happen to the website and it won't rename. Not sure why you're concerned about it. -- ferret (talk) 17:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Why would something happen? Europe continues to be the name of the continent. --PresN 17:47, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Angeldeb82, I've said this multiple times that you should not be worrying about websites all the time. These trivial things are not that important to make threads about. GamerPro64 18:38, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I see. Well, thanks anyway. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Confirming "nothing", so did Eurogamer themselves today. Lordtobi (✉) 18:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Genre by year categories

Latest comment: 8 years ago12 comments8 people in discussion

Do we sub-categorize/diffuse game gernes by year and use that as the main category in articles? I'm looking at this user's contributions and it appears they are replacing all instances of Category:Role-playing video games with one of the Category:Role-playing video games by year ones, such as [3], without edit summary. Since their edits trail back over a month without reverts, I'm unsure if I'm missing some new policy/guideline/discussion here or elsewhere? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

This sort of thing is ongoing. It seems the CfD basically got closed on procedural grounds. Can someone handle the .... large... effort of getting the proper discussion opened? -- ferret (talk) 21:14, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Years removed from categories by Special:Contributions/Chocolatejr9, not sure if this is correct or not. But some other edits have been vandalism. Jonpatterns (talk) 10:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Sergecross73, Salvidrim!, and Czar: Just pinging a few of the regular admins, could any of you review the contributions above and consider whether any role backs are appropriate? About 50 edits ago as of this writing, Chocolatejr9 switched from adding "genre by year" to removing it, along with default sort templates. He's never been very responsive on talk pages, etc, and many times WP:VG editors have had to revert his category changes. This whole section is basically dedicated to him actually... -- ferret (talk) 11:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
I looked it over and I think that editor needs to just hit the pause button until we're sure about these categories. They clearly want to help with categorization, but the approach is unclear of how to get there. --MASEM (t) 14:42, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
A note in case everyone missed it—before Jonpatterns had posted here, I had left a link to Adrian's CfD on Choc's talk page and asked Choc to (1) stop adding RPG by year, and even (2) revert those edits. Choc appears to have done that, which is what we wanted in the first place, so consider this thread successful. A spot check of their recent contribs looks like this is right, but it still leaves many categories to change back once whatever ultra-CfD we need goes through. And of course others are encouraged to leave a note on Choc's talk page with suggestions for future category changes. czar 15:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Rufus (Street Fighter)

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

An anon just proposed to merged Rufus (Street Fighter) into the character list in Talk:Rufus (Street Fighter)#Merger proposal. Please join to discuss. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 17:46, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

There is also a proposal form the same person at Talk:Oro (Street Fighter)#Merger which has so far received no responses.--67.68.29.34 (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Speedy closed them both, the rationales aren't policy based and it's obvious a merge is not going to happen. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 02:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

New articles - 19 June

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion
Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles being created that fall under this project.

8 June

9 June

10 June

11 June

12 June

13 June

14 June

15 June

16 June

17 June

18 June

19 June

Salavat (talk) 02:45, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

Uh...is anyone familiar with DerpyCon? I've never heard of it, and am noticing that every source is first party... Sergecross73 msg me 12:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I noticed that too. Maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject My Little Pony can help us out with that article. If not, it doesn't seem that notable anyway. AfD possibly? Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:43, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I know Masem edits in that area sometimes. Perhaps he has some insight? Sergecross73 msg me 12:49, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
As best as I can tell, Derpycon in NJ (what the page is about) is not MLP related, its multi-genre (though have had MLP-related events). There is a different, solely MLP con, DerpyCon South, in New Orleans. --MASEM (t) 13:57, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Additionally, the small number of hits on Google News are all for DerpyCon South. I see a case for an AfD. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 02:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Lego Island sock puppetry edit war

Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

Over at Talk:Lego Island, user Taokaka purposefully edit wars over forum content, which belongs deleted per WP:FORUM, and had also been discussed at the admin's board once. The porblem is that Taokaka is a sockpuppeteer, weilding one different IP address after another. Is there an admin who can check the article's hisotry and ban every IP address adding masses of content, past, present and future? Many thanks. Lordtobi (✉) 19:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

My IP changes when I am on the go, as I am using mobile data. As long as I am not using it to vandalise, it is ok according WP:LOGOUT. Taokaka was already banned but still does periodical changes to their IP to persue the same kind of vandalism. Furthermore it is, for me, not the question how old it is, but that there is a guideline that should be considered for that content. All I am asking for is assistance to wipe out a suckpuppeting vandal. Lordtobi (✉) 19:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
It seems like a pretty trivial thing to edit war over, especially considering the talk page had 0 activity until you blanked its contents. You should have just archived it, so there would be less reason for other editor to continue restoring it. --The1337gamer (talk) 20:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
It looks to me like the editor is willing putting the content to disrupt the talk page, considering that they just copy the entire old page and paste in anywhere, atop, at the bottom. They even re-paste the "Sales" section, which was the only to seem actually appropriate. If I was to archive it, I bet that s/he will just take the content and put it back there. Lordtobi (✉) 20:09, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I've decided to repair the content as best possible before edit warring (going back to February. It's edit warring even if the IP is wrong). I've also added an archive config, so Lowercase sigma should clear all but the Development section later tonight. Let's see how the IP reacts to the archiving (It's really the preferable approach), then can seek blocks if they continue. -- ferret (talk) 20:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

The IP came to my talk page to say he was happy with archiving and would not revert further. Case closed. -- ferret (talk) 13:08, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Come on, Lordtobi, I was just instructing you on this a week ago. Stop wasting your time blanking old talk page messages, just archive them. That's the preferred approach anyways, unless it's something really bad, like blatant personal attacks or BLP violations. Sergecross73 msg me 13:32, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Help with Virtue's Last Reward's plot summary

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

So, Famous Hobo, ThomasO1989 and I are working on the article Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward, hoping to make it a Featured Article. We think we need some help with the plot summary, namely: is it comprehensive enough, and does it make sense to people who not played the game? If anyone has the time and wants to help us out with this, I would be very grateful.--IDVtalk 20:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

List of "Free-to-Play" games appropriate for Wikipedia?

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

As follow-up here: Talk:List of PlayStation 4 games#Merge Free-to-play games into the main list?. Does the list of "Free-to-Play" games against the 8th bullet in WP:GAMECRUFT as I think it is? Rukario-sama ^ㅈ^ -(...) 19:16, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

A list of notable F2P games (where notable = has a reasonable standalone article that meets the GNG) seems reasonable to have. Details like if it 100% truly free or has a freemium model or the like could be outlined. --MASEM (t) 19:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Since f2p is also a type of game style/mechanic, it wouldn't violate WP:GAMECRUFT or WP:NOPRICE. Sergecross73 msg me 20:32, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay, so, is it a good reason to have games removed from the main List of PlayStation 3 games released on disc and List of PlayStation 4 games then add to the secondary table "Free-to-Play" under each respectively? I originally tried to merge them back into the main list then label them F2P, but was undone. Rukario-sama ^ㅈ^ -(...) 01:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

New articles - 24 June

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

16 June

18 June

19 June

20 June

21 June

22 June

23 June

24 June

Salavat (talk) 07:45, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Skyward Sword help

Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hi. I've been doing work on The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword as a one-off project. I'm planning on doing what's left of the work when I've taken a short break, but I'd like someone to check over the images and make sure the usage licenses are in order before I take this anywhere near GA (my eventual plan). --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

  1. The cover is a little large size-wise. You should try to find a source which is not Wikia since that source is not an originating source.
  2. The first thumb (the gameplay image) is too large and needs shrinking. It would be good to have a link to the press kit but that shouldn't be particularly worrisome. The fair use rationale on the image page could stand to mention the same topics as the article does, which will very-much strengthen the fair use claim. The "other information" item doesn't seem to follow the guidelines as in the template documentation, though I suppose it is nice to know who does own the copyright. I might add the text from the cover images "other info" here.
  3. The second non-free thumb (the promo artwork) has the same fair use rationale as the other two images, to display the art style, apparently. This could stand to be removed, I think, if that's the only reason the poster is there.
--Izno (talk) 21:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I didn't mean just advice but actual editing help. But thanks anyway, I guess. I was actually planning to replace the gameplay screenshot anyway as it's from the 2010 version of the game, rather than the finished product. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
"make sure the usage licenses are in order" is a little ambiguous. I would always prefer to provide input to making the edit myself in this case, since that spreads the knowledge... and then maybe I'll work myself out of a job. :D --Izno (talk) 23:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Images aren't even in the GAN criteria, so no worries there. They look fine though. I don't think the poster was necessary, though the custom controller might be a better addition than the regular Wiimote. I had this on my list too—the article doesn't need that much more for GA status. czar 02:50, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Old draft notification (21 June 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago37 comments7 people in discussion

Hi, I'd like to bring some attention towards some of these old drafts that I found in the list of stale drafts, along with manual seearching. Maybe some people will want to work on these. I understand that some of these are unsalvageable and WP:MfD looks like a viable option, but I'd like to share them just incase there's a few salvageable ones.

Old drafts (21 June 2016)

Currently at MfD

General discussion

Hope this list is helpful! This is not a complete list. This contains a very small amount of the drafts, if requested, I can possibly create a longer list (it'll take me time, though). Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Can I just say I love this idea? Let's go through some of the drafts here first, and then we can go through more drafts later :) ~Mable (chat) 11:39, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I might do it monthly or whenever-I-feel-like-it-ly if it's successful. I just felt like listing out some drafts which looked like people forgot about. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:11, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I like the idea too, thanks for doing it. Its very interesting to look over, much like the weekly "articles created" list too. I've deleted a few of the G13's too, by the way. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 12:33, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I have another list, if you want me to post it, just ask :) Anarchyte (work | talk) 23:40, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
All watching this page, please take a moment to comment on the MFDs. --Izno (talk) 11:23, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm surprised you guys didn't just G13 them all instead of MFD. They're all old and worthless. I would have deleted them. Sergecross73 msg me 12:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
@Sergecross73: G13 doesn't apply to non-AFC articles, I thought. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Huh, it appears you're right. I didn't realize, I don't really do much in the way of nominating articles for CSD, I usually just do the deletions themselves. Guess I hadn't noticed the G13's were only from AFC in the past. Still, isn't there a faster way to get rid of these? All five are complete garbage and not worth saving... Sergecross73 msg me 12:42, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I seemed to recall G13 was for AfC'ed userspace drafts & all draft-space articles? But maybe it's just a point I made in some RfC that ended up swinging another way. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:04, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Likely to have been a point you made, indeed. --Izno (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm glad I'm not the only one who didn't realize this. At least I've learned it now. Sergecross73 msg me 15:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
No, there is no faster way to delete a draft, and there are even some vociferous opponents lying around of even a G13-light/extended draft prod/insert-name-here process to remove stale drafts. --Izno (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I would have liked to, but G13, as above, is indeed only AFC submissions at this time. --Izno (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
On a semi-related note, does anyone know if this GamesRadar source regarding CrazyBus is real or an April Fools Joke? It sounds too crazy to be real, but if it was, I'll personally work on improving that one out of draftspace.... Sergecross73 msg me 15:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
@Sergecross73: ProbablyGuaranteed an Aprils Fools joke, if you've ever heard the music it's pretty obvious. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, upon a slower, more thorough read, and some source hunting (very little out there), its become rather apparent its a joke source. If that's the case, I've lost all interest - its just a run of the mill, garbage homebrew game. I'm content with it being deleted...or just rotting away in draft space forever. Sergecross73 msg me 14:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
@Sergecross73: Please leave a comment to that effect on the MFD. :D --Izno (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Old drafts notification (24 June 2016)

Latest comment: 8 years ago40 comments6 people in discussion

Sorry for bombarding this talk page with more drafts, but I'd like to clear my stickynotes  . Anyway, in this list there are video game-related draft articles which I've found in the list of stale drafts and through manual searching/stumbling upon them. Some or many of these may be unsalvageable, but I'd like to bring attention to them just in case there are a few salvagable ones.

Old drafts

Undiscussed from the last list
New list

Currently at MfD

From the old list
From the new list

General discussion 06-24

I'll try to wait a little longer next time if I post another list. I won't wanna spam this page too much  . Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I have a few drafts in my userspace in which I have very little to no interest in working on. I might just get them deleted at some point in the future, but I figured I'd share them here first. They are: Guxt, video gaming in Cuba, and Arena.xlsm. I may work on video gaming by country again in the future, but I don't know for sure. I'm also strongly interested in User:KraigWalker/Coming Out Simulator 2014, but it is not the kind of article I like working on. I was hoping someone might pick it up sometime. It wouldn't take that much work to get it to start class, I suppose. Just wanted to share these here as well, as we're talking about drafts anyway. ~Mable (chat) 09:30, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Screenshots of Fallout 4: Far Harbor

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, would anyone happen to own the game Fallout 4: Far Harbor? The article is lacking screenshots and will greatly improve if there were some included. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:21, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't, but I tagged it as "needing a screenshot" on its talk page, at least. That usually works with varying degrees of speed for me when looking for box art and screenshots... Sergecross73 msg me 12:50, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've added a screenshot. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:38, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Third parties required

Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments7 people in discussion

I've having an edit dispute with @Lordtobi: over at VA-11 HALL-A. Basically this is a game that been released for the iPad (and not iPhone or iPod, which it is incompatible); thus, as per WP:COMMONSENSE I put "iPad" in the platform field of Infobox video game as it's the least confusing. However, Lordtobi wants to change it to "iOS" and has done so multiple times. Third party input(s) required, also pinging @Opencooper: and @Czar: since they've worked on the article. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 08:37, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I see you've been discussing it on their talk page. Their main argument seems to be that Template:Infobox video game calls for the |platforms= parameter to be the "operating system family" (so "Windows" instead of "Windows 7" or "Windows 8"), but it does make a distinction between strictly incompatible systems like the Playstation 2 and the Playstation 3. I think this is a tricky one since they both fall under the iOS moniker, but the two aren't really compatible unless the developer explicitly targets both.
At the end of the day, we have to remember that articles are written to best serve readers with accurate information. If I as a reader come to this article and see iOS in the infobox, I'd be mislead if I had an iPhone, especially since these days it is reasonable for ports to be made for both variants. While this rule was likely written with backwards compatibility in mind, the two are not "compatible" in that sense. Thus I would side with Satellizer's appeal to WP:COMMONSENSE in this case. Lastly a slight segue, my Humble Bundle copy of Cave Story+ doesn't work on the later versions of MacOS, a known issue; they should really call these things simplifyboxes because they lose all nuance. Opencooper (talk) 10:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
You've brought up some interesting points, Opencooper. The software designed for consoles is pretty much guarenteed to work on those platforms (except for the occasional requirement of a Rumble Pak, Kinect or light gun), so it makes sense to make the distinction between PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3. Platforms like iOS and Microsoft Windows are continuously updated platforms and are available on several generations of hardware, with different kinds of requirements. For instance, while Tomb Raider II and Tomb Raider both list "Microsoft Windows" as a platform, I'm pretty sure you can't play the 2013 game on Windows 98. Perhaps it's time to rethink the "platform" parameter. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:16, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
I would think it is implicit that with PC-based games that games don't always work on older versions of the OS that it is supported, and often there's no exact line where that's drawn; white-hat hackers can get a lot of things done if they are insistent on it. So we should take it as implicit that if we say "Windows", that there are going to be limited versions that the game will likely run on, but those details are beyond the scope of WP's game information. --MASEM (t) 14:42, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Anyone recall how we've handled this in the past? I cant imagine this is the first time we've had an "iPad only" game article. I do understand Satellizer's frustration though, I find it equally vague and unhelpful when I come across articles that just list "PlayStation Network" as a platform or release parameter, when that can mean many different platforms now. (PSP, Vita, PS3, PS4) Sergecross73 msg me 12:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
There was another game that only played on the iPad (can't think of it at the moment). I tried to edit it to just say iOS, but I couldn't justify it enough and left it alone. Infoboxes need to be generalized without being misleading, and I think this falls into the misleading part. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 13:07, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
What if we were to add a footnote on the information in the infobox so that if one saw "iOS [a]" they would recognize there's something not standard about that, explore the footnote and learn about the device exclusivity. --MASEM (t) 15:31, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
That seems like a needlessly complicated solution to just bending(/ignoring) the rules and listing the thing it's actually available on. Never forget the reader. If absolutely necessary, we can rethink the label of "platform" to accommodate this. Change the presentation to suit the data, not the data to suit the presentation. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:37, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree. I really think this is something WP:VG needs to update their approach with, to get with the times of digital distribution across multiple platforms... Sergecross73 msg me 19:05, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

When to not use an aggregator score?

Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

I happened to review Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes, and caught that it had a lowish MC score of 66%, which seemed odd given that while there hasn't been much talk of the game, it seemed to be favorably high (it's been out for half a year so plenty of time for serious reviews). Checking MC [11] I see it only has 5 scores, and there is one score there from a Russian site called Riot Games that is bringing it down (a 20 among the others in the 80s). Now, we shouldn't necessarily try to mask a game with poor reception and artificially remove information to make a game seem better, but this is a situation that using MC as a metric with only 5 data points, whereas a typical indie game of note gets 15-20 some reviews at minimum; and one of those data points is from a site that would not be considered an RS by ourselves. Note that neither GR works out (they only have 3 reviews between VR + PC version), and OpenCritic has none, so its not like a separate aggregator could be used. And what makes it difficult here is that because that site is not an RS, the discrepancy between the average MC score and the apparent praise from the usable RSes can be a bit offsetting to the reader.

In such cases specifically where the sample size of reviews is small, under 10, I'm wondering if should forgo including the MC and just address the reviews from our RSes directly. But I could see this, in the case of a game like Keep Talking, purposely removing something that might be negative about the game might be taken as biasing the information too. I'm looking to get input on how might be best to approach this. --MASEM (t) 22:02, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

So if less than 10 reviews are made of a game on Metacritic, or maybe by extension any of the other approved aggregate websites, we shouldn't include it? I'm all for this. GamerPro64 22:25, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Just as a side note, GR and OpenCritic only have two reviews (Same two). I think it will be very difficult to police this. On one hand though, Metacritic at least doesn't calculate a score until there are at least four reviews. This puts it ahead of GR and OC which will show a score for a single review. -- ferret (talk) 22:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, OpenCritic needs three numeric reviews to set a score. Its in their FAQs. GamerPro64 22:44, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Ahhh, I misinterpreted their presentation. The score break down in the lower left had me thinking a score was assigned. -- ferret (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Ten isn't so bad, but I personally usually remove it if it's less than 5. Sergecross73 msg me 01:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I'd been wondering about this issue myself for some time. I always remove aggregator scores which are based on only one review, since in such cases they're not only misleading, but blatantly redundant. But beyond that I've been hesitant to remove them without knowing what the general consensus is. Less than five reviews sounds like a good general cut-off point to me. I can see the reasoning behind having ten as the cut-off point, and for the most part I agree with it, but one concern I have is that among pre-information age games, there seem to be extremely few games which have ten or more scores. So that would mean pretty much dumping review aggregators for that era, which might not be undesirable, but it's something to think about.--Martin IIIa (talk) 02:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

New articles - 1 July

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

24 June

25 June

26 June

27 June

28 June

29 June

30 June

1 July

Salavat (talk) 08:37, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and maybe even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Re:Both Computer and Video Games and PALGN websites are blocked by the Wayback Machine "due to robots.txt"

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Remember when I said that both the CVG and PALGN websites are blocked "due to robots.txt"? Well, it seems that the CiN Weekly website is now blocked due to "robots.txt" too! This stinks! It seems that some websites are trying to prevent us from archive crawling for future references at Wikipedia! Why?! --Angeldeb82 (talk) 03:06, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Now it's so annoying! I really hate it when Cyberbot II archives dead links despite the fact that many archives cause blank pages or dead redirects or even get blocked by robots.txt like in this example! So annoying! --Angeldeb82 (talk) 16:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we can answer that question, since (to my knowledge) none of us work at the place that owns CVG, or PALGN, or CiN. Harryhenry1 (talk) 07:49, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Esports notability

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is currently a discussion at the Village Pump regarding notability guidelines for esports players. Figured some of you may want to check it out. TimothyJosephWood 20:27, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Requesting comments on requested move: ESports

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  FYI
 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

The present name of the article (on a general topic, professional video-gaming competition) coincides with a commercial trademark (in that market sector).

Over the last year, there have been 6 or so requested moves and other renaming discussions at what is presently Talk:ESports, most of them poorly attended, with mostly WP:ILIKEIT votes, mis-citations of policy where any was mentioned at all, and closure reasoning problems (while only one was an admin close), resulting in the name flipping around all over the place.

I've opened a multi-option, RfC-style requested move at:
     Talk:ESports#Broadly-announced and policy-grounded rename discussion

It presents four potential names, all with some rationale outlines provided.

Input is sought from the community to help arrive at a long-term stable name for this article, based on actual policy and guideline wording, and on treatment in reliable and independent sources (i.e. not blogs or "eSports" marketing).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  15:41, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

most of them poorly attended, with mostly WP:ILIKEIT votes, mis-citations of policy where any was mentioned at all

(1) Totally unsubstantiated and (2) wholly inappropriate to generalize any value-laden claims at all when canvassing to an RfC czar 07:00, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Multiple box fronts?

Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

If a game is republished by completely different companies, can an article on that game include more than one non-free box image? Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:38, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Generally no. Pick the most recognizable or iconic box. The only situation in which having two box arts MIGHT be acceptable fair use is if BOTH the original's and the other release's box art are discussed critically as box art (that is, the capital-A Art of cover images). Axem Titanium (talk) 18:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Ok got it.Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Or as "art" (air quotes included) in the case of Ico's NA cover... :) --MASEM (t) 19:17, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Okami is always my go-to example for that too. Sergecross73 msg me 12:53, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

VG Backlog

Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I was trying to add Category:Articles with unchecked bot-modified external links to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Backlog but whenever I used the catscan, it came up with 0 results even thought I knew for sure that out of the 125k articles inside the category, some had the WikiProject Video Games templates on them. Here's the CatScan that the template generates:

  • Articles with unchecked bot-modified external links: 0

    • The code being: {{WPVG backlog count|Articles with unchecked bot-modified external links|0|0}}. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

    @Anarchyte: Don't know how it translates to the template, but in catscan uncheck the "Use talk pages instead" box for the VG templates- this category is on the talk page to start with, so that was trying to look at Talk:Talk:whatever. I'm getting 2106 results. --PresN 14:23, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
    I jury rigged that template together. It uses a default for catscan that works for the vast majority of the backlogs, but sometimes you need to play with the "depth" number if there isn't a general category that holds everything czar 07:02, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

    I see no way in the template to change the way it searches, so if this is to be added to the list:

    1) it can't be automatically dotpointed because apparently that breaks the next bit and
    2) use the HTML <abbr> template next to the listing.
    Something like <abbr title="The option for searching talk pages must be disabled for this to show results">?</abbr> (that'll generate ?)

    Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:14, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

    Feel free to add that next to the entry on the Backlog page. Likely easier than working it into the template czar 01:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

    eSports WikiProject

    Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

    I had an inclining that there might be some use for an eSports project, after the lengthy unproductive discussion on policy at the Village Pump, and what seems to be a completely wild-west goings on at the main article for eSports.

    Of course, immediately after creating a placeholder I find the eSports task force here, which is pretty much the same thing.

    So I figured I'd post here before deleting and moving on in case there might be some support for transition to a stand alone project. I fully expect strong opposition.

    I suppose the main argument in favor would be: increased visibility of the project, stand alone discussion board, and (my personal concern) stand alone guidelines such as an eSports MoS.

    Thoughts, comments and gratuitous references to snowballs welcome. TimothyJosephWood 12:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

    If I remember right, it's just that, the last time it was proposed, I think Prisencolin was the only active "edit-every-day" type editor who would have joined. There wasn't really enough people to really discuss things, set up guidelines, discuss with clear consensus, etc. The task force is pretty barren - I'm not sure why a WikiProject would be any different. Sergecross73 msg me 13:01, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
    WP:ESPORTS is still a thing and you're welcome to use it and liven it up if you can get other people to collaborate with you. There was never enough discussion to justify an independant talk page, but if there is, then unredirecting it into a standlone talk page is always possible. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
    Hmm...well, my original thought was to try and start discussion on small things like how names vs. pseudonyms appear in the first line of player articles. I'm not sure that this board would be appropriate for such a discussion, but as has been pointed out, there may not even be enough editors to have it. TimothyJosephWood 14:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
    By the way, those discussions have happened here at WT:VG both recently and historically. You can break them out to the private eSports talk page if you want, but this talk page is likely where you'll get the most feedback. czar 21:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
    If you're talking about those discussions we had about article titles, it's not the same thing. To my knowledge there has never been a discussion on how player names are represented in the lead.

    Just so you know, a Wikipedia:WikiProject Pro Gaming has existed in the past, and twice been merged into WP:VG.--Prisencolin (talk) 20:51, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

    New articles - 8 July

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
    Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

    New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

    23 June

    1 July

    2 July

    3 July

    4 July

    5 July

    6 July

    7 July

    8 July

    Salavat (talk) 03:36, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

    Announcement template protected?

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Why is Template:WPVG announcements protected all of a sudden? I can't find any protection requests in the WP:RFPP Archive. Anyway, could someone add the new newsletter to the recent announcements? Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:16, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

    @Anarchyte: Moved it down to requiring autoconfirmed users only-it may be a "highly visible" template, but non-admins edit it all the time and there's no history of vandalism. --PresN 11:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

    Civilization Beyond Earth RT article for deletion discussion

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    The page Civilization: Beyond Earth - Rising Tide has been nominated for deletion. You have been invited to participate in the discussion Oldag07 (talk) 23:30, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

    NF Magazine (Nintendo Force)

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Hi! I'm cross-posting a notification to WT:NIN and WT:VG about the fact that I've started a page in our reference library for Nintendo Force (Nintendo Power's spiritual successor)! Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Reference library/Nintendo Force. So far I only have the latest issue, but I plan on continuing to subscribe and will document future ones as well. If you have previous issues feel free to add your name to the list and possibly to document the contents. Just in the latest issues there is a lot of content that be used to improve or create articles; Nintendo Force has already been vetted as a reliable source (WP:VG/S). The Nintendo fanboy in me is immeasurably happy. :D ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:00, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

    The Wachowskis/Wachowski Brothers

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    In view of the inconsistency in regards to how the transgender Wachowskis are credited in film articles I have started a discussion at Talk:The Matrix Reloaded#The Wachowski credit in the lead in attempt to address the problem. Your project has a stated interest in at least one of the articles so please feel free to join the discussion if you would like to have your say or if you can offer a constructive solution to the issue. Betty Logan (talk) 02:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

    Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

    Hi everyone,

    Not a huge issue, but I noticed that on Fallout 4: Far Harbor's infobox, the genre and mode weren't capitalised. On the bottom of the infobox, it says "edit on Wikidata", but I can't seem to figure out how to fix this. Anyone have any idea how to do so? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

    Fallout 4: Far Harbor is being used to test the infobox's sandbox. See discussion at Template talk:Infobox video game#Wikidata. The capitalization of genre and mode is an issue being worked on currently.-- ferret (talk) 12:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
    Gotcha. Thanks for your quick reply, ferret. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
    And fixed. RexxS had actually provided a solution a little while ago but I had not implemented it in the sandbox yet. -- ferret (talk) 12:59, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
    Will the "video game" part of single-player be hidden like normal too? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 13:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
    We'll have to look into the correct way to find/pipe links built from Wikidata. Please post a sub-section about it at the template so Rexx and I can take a look. He's the pro on pulling infobox fields. -- ferret (talk) 13:12, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

    Imput requested for several move requesfs

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    There are currently several move requests to remove subtitles from all of the mainline Dragon Quest games. So far there has been little imput in any of these requests so more views would be useful.--174.91.187.80 (talk) 03:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

    I'm torn - on one hand, I agree with the nominator, but on the other hand, as you've noted elsewhere, the nominator is block evading, so it should probably be thrown out altogether. (That's how we handle it when block evader create articles while evading, at least.) Sergecross73 msg me 13:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

    RFC on whether Japanese names of people (without Wikipedia articles) mentioned within a video game article should be footnoted

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Please review this RFC on whether Japanese names of Japanese people (without Wikipedia articles) mentioned within a video game article should be footnoted: Talk:Sonic_the_Hedgehog_(1991_video_game)#Should_Japanese_names_of_subjects_without_Wikipedia_articles_be_footnoted.3F WhisperToMe (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

    Move cleanup from generation articles

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Can someone move these talk page archives over redirects? Left over from when all of the generation articles were renamed late 2015.

    1. Talk:Video game console (sixth generation)/Archive 1 over redirect Talk:Sixth generation of video game consoles/Archive 1
    2. Talk:Video game console (seventh generation)/Archive 1 over redirect Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 1
    3. Talk:Video game console (seventh generation)/Archive 2 over redirect Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 2
    4. Talk:Video game console (seventh generation)/Archive 3 over redirect Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 3
    5. Talk:Video game console (seventh generation)/Archive 4 over redirect Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 4
    6. Talk:Video game console (seventh generation)/Archive 5 over redirect Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 5
    7. Talk:Video game console (seventh generation)/Archive 6 over redirect Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 6
    8. Talk:Video game console (eighth generation)/Archive 1 over redirect Talk:Eighth generation of video game consoles/Archive 1

    Thanks -- ferret (talk) 01:35, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

    ✓ done czar 21:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

    Endgame series

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    There are a couple of articles about the Endgame series, but they are inconsistent and badly linked, and the series itself seems to have been canceled. Please see Talk:Endgame: The Calling#More than just this page.

    I am very far from being a regular player of video games, let alone an expert, so I'm not going to undertake these adjustments myself, whatever may be necessary. That's why I'm throwing the ball into your court, videogeeks :-) .

    --Thnidu (talk) 04:58, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

    New articles - 15 July

    Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion
    Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

    New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

    8 July

    9 July

    10 July

    11 July

    12 July

    13 July

    14 July

    15 July

    Salavat (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

    Just a friendly reminder to all WP:VG participants that if you create an article with content you find interesting, nominate it for DYK! I feel we're kinda under-represented on the main page given the size of this project and would love to see more video gaming-related content there. Hell, I'll even QPQ such pages just to speed up the process Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 00:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    I've had one article at DYK for over 2 weeks now. Here's the link if you wanna take a shot at it. Anarchyte (work | talk) 03:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

    Quality Scales of the Tycoon Games

    Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

    I just want to bring a head's up of the three most popular Tycoon games of this year. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 17:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

    I've reassessed the stubs as starts. The articles can't really move beyond start without the post-release information which they are lacking as presently-unfinished games. --Izno (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
    Just taking a cursory glancw, World seems to meet c-class criteria right now, released or not. I dint believe it's true that articles can't move beyond start class before release. If the information is there, even B-class is possible. ~Mable (chat) 00:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
    The information can't be there for everything pre-release (unless the game was cancelled, etc.), so I would say any such article fails the B class criteria. Regarding start/C, no opinion. --Izno (talk) 11:59, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    Similarly, an article on an ongoing series can't describe the manner in which it ends. An article on a country can't describe future wars that country may take part in. Regardless, such articles can get G/FA. I personally don't think a game in development isn't its own well-defined topic. But yeah, getting B-class would be highly difficult ^_^; ~Mable (chat) 13:32, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    There is a rather large distinction on an ongoing series and an in-development video game, and that distinction is WP:CRYSTAL. --Izno (talk) 13:41, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    Yeah, in-dev games have gotten to B/GA, but only when the "in-development game" was itself the notable topic, as much as the eventually released game. Duke Nukem Forever was the canonical example, where it did not need to be eventually released to get critical commentary, and even make it to GA for a while, but even non-famous vaporware games can do it: see Final Fantasy XV (and Development of Final Fantasy XV, both Bs. In practice, though, I agree- most in-development games are really just article skeletons waiting for release so they can get a real gameplay+plot+reception sections, and without it they can't be B-class. --PresN 14:47, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    (CONFLICT) Both should be described as they are "in the moment", regardless of availability or planned availability. ~Mable (chat) 14:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

    eSports MoS starter issues for consensus building

    Latest comment: 8 years ago24 comments9 people in discussion

    This seems to be the recommended path so let's see if we can get a consensus on basics. TimothyJosephWood 22:44, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

    MoS

    Would it be helpful to develop MoS guidelines for eSports related articles?

    Support

    Oppose

    Discussion

    • Abstain as proposer. It will be assumed that any oppose votes here count as blanket opposes on the following and if this is not supported no further discussion will be proposed by myself. TimothyJosephWood 22:44, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Did we not just have a discussion about eSports pseudonyms and real names? It wouldn't hurt to actually mention and summarize that discussion. Some players are better known by their real names and others by their pseudonyms—it doesn't need to be a "rule" across the board. czar 06:32, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
    This discussion from last November appears to be the correct thread. There seems to be some level of consensus that either Name (gamer) or Name (video game player) should be used as a disambiguation. May be helpful to add these two choices only and see if we can agree on one or the other.
    I see no immediately discernible consensus on article titles generally. TimothyJosephWood 12:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
    I'd take another look as there is much more than disambiguation discussed in that link. The whole point of that discussion was the same point as this one: whether to use nicknames or real names or a combination of both. It was established that First "Nickname" Last is likely against policy. There is existing policy in place for all of this. The choice between using using the real name or nickname should be based on the common name, which is to say its current usage in the reliable sources, and not some kind of blanket rule for always real name or always pseudonym. And special capitals in a name are to be avoided per trademarks style rules. czar 23:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

    MoS placement

    Should any eSports MoS recommendations be placed as a section in the existing MOS:VG or spun off into its own page?

    Section

    Spin off

    Discussion

    Player names

    Should articles on eSports players carry the title of their given name or their pseudonym (with redirects going either way)?

    Given name

    Pseudonym

    Neither

    • Follow commonname as always. Pseudonyms are fine if they are best known under that name. If it's unclear which name is more familiar, either can be used, though some consistency in teams or specific games is probably a good idea. ~Mable (chat) 13:06, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
    • What Mable said and what I said above. The article naming criteria (policy) overrules this proposal. We shouldn't default to either the pseudonym or the given name: we use the name that is invoked most often in our reliable sources, whether that's one or the other or something else entirely. (And as a naming conventions caveat, we never put the pseudonym in quotations between the given name, even if that's what sources use.) This is covered in the previous discussion as well WPVG's thoughts on disambiguating such names. czar 05:50, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

    Notability Guidelines

    I created a set of potential SNGs for eSports over at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Proposal 3, bu no one seems to have commented yet so I'm just putting up a notice here, in case anybody just stopped paying attention to that thread.--Prisencolin (talk) 00:18, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

    So I know a lot of you guys aren't very familiar with pro gaming, but if there aren't any major objects to this, can I just move it into WP:NVG?--Prisencolin (talk) 23:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
    ...Are you talking about the one that has zero comments on it so far, here or there? If so...no, that seems like a bad idea. I'd definitely keep waiting for more input... Sergecross73 msg me 00:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

    Honestly, if I would create articles in this field (which I have rarely done), I would just follow GNG. If reliable sources have written something about a person, particularly personal/early life, practices, or achievements, you can write an article about them. But that's just me ^_^; ~Mable (chat) 05:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

    Rare Replay

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Hi all, in case it slipped your radar, I wanted to announce that the Rare Replay good topic is finally complete: 32 articles based on the 30 titles included in Rare's recent 30-year compilation. Since it'd be nice to have it squared away by its one-year anniversary (Aug 4), here are some opportunities to review, if you are interested:

    czar 20:13, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

    Replace List of video game exclusives (eighth generation) with contents from User:Rukario-sama/sandbox (As of July 18, 2016)?

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    List of video game exclusives (eighth generation) was established after List of video game exclusives (seventh generation) and they don't have real purpose. Initially the seventh game exclusive list was created when the exclusive column was removed in List of Xbox 360 games (according to its edit history) but it has returned for a long time now. I thought it's silly to have the video game exclusive list to remain exist as it just consist the stripped down table versions of List of PlayStation 4 games, List of Wii U software, and List of Xbox One games where non-exclusive game lines are removed. When I read the Talk:List of Xbox 360 games#Proposal for improving the exclusivity information I thought this video game exclusive list could be very useful if it's replaced with the table that's devoted to the exclusivity information of each game of its generation. I've already made a list in my sandbox User:Rukario-sama/sandbox. It has every games of the 8th gen consoles but incompleted due to lack of cleanup (massive game duplication and "unknown" cells) but I think it's enough to deploy a replacement. It will attract more editors and will be completed eventually.

    Read more at Talk:List of video game exclusives (eighth generation)#Purpose of this article?.

    Aye or Nay? Rukario-sama ^ㅈ^ -(...) 22:55, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

    Work: Cherry Tree High Comedy Club

    Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

    Hello - I have been doing some work on this article. What would be appropriate steps to take from here? Is there an example article template so I can better fit with other video game articles? I have a sandbox for this article, too: User:Catfrog/sandbox/Cherry_Tree_High_Comedy_Club Catfrog (Edits 🐸 Talk) 00:21, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

    • I just provided some guideline fixes to the article, but a good way to improve the article is to find a similar game that reached GA or FA status, and try to emulate what you see. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 05:47, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

    Dota 2 featured article nomination help

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    So I nominated Dota 2 as a featured article candidate a week ago, but it's seen little activity regarding comments. Could any of the more experienced project members with a focus on those who normally work with FA nominations help and provide their opinions? Any help would be appreciated. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 08:42, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

    Early history of video games

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Since Czar's similar post above went so well, just thought I'd let everyone know that the good topic nomination of the Early history of video games is still up and needing reviews: a collection of 12 articles, all written/rewritten by me over the past year, covering every single article on Wikipedia about video games pre-1972 (when the release of the Magnavox Odyssey and Pong started off the commercial video game industry). Come check out a bit of history! --PresN 20:42, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

    I hope to be able to take a look at this topic once I get home next week. I've put some minor work into these articles as well (to be fair, more on Commons than here :p), and I'm really badly that these articles have come this far. Amazing work > u < ~Mable (chat) 00:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

    PS-themed book needed

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    I'd like to know if someone's got access to the duology of Pix'n Love books about the making of the PlayStation titled La Revolution Playstation or to Revolutionaries at Sony, an earlier work by the same author containing much of the same information. The reason why I'm after one of these is that they are chock-full of valuable info tidbits that I could use in beefing up an article about a certain early PS title. Any help would be much appreciated. -- Electroguv (talk) 15:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

    New articles - 23 July

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
    Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

    New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

    13 July

    15 July

    16 July

    17 July

    18 July

    19 July

    20 July

    21 July

    22 July

    23 July

    Salavat (talk) 16:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

    Graphical timeline

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Hi everyone,

    I just changed the horrible looking graphical timeline to the neatly {{Video game timeline}}. I went through the what links here page of the graphical timeline and didn't find any other video game-related articles, so hopefully this is it. If you do happen to run into one and you haven't got the time to change it, let me know, I'd be happy to do so. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:12, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

    Suggested merger for the stuff packs articles in The Sims

    Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

    I propose that

    Be merged into

    For those whom are familiar with The Sims topic area, every Sims game since Sims 2 has had stuff packs in addition to expansion packs. Stuff packs are comparably small to other packs that are put out for the game, which leaves little to talk about a stuff pack, even where the stuff packs are all listed within the same game which they were released for. So to even have separate lists of stuff packs for each game is too far a stretch to section things off into their own articles. These are effectively list articles with just a small amount of content within each section. Its not as much article size that's the issue, its the fact that the individual sections average out just a few sentences long. I thought to make things easier to navigate, so readers will be able to read up on stuff packs within a single article. If the articles were to be combined, anyone whom was looking for only a specific games stuff packs could still simply rely on the TOC and click on their desired section, and since stuff packs add littler content compared to other packs, some readers may very well want to read things in a single article. Long story short, I think such a merger would serve as a compromise to keep things that need to be in one place, whilst still allowing readers to read into which stuff packs they so choose. But also that I'm looking to discuss things from the perspective of all video game article editors, not specifically editors of The Sims. —Mythdon 04:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

    Perhaps List of The Sims stuff packs as the merged title? Disambiguation can be avoided as this topic would definitely be a list. ~Mable (chat) 04:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    Sounds a bit more reasonable. Since the word stuff packs originated from The Sims, then you're right, putting the Sims title in parenthesis would falsely imply that the term stuff packs exist elsewhere. —Mythdon 06:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    • The Sims articles are a total shitshow but here's how I think it would be done best: (1) main articles on each major entry (Sims 2, Sims 3, etc.), (2) spin out the "Expansions" section of each, summary style, (3) summarize each expansion in these pseudo-list spin-outs (Sims 2 expansions), which can also carry these "stuff packs". No need to make it more complicated than that. Choo choo get on the merge train czar 10:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
      Agreed with Czar. List of The Sims expansion packs and etc. is the right home for these, and would definitely include the expansion packs as well as the stuff packs. I've had my eye on these The Sims articles for a while for merging. --Izno (talk) 12:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
      I would even go as far to say that we don't need a separate article - a discussion of what Stuff Packs are should be at The Sims (video game series) ,and then a short table of pack name(s), release date, and one-two sentence description of the contents within each of the game articles. --MASEM (t) 18:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
      The expansions need cleaning as well, however, so it's not like the stuff packs couldn't use the same lists as the expansions. --Izno (talk) 09:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

    Video game TFAs

    Latest comment: 8 years ago13 comments9 people in discussion

    Wh-what's going on? By my count, there have been three video game-related TFAs this month. Is someone on the TFA committee asleep at the wheel? Are there proportionally more video game FAs being promoted than other topics? I'm not complaining; I'd just like to know if anyone has any insight on this phenomenon. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:19, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

    Well I had to get Nights into Dreams... on the main page on its 20th anniversary (5 July), and Satoru Iwata's death was on 11 July, so at least two of the three video game TFAs had to be up there for important anniversaries. That could explain why so many are appearing, not to mention the TFA process is looking dormant as well... JAGUAR  20:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

    I think I heard that there's been a push for more FA articles about video games for the front page. Honestly I kinda enjoy people getting upset about the frequent amount of them. GamerPro64 03:01, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

    While video game related I don't think Iwata should be in the same boat since he was a programmer and later a president of a video game company.--174.91.187.80 (talk) 03:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Mischief Makers should have ran next June for its 20th anniversary. It was picked early I guess, and I didn't realize it was supposed to be next year instead of this one. So much for planning ahead czar 04:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

    Is it just me, or are "three" same-subject TFAs in one month considered a lot? Because I could swear that there are at least six or seven articles on boring plants that appear on the main page every month. JAGUAR  11:37, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

    Well, on an average month, 3 articles from the same domain is 10% of all TFAs for that month. I'd be hard-pressed to argue that video games encompasses 10% of all things on Wikipedia. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    We're sitting around 30k articles. Out of 5 million, that's 0.6%. --Izno (talk) 18:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    What percentage of all Featured Articles are video game related? I would assume that that would get closer to 2% or something. 10% is definitely a bit much, though that just means other wikiprojevts should step up their game ^_^; ~Mable (chat) 21:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    WP:VG has 208 FAs, and Wikipedia has a total of 5785 FAs, so that's 3.5%. I did the maths. That's not too bad actually! JAGUAR  22:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    By that measure, two per month isn't surprising, and a month with three was to be expected eventually. Keeping it with one or two per month is probably more balanced. To be fair, I personally do like seeing more culture than nature on the front page, but opinions may differ. That's the beauty of this whole project. ~Mable (chat) 22:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    Historically, VG articles have been on the main page about 13 times a year over the past few years, roughly one a month (~3.5%!), and pretty evenly too. My perception was that this pattern was a relic of about 8 years ago, when having VG articles any closer together generally resulted in curmudgeonly complaints on the main page's talk page. That hasn't been true for several years now, and perhaps the "new" coordinators (since the start of 2015) simply aren't sticking as closely to the pattern if they have TFA requests they can fulfill. --PresN 23:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    Seconded. On an interesting note, there has already been eight (!) military-related TfAs these past two months. Three video game TfAs in a month is nothing, haters gonna hate. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 11:36, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

    Pokemon Go - CIA involvement, seeking third party

    Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
      Done Sergecross73 msg me 22:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Could someone, perhaps an uninvolved admin, read over Talk:Pokémon_Go#.22CIA_involvement.22 and determine if this should simply be closed as disruptive at this point? The user is mostly attacking editors without providing any sources to back the content they wanted. -- ferret (talk) 21:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

      Done Sergecross73 msg me 22:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    COMMONNAME discussion

    Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

    There is currently a discussion at Talk:Great Detective Pikachu#Reverting title of page about the use of WP:COMMONNAME: Should COMMONNAME only be applied when the common name has a basis in an official name? I would like to see more participation in the discussion, so if you have the time, please give your thoughts.--IDVtalk 13:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

    I don't see how it's even contested czar 20:04, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    It's really not, anymore, but when he first posted this, it was only like a 2 vs 1 argument. (That's where it was at when I jumped in.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    Exactly. It's quite frustrating when I feel I have a solid case based on MOS and WP policies and guidelines but so few people partake in the discussion that it almost doesn't matter. Happened earlier with Battle Tendency, where 1-2 people insisted in keeping a huge character list and plot summary and a separate fair-use image of the protagonist despite him being depicted on the cover art already. I couldn't get consensus to follow MOS, and while I can't revert multiple times if it's not outright vandalism, an IP user doesn't have to care about that. Is there another way to go about this? Articles with only few editors watching it can get steamrolled by a single person who insists on having it their fanwiki-like way, and that just doesn't seem right.--IDVtalk 21:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    Yeah, you did the right thing. I know what you mean, the same scenario happens with me from time to time on the obscure JRPG articles I work on. Dropping a neutrally worded request for input here usually helps build a consensus pretty quickly, especially when its obvious Wikipedia MOS/Policy stuff. Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    I've had the same problem before in the past. But if you post it here asking for help, more often than not you will get editors who are more familiar with WP:VG guidelines that help. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

    Video game release new - Font size discussion

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Please see Template talk:Video game release#Font size is not accessible concerning the font size of country codes in this template. -- ferret (talk) 21:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

    The current way that country codes are displayed in {{Video game release}} & {{Video game release}} has been found to be non-compliant with the MOS section on accessibility. The solution we are planning on implementing will slightly increase the text size of said country code (from ~61% of base font size to ~85.5% of base font size) to make them acceptably readable for visually-impaired readers, and would add a colon after said country code for clarity since it will be on the same vertical level as the date. If you have any objections, let us know in the discussion Ferret linked to above. You can see examples of before-and-after here: Template:Video game release/testcases. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    At some later point merging the two will also be under discussion but for right now that's now the crux of the issue. :) 20:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

    For those working on first-party NES games...

    Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

    Nintendo is publishing its own book on the history of its games for the NES games. Its only up for pre-order right now, slated to come out with that mini NES console this fall. --MASEM (t) 22:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

    Sounds like a book that will probably end up notable on its own. I hope the book will discuss some niche titles that are difficult to find sources for. Will this book be considered a primary source? I haven't checked who is writing it yet, but it sounds like it will be closely tied to Nintendo either way. Wouldn't use it for opinions. ~Mable (chat) 22:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    Assuming it was written in the last year or so to talk about creating the carts from then, that's likely secondary (reflecting and commenting upon the process). It does say it will include some reprints of Nintendo Power features too. Judging by the blurb, this is basically about the same games that will be in the 30-in-1 system that they are putting out, which all are already notable on their own; this will just help out. --MASEM (t) 22:55, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    Either way, this sounds great. We'll see what we can use it for when it gets here, but I'm expecting good things :3 ~Mable (chat) 22:59, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    I would still consider it a primary source. SharkD  Talk  21:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    Latest comment: 8 years ago10 comments7 people in discussion

    It looks inactive, so should we revive it? If we do, should we use bots to maintain it? If we don't revive it, should we take it off the WPVG sidebar? If we keep it on the sidebar, should we give a rational as to why it's on there?

    What do you think? Catfrog (Edits 🐸 Talk) 00:24, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

    Inactive? I was about to agree until I saw new titles on there such as Pokemon Sun and Moon and No Man's Sky. Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Traffic statistics, on the other hand, hasn't been updated since 2011. JAGUAR  18:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
    Well, the chart says the last time it was updated was to give figures for March 2016...so, out of date, yes, but not really "abandoned" yet. I find the page interesting, though I have no idea what it would take to get it up and running. Sergecross73 msg me 19:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
    Ah, I see now. It looks like it used to be updated on a monthly basis by Mr.Z-bot, but I suppose the onus would be on the bot's owner or somebody who is super-savvy with programming. JAGUAR  19:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
    I hate that these don't get updated anymore, especially because I really want one made for another project so I have a better grasp of what articles are most important in that scope. I would love to see what the situation is in VG as well, so I hope someone could do something about this. Spoilers: Pokémon Go will be at the top ;) ~Mable (chat) 12:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

    The Wikiproject could try out the HotArticlesBot instead and see how that turns out. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

    We can't, actually (or at least not in one group) - HotArticlesBot requires that all the articles be inside of a single catagory, like Category:WikiProject Cats articles, but Category:WikiProject Video games articles contains no articles and instead leaves them to the class/importance subcategories. So, we could see which B-class articles are being actively edited, but not all articles unless we had like 8 groups. --PresN 14:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    Wouldn't be too hard to change that, though. Change it so everything with {{WikiProject Video Games}} is added to Category:WikiProject Video games articles. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Tracked in Phabricator
      Task T141154
      T141154 – open ticket for WMF's community tech team to support the feature czar 05:42, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

    Multiple release dates in the infobox

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

      Please see discussion at Template talk:Infobox video game#Multiple release dates in the infobox czar 06:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

    Max Payne and "Max Payne"

    Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

    (Pasted from Talk:Max Payne#Speaking of names...)

    After discussing the names of many characters and other entities in Max Payne § Norse mythology references, the section ends with

    Max's own bullet time abilities seem to mirror these of the berserkers, Norse Viking warriors who drove themselves into such a frenzy when they entered battle that they seemed superhumanly strong, fast, untiring, and unable to feel pain (the theme of Payne's necklace is a Viking longship).

    How about Max Payne himself, as in "max(imum) pain"? Is he able to endure, ignore, or not feel even extreme pain? I've never played the game myself, and the article doesn't mention it, but it sure seems like a likely connection if true.

    Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 02:04, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

    Looks like original research to me. Most of that section does, actually. – Rhain ☔ 02:30, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
    @Thnidu: I concur with Rhain. These theories and ideas are all fine and dandy, but as long as no reliable sources have picked up on them, it's just original research. ~Mable (chat) 09:46, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
    Resolved at Talk:Max Payne § Speaking of names... --Thnidu (talk) 20:05, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

    FLC review request

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Hey all, I have an FLC up - List of Uncharted media, which is now down at the bottom of the queue (FLC typically cuts off after 2 months, so it's overdue, though there's a glut at the bottom right now). Can anyone come by to give it a final review? --PresN 01:53, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

    Problems with the Rogue Galaxy article

    Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

    Lately I've got a problem with the Rogue Galaxy article. I fixed a lot of tweaks, removed scores from prose, and corrected and added more release dates. But somehow, Bertaut ruined my good work by making the European release date incorrect, removing Australian and Korean release dates, restoring scores to prose, removing some reviews and scores, and breaking the Video Game Releases template in this page, even though I warned him not to ruin my good work! Bertaut is the one breaking the rules, not me. What should I do? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 22:47, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

    Have you tried discussing it with Bertaut on his talk page? But per WP:VG/DATE, release dates should be provided for primarily English-speaking regions, including North America, Europe, and Australia. Including Korea's release date probably won't be needed unless it was released there first, which I doubt, but I might be wrong. JAGUAR  23:25, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
    Correct, and in this case, it wasn't, so the Korean release date should only be mentioned in prose, if at all. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
    With regard to the removal of reviews and scores, I could be mistaken, but I think Anime News Network is almost exclusively a publication on anime, making it non-notable in the context of video games. However, as to his removal of the scores for Edge, Game Informer, GamePro, Game Zone, and PlayStation Magazine, and most especially the removal of reviews from Digital Spy and The New York Times, I think Bertaut is clearly in the wrong there. The fact that his only defense for these deletions is 'what "rules" say Edge, Game Informer etc must be included in articles?' makes me all the more doubtful that he has a good faith reason behind them.--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:06, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

    Proposed change to Template:Video game reviews

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    I've proposed a change to this protected template at Template talk:Video game reviews#Template-protected edit request on 31 July 2016. All input would be appreciated.--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:20, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

    Discussion at Wikipedia talk: Non-free content#RfC for NFCC#8 exemptions for currency and USPS stamps

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

     You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk: Non-free content#RfC for NFCC#8 exemptions for currency and USPS stamps. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 06:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Pokémon character notability

    Latest comment: 8 years ago10 comments7 people in discussion

    Which notability guideline applies to fictional characters? I'm thinking about making articles for the Pokémon characters Arceus and possibly other legendaries like Groudon, Darkrai, and the Regis. I assume Arceus would be notable enough but I'm not so sure about the other ones. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:56, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Might want to ask that specific project. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 09:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    The talk page there is pretty idle. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    @The1337gamer: So there are no specialized guidelines about characters? Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Generally if you can't build a section around their reception by professionals at a minimum and fans at a stretch, or a design/development section, then there isn't enough coverage to warrant notability. So you have something like Pikachu who is ridiculously notable, merchandised up the yin-yang, can be recognised in third party situations, to a lesser extent you have Mewtwo who might not be as recognisable by far but has starred in feature films and is a special character in the games so will have some coverage. I have no idea what an Arceus is but looking at its image it doesn't look like something ripe for merchandising, but maybe it is a popular character? I don't know as I've not been involved in that realm for a long time. But I would guess it probably isn't notable enough for an independent article. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 10:05, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Arceus has been featured in its own movie and Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS/Wii U. Using the WP:VG/S search for "Arceus" brings up a large amount of possible references too. I'll take a shot at making it [the Arceus article] tomorrow. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:33, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Just try keeping the in-universe information to a minimum. That's for Bulbapedia to describe :) ~Mable (chat) 13:48, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    (edit conflict) Just make sure you've got third party, reliable sources that discuss the article in significant detail, like usual. But as mentioned above, make sure you've got out-of-universe commentary - if its all in-universe plot summaries and descriptions of his move-sets and whatnot, then it's likely to be deleted or merged back. I'd really try to bulk up on the sources though, it can be rather difficult to find good sourcing for video game characters it seems, and there's quite a number of editors who are pretty active checking/redirecting/merging/AFDing weak looking articles. Pokemon articles have a reputation of having exceptionally weak sourcing too (along with Sonic characters), so it could be a likely target to be challenged... Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Also keep in mind the Pokemon test - at one point we had individual articles on each Pokemon but ultimately merged most down to lists beyond those with clear GNG-meeting notability. You readily need out-of-universe importance. --MASEM (t) 14:04, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance GAN

    Latest comment: 8 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

    An anon nominated Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance to GA some years ago. I doubt it could become a GA unless it is given some touches. Is it possible to cancel the nomination if nobody will work there? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 14:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    It was nominated today, not years ago. -- ferret (talk) 15:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Sorry, my typo.Tintor2 (talk) 15:34, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    The article looks fairly complete, and seems to be quite well-sourced. I do not read read it thoroughly though. If I had remembered correctly, you can undo the nomination, and then notify him. This happens before with some Sonic articles several months ago. I think reviewing/quickfailing the nomination is the better choice though. Leaving some comments is better than an undo after all, though I am not sure whether the IP is really going to work on the article, given that he only has two edits. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    ...Interesting, I'll see if I can make it a GA. However, do you notice some typos in the article? I was wondering if I should request a copyedit in the guild. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 17:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Deletion discussion for Category:Rare (company) stubs

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Dawynn (talk) 17:47, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Pokémon Go - CIA Involvement, seeking third party (again)

    Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

    On the Pokémon Go talk page, the same user has brought up the CIA involvement issue. Could an uninvolved administrator please close the discussion, again? Cheers, Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:49, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

    ✓ done czar 09:48, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
    For a fourth time Santamoly (talk · contribs) started a discussion. I've closed the discussion and left them a message at their talk page. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 07:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Nevermind. Despite my best efforts, they've started a fifth discussion. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 07:43, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Closed the 5th discussion. Is it time this is taken to WP:DR/N? Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    We're on a sixth (seventh?) discussion now. The editor continues to make borderline NPAs while continuously reopening the topic in a disruptive manner with no secondary reliable sources to back claims, or really any discussion of the topic itself at all, just discussions about the various editors who have reverted or replied on the topic. -- ferret (talk) 20:02, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    I've issued a final warning to the editor. Sergecross73 msg me 20:15, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    New articles - 29 July

    Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

    New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

    23 July   Duelyst (edit talk links history) — Nocturnvs   Freya Ravensbergen (edit talk links history) — Stagehero   Draft:Software Toolworks (edit talk links history) — Bilofsky

    24 July   Twin Saga (edit talk links history) — Namikatze   Invent4 Entertainment (edit talk links history) — Lordtobi   Badiya (edit talk links history) — Marcellus Drum   Draft:Iran computer and video games foundation (edit talk links history) — Eric hack

    25 July   Draft:Light of Life (mobile video game) (edit talk links history) — Otterworker11

    26 July   List of games which support Xbox SmartGlass (edit talk links history) — Seba5tien   Momodora: Reverie Under the Moonlight (edit talk links history) — CurlyWi   Doc the Destroyer (edit talk links history) — Wyskoj   Draft:7th Dragon III Code:VFD (edit talk links history) — NeoSkyte   Draft:Five Nights At Grotesques (edit talk links history) — Nirvana Articles

    27 July   Lady Layton: The Millionaire Ariadone's Conspiracy (edit talk links history) — Wonchop   Tall Unlimited (edit talk links history) — Wyskoj   Mad Planets (edit talk links history) — Dgpop   Eden star (edit talk links history) — LSmart01   Creativerse (edit talk links history) — Alumnum   The Lost Arcade (edit talk links history) — Valoem   Jesse Hernandez (artist) (edit talk links history) — FlameRabbit   Draft:Vinesauce (edit talk links history) — TheSheepGuy

    28 July   Monster Hunter Stories: Ride On (edit talk links history) — Dynasty889   Just Sing (edit talk links history) — Haveyouseenthisboy   ISS (2000 video game) (edit talk links history) — Sahilebrahim

    29 July   Antinomy (video game) (edit talk links history) — LakersPlaya   The Idolmaster Platinum Stars (edit talk links history) — Liaon98   Hans Stuffer (edit talk links history) — Speckaustria   Alphabet Park Adventure (edit talk links history) — Childishbeat   Jeuxvideo.com (edit talk links history) — NinjaRobotPirate   Draft:Ninth generation of video game consoles (edit talk links history) — Mr. Plank Hill   Draft:Kyle Landry (pianist) (edit talk links history) — Alfiehjohnson

    Deletion discussion for Category:Xbox stubs

    Xbox One S and the Eighth Gen

    Latest comment: 8 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

    So the Xbox One S has come out and one source has revealed that it contains additional power over the original. Not quite Scorpio level increase but nothing to cough at. So let's ask this question: How do we include it on the Eighth generation? Is it just a hardware revision that instead of being exactly the same has more juice or does it need something more? Perhaps we need to wait until somebody sits down and clocks everything (like, is the APU different at all?), but I want to kick this idea around. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 18:35, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Everything I've read has MS considering it as a revision of the Xbox One (and all their pricing changes for the original Xbox One also support this). Also consider that MS doesn't think either the S or the Scorpio to be "new" consoles from their E3 talks. --MASEM (t) 18:45, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Generally, since we have such a hard time concretely describing how we define generations, we just go by what sources say. This would go along with what Masem says above - sources are generally saying its a revision, not part of a new generation. Much in the way of the New 3DS, which is also a more powerful, but still relegated to 8th gen status. Sergecross73 msg me 18:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    I think more to Zero Serenity's point is that while the Xbox One S would still be listed as 8th gen, should it be listed as a wholly new device within 8th gen or as a revision to the Xbox One, and my take is that everyone in the media has acted as if its the latter and thus should be grouped in the same column with the Xbox One, as is the case with the S and E revisions of the XBox 360 on Seventh generation of video game consoles. --MASEM (t) 19:39, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Ah, apologies. I keep running across these bogus 9th gen articles editors keep creating, where they mention Scorpio and Neo as 9th gen consoles, and I was think this was more in line with those sort of situations. To this specific situation, it looks like editors have listed out every specific variant of 3DS and Vita in the handheld section of the 8th gen article...though I'm not certain that's the right choice, it looks pretty cramped and overwhelming honestly. I guess I personally don't know yet. Sergecross73 msg me 19:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Ayup. No intention on a 9th gen article sofar. Just trying to sort out how to include it somewhere on that page. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 20:42, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    So 71.172.52.70 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) went ahead and put info in a way that I'm largely comfortable with. As an aside, perhaps the Scorpio and Neo would be considered Generation Eight and a Half? Just an idea. Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 22:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Zero Serenity - If you're happy with his additions, and they look appropriate, then we're fine, but keep a close watch on that IP. He's been blocked 3 times in the past - twice by me. He has a bad habit of adding unsourced figures to articles, arguing that his personal calculations are more accurate than the sources present, and then breaking down into personal attacks, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 13:36, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

    Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2016

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Кио (talk) 18:56, 5 August 2016 (UTC) in Fragile Dreams page:

    1. need to be correctly placed in template
    2. write single_release date instead of multiple
    3. add Shōnen demography
      Not done: This is not the proper page to make this request. Request it at Talk:Fragile Dreams. -- ferret (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

    Help

    Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

    I've been trying to format all the bare urls from Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, but this appeared

    "Cite error: A list-defined reference named "CVGDecPreview1" is not used in the content (see the help page). Cite error: A list-defined reference named "XPLay_Confirms_MGS:R_not_exclusive" is not used in the content (see the help page). Cite error: A list-defined reference named "nvidia" is not used in the content (see the help page)."

    Any idea how to fix this? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 16:25, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

    @Tintor2, yep, it means that some list-defined refs are not in use. Just need to remove them or otherwise add references that use them.[12] czar 16:35, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
    Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 18:16, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

    {{resolved}}

    Very obscure and rare game called Where in North Dakota Is Carmen Sandiego?

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Hi my fellow WP:VGians !

    I have been heavily researching this unendingly fascinating state-specific Carmen Sandiego video game from 1989. It has recently received a lot of coverage due to being rediscovered in 2016, with many documents and even a documentary set to be released soon. The historic sources (from c.1989) are very hard to gain access to, and the contemporary sources (c.2016) are few and far between, so it has been an interesting challenge to work on this article.

    I have worked very hard to gather sources and create the article framework, although copyediting (especially for an article such as this) is not my strongest suit. For this reason I request that it be copyedited by members of WP:VG to tighten things up and consolidate all of the content into a more concise and logical narrative. The gameplay section (my least favourite section to write) also needs a bit of work.

    So please head down and give the article a once or twice over, and learn about a very interesting and unique piece of video game history!--Coin945 (talk) 04:32, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

    List of most downloaded free-to-play video games

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    What do you think about create a new article?In Talk:Pokémon Go#List of best-selling video games is disscussion. Dawid2009 (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

    Rare Replay FAC

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

    Hey, anyone have time to take a look at   Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rare Replay/archive1 before it times out? Full reviews or source/image reviews all welcome. (If FAC still looks scary, no prior experience needed, just follow the FA criteria or the model in other reviews.) czar 07:30, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

    New articles - 6 August

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
    Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

    New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

    26 July   Draft:SuperLoganGamer (edit talk links history) — 2607:FB90:423B:5CBC:0:45:75B2:5501

    30 July

    31 July

    1 August

    2 August

    3 August

    4 August

    5 August

    6 August

    Salavat (talk) 07:50, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

    One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
     

    Hello,
    Please note that The Sims (video game), which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
    Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:06, 8 August 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

    Fantastic! This is an article that absolutely needs improvement. If anyone needs new references for the article, I've gathered many dozen interviews/features/articles at my sandbox here: User:Harryhenry1/sandbox Harryhenry1 (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

    Infobox Wikidata

    Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

    Please be aware that Template:Infobox video game will become "Wikidata aware" today. A basic guide to Wikidata editing is available at WP:VG/WD. If you encounter any major issues, please open a section at Template talk:Infobox video game. The implementation we are using is typical and relies on Module:Wikidata, which helps standardized retrieval and formatting of Wikidata properties.

    Note that a blank template parameter will prevent Wikidata pulls. If you begin populating Wikidata and expect to see that data in the article, make sure you remove placeholders. This is by design based on the last RFC that allowed for Infoboxes to pull Wikidata. -- ferret (talk) 11:30, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

    Very nice work! Check out Fallout 4: Far Harbor for an example on the new infobox, if you're interested :) Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    I believe the advantage to using Wikidata is so that the information can exist and be edited in one central location but be pulled from multiple articles. Is that true? If so, how do I pull review data on Fallout 4 for use in a series review box at Fallout (series), for example? Axem Titanium (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    @Axem Titanium: Yes, that is one of the uses. If both Fallout 4 and Fallout (series) use Wikidata, then editing the score once will update both articles. The templates {{Video game reviews}} and {{Video game series reviews}} support Wikidata now, at least for aggregators. {{Video game reviews}} will display a score from Wikidata if either |MC=wikidata or |GR=wikidata. It was decided to use an opt-in model here. For {{Video game series reviews}}, things are a bit more complex. Check the documentation page, but there are essentially two options. If the series data is completely fleshed out in Wikidata, the template will build everything with zero parameters. It will ask Wikidata for the "parts" of the series, and iterate through them, pulling their label, page link, scores, etc. This has been done on Fallout (series) already. Otherwise, an editor can build the template with a mix of parameters and Wikidata as needed. The template will pull scores for an item based on a QID being provided. For example, you might use the parameter |game1=[[Fallout (video game)|Fallout]] together with |qid1=Q60102. This would use a local value for the wikilinked game name, while using the QID to pull score data for Fallout (1).
    While matching scores across articles is one of the uses, another general goal is consistency across different language Wikipedias. For example, the developer is stored in Wikidata, and 20 different Wikis use that data in their infobox, rather than having 20 different local values. Adopting Wikidata for the infobox helps give us a more global picture that other Wikipedias can also utilize. Note that using Wikidata on any given article is always optional. Local parameters will be honored. -- ferret (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    How does simply placing {{Video game series reviews}} onto Fallout (series) know which games to populate itself with and in what order? Axem Titanium (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    Fallout (on WD) has a statement has Part. This is used to tie a series/collection to its parts (It's a little bland sounding). The template's module starts by pulling "has Part", and then for each item pulls the publication date and review score data. It sorts the results by publication date, then outputs them. In many cases, as long as the series has been setup in Wikidata, this does the job. In cases where its deemed the series has too many parts or inappropriate parts (Perhaps local consensus at the article is to not include spin offs), the editors can manually specify the QIDs for the items they want included. -- ferret (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    Ok thanks. It looks like it'll take me a little while to wrap my head around this stuff. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

    Nintendo Power issues on Archive.org

    Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments8 people in discussion

    Unsure if this is news to anyone else, but I only learned of it today, so: The first 145 issues of Nintendo Power (August 1988–June 2001) are available on Archive.org. Might be useful when writing about games that don't have much coverage on the internet.--IDVtalk 18:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

    Wow, that's great to see. Which more old gaming print magazines would show up there. --MASEM (t) 19:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Thanks for pointing that out! Yeah, as you mentioned, that'd be interesting for some of those 90's games that aren't always covered very much in the modern internet age. Sergecross73 msg me 19:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    Oh come on! I was gonna use it for Kirby's Avalanche. GamerPro64 22:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    ...This is why we can't have nice things. ~Mable (chat) 22:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    Pretty sure you can find the archives elsewhere too. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:03, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

    Good wiki target?

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    Hey guys, I just restored the draft Draft:List of Xbox Demos (North America), which was created by AGPunchak. I think that this type of detail is a little too indiscriminate for Wikipedia, so I don't know that it'd ever make it live, especially given that this type of thing could potentially be a mammoth page. However that said, it is an interesting topic and one that I think would make for a great entry on a fandom wiki devoted to the Xbox. Anyone know of a specific wiki that could use this information? I could probably google a few, but I figured that you guys would be more aware of which places would be the best place to start off with. (I restored the page so he'd be able to access the info to port it over to the destination wiki.) I've tagged AGPunchak in this so they can see your suggestions and just to introduce him to this WP in general. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

    More eyes on Metroid II's "fan remake" section

    Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

    ⇒ Talk:Metroid II: Return of Samus#AM2R download links through Wayback Machine – // Hounder4 // 12:36, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

    (I've helped some, FYI.) Sergecross73 msg me 12:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

    Timeline of Valve Corporation

    Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

    Should Timeline of Valve Corporation exist? I don't think I've ever seen a company timeline article before. Seems kind of redundant when this information should be the meat of the Valve Corporation article. Anyone know of reasons to keep such an article? --The1337gamer (talk) 19:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

    I say AfD it. It just rehashes the article in a chronological manner. Unnecessary and redundant. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:20, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
    There's also a bunch of redundant or unnecessary entries (like GOG and Origin launch dates? Beyond being competitors to Steam, why?) --MASEM (t) 19:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
    AfD'ed. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 07:57, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

    Looking for article naming help

    Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

    I'm looking to start an article on broadly covering video game software management services - eg: Xbox Live, PSN, Steam, Origin, etc. There's a handful of topics that I've encountered of late in other areas that an organized place to talk about such services on broad terms makes sense (eg: cross-platform play, the nature of certification processes for console-based services, etc.) However, I can't come onto a good name for this only because itself its not a commonly-talked about aspect, so what name this would fit under, I don't have a good idea. "Video game software service" would be my first wording for it, but I'd like to see if anyone knows a tighter term for that. --MASEM (t) 17:24, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

    Video game (digital) distribution platform? Video game network software? If you were willing to draw a line between console service, which provide server/multiplayer infrastructure, and PC services like Steam/GOG/etc., which just host files, then you could do something along the lines of Video game console network infrastructure or Video game console network software (and let the PC discussion live at digital distribution in video games). Just spitballing here. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
    Well, it's not just the distribution aspects, its the other services these all provide, in broad terms, like friends list, matchmaking, achievement systems, etc. --MASEM (t) 20:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

    NX or Nintendo NX?

    Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments6 people in discussion

    Hi everyone,

    On The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, it currently lists the upcoming Nintendo console as "NX". At this point a definitive name has not been announced, but how should we call it in the meantime? Nintendo NX or just NX? I hate to go into the whole Nintendo GameCube/GameCube thing, but I think we need to establish some sort of consensus about the name. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

    Until Nintendo actually announces the console to give us its preferred naming approach, I would stay with Nintendo NX, since its also unclear if NX is the true final name as well. --MASEM (t) 14:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    Even if NX is the final name, I would expect to see the full phrase spelled out as Nintendo NX on first appearance in an article, and anywhere thereafter as NX only if no other disambiguating term is needed. --Izno (talk) 15:18, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    I dunno about that, as we have tended to use "Wii" or "Wii U" without Nintendo in front of it. But perhaps because there, those are "proper" words while something like 3DS or NX may be random abbreviations and the clarification of Nintendo in front helps. Unfortunately I don't think this will be cleared up until Nintendo formally announces the platform. --MASEM (t) 15:32, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    The Wii and Wii U are not great examples since neither of them had Nintendo In their names. A better example would be the GameCube which was used despite offically being called the Nintendo GameCube due to GameCube on its own being more common.--67.68.161.51 (talk) 17:24, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    That's sorta my point: what is Nintendo going to want us (the consumers) to call it. With the Gamecube, they clearly wanted people to think of it as "Nintendo Gamecube", so we'd follow suit like Izno suggests (spell out first use, shorten to Gamecube all other times). For Wii/Wii U, they even made their ads clear it was just "Wii", not "Nintendo Wii". So it will just be a matter of time to figure it out. --MASEM (t) 17:49, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    It is not a matter of life and death, but it's indeed difficult to figure out what the device's common name currently is. I'd definitely go with "Nintendo NX" for first mentions and infoboxes as well, as this increases clarity. Luckily, very few games have been announced for the console thus far, so our decision doesn't have much impact at this point. ~Mable (chat) 18:14, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    Using Nintendo GameCube first on articles is in fact not something we follow suit on. Looking at multiple video game articles there are several in which neither the lead or the infobox use the term Nintendo GameCube and go with GameCube right off the bat. Several of the articles that do so are The first Metroid Prime. Cubivore, Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker, and Paper Mairo the Thousand Year Door.--67.68.161.51 (talk) 19:21, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    With Breath of the Wild and Nintendo#2015–present: Mobile and NX, we settled on just "NX" a while back because Nintendo announced the platform under that code name and has never used "Nintendo NX". That said, many reliable sources use "Nintendo NX", so neither name is clearly preferable. —zziccardi (talk) 15:04, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

    In more Internet Archive news...

    Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments5 people in discussion

    They now have a section for old Amiga games, similar to their DOS and VGA collections (in that they can be played an emulated in a browser).

    Now, unlike the Nintendo Power aspect, my recollection is that the Internet Archive asserts fair use of these materials under the DMCA (in that the original way to play these games no longer exists in a readily-available consumer form, so the emulation is acceptable for non-commercial purposes). Like suggested with the DOS and VGA games, it would thus seem fair to allow these as an external link from the respective game pages. --MASEM (t) 16:10, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

    Template: {{Internet Archive game}}; if the article is a multiplatform game, you may wish to manually create the link instead with "The Amiga version of GAME" instead. --PresN 17:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
    Have any lawyers looked over this idea? I really think it would be worth getting a second opinion because although IANAL I'd consider these pirated games. Some are still for sale on GOG or Steam, and even if they aren't I don't think that means you can just pirate them as much as you want. --Odie5533 (talk) 22:57, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    This has been around for a very long time. A lot of Spectrum and BBC Micro games are ready to be played via the Internet Archive. I think they've been in the external links of some articles (especially stubs) for years. JAGUAR  23:06, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
    Just because Wikipedia has linked to other pirated material for a long time doesn't mean we should add more of it. Archive.org may seem like they are doing the due diligence on these, but they actually aren't, not in any sense that Wikipedia requires. These files aren't officially uploaded by Archive.org and nor do they officially distribute them. They rely on users for the material, and a lot of it is illegal pirated copies. Some of the games they share are still on digital markets for sale. For an encyclopedia that prides itself on being truly free and not breaking copyright law, I don't think we should link to pirated material. The only difference between Archive.org and any other illegal pirate site which streams old games is that Archive.org feels official. --Odie5533 (talk) 05:20, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
    I agree with you; I wasn't sure if my previous comment sounded like I was endorsing it in anyway. I personally remove the external links myself on any Spectrum articles I come across. JAGUAR  17:32, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

    Note: it appears that the Amiga addition was a beta test, and the site has been taken down for a while as they do some more work on the online emulator. --PresN 23:18, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

    • @Odie5533, see   Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 110#Linking to Internet Archive emulated games for the previous discussion. Jason Scott, an IA employee and archivist, is responsible for these collections and our understanding was that the emulated games use the same DMCA exception that lets the IA upload old gaming mags. Feel free to see clarification if you want, but that's where we left off. czar 15:41, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
      • @Czar The exemptions being discussed are exemptions to the DMCA non-circumvention clause, not exemptions to copyright law. Yes, you can circumvent security technologies on "video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and which require the original media or hardware as a condition of access." but that doesn't mean the video games are now public domain and you can post them online and share them and sell them. A quote from the register:
    The purpose of the proceeding is to determine whether current technologies that control access to copyrighted works are diminishing the ability of individuals to use works in lawful, noninfringing ways. [...] persons making noninfringing uses of these four classes of works will not be subject to the prohibition against circumventing access controls during the next three years.
    the DMCA also states that the law does not affect copyright infringement, only circumvention of access security:
    (c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected. (1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.
    So circumventing any security protections on these old games in order to access the work is legal, but sharing them is still copyright infringement. 99% of these IA links are to infringing works and should be removed. Some I saw even linked to games on IA which are still for sale on Steam and GOG. IA is just hoping they won't receive takedowns because the games are mostly old and forgotten, but that doesn't make it any less illegal than posting pirate links to modern games, just less likely to get caught. I don't think Wikipedia should link to either. --Odie5533 (talk) 05:21, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

    New articles - 12 August

    Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
    Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements

    New articles from the past week. This post has been made to help raise the visibility of new articles that fall under this project.

    3 August

    6 August

    7 August

    8 August

    10 August

    11 August

    12 August

    Salavat (talk) 06:24, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

    Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_123&oldid=1249260281"