Response

Maybe you are not watching but I responded to your inquire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Trimming_the_sidebar Swmmr1928 talk 03:07, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

FLC

I just wanted to say thank you for your input at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs in Rock Band 3/archive1, which has now passed. The list is now much better than it was at the start of the FLC, and your input helped make it as good as it is now! –Drilnoth (T/C) 14:54, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Re:Super Mario RPG

Thanks for letting me know about this. I feel that this and Super Mario Galaxy 2 have issues unaddressed from their reviews. The problem is that I don't know what the problems are. What do you see as major problems? GamerPro64 00:06, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I knew there was RS problems. I can use this for a community GAR. GamerPro64 15:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Invited

Been invited to be part of the discussion to share your opinion whether List of LGBT characters in film, radio, and TV fiction should be deleted or not. this discussion is here here.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Europa Barbarorum

Hi, since you were the main reviewer at Talk:Europa Barbarorum/GA1, I thought you might like to know that I have requested that the article be reviewed for Good Article status again: perhaps you would be interested in contributing this time around, too? It Is Me Here t / c 22:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

disallowing edits

I believe I follow you...though I've often used Wikipedia, I have never attempted an edit or contribution.Jqbertlee (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Maniac Mansion

I was wondering if you had the chance to over the article once more, or if those couple of edits you made a couple of weeks ago were the result of that effort. –MuZemike 03:09, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Unsolicited Advice

You're a good editor and a patient guy and I admire that, so certainly no offense at your unsolicited advice. I tend to be a bit more strident, which sometimes is fine and other times gets a little extreme I do admit. I am used to getting into heated discussions on policy debates, as I often take policy positions that are legit but a little on the creative side, but that is the kind of discussion I think helps Wikipedia. Argument can be as useful as conciliation in the right circumstances to pull out where everybody stands.

The situation on the shoot 'em up page is, unfortunately, a bit different. Bridies has proven himself to be completely uninterested in fact, preferring instead to take an extreme position on the verifiability not truth essay by declaring that any fact in a generally reliable source should be included without challenge. This does not just involve the current situation, but also his extended disagreement with Marty over the whole parallax scrolling thing as well. When alternate theories exist for an issue or multiple people involved in an event give different accounts, or the same person gives different accounts at different times, then Wikipedia needs to include them all, because "truth" in this case is inherently unknowable. In matters of objective fact, Wikipedia should not include material clearly provable as erroneous. When one secondary source conflicts with a dozen primary and secondary sources on an issue, especially on an issue tangential to the author's research, then including it does not balance the article, it distorts it.

The problem with not weeding out unreliable information on Wikipedia is that in areas with an underdeveloped scholarship like video game history, inaccurate information can have a really bad ripple effect. Unfortunately, what is written on Wikipedia often becomes fact for IGN, 1up, Gamespy, various blogs, etc. which then distorts the historical record entirely. This is why I feel strongly about the issue. The situation is only made worse by the fact that pretty much every history of the video game industry written thus far contains numerous errors, so it often takes comparisons between many different works and examination of the underlying primary sources to figure out the facts. I am not a professional video game historian like Marty, and I do not have access to caches of primary documents generated by companies in the industry as he does for Atari, but I am probably more well-read on the subject than nearly every other editor on Wikipedia, as I have read hundreds (maybe even thousands by now, I don't keep count) of newspaper articles, magazine articles, press releases, first-hand accounts, etc., and even conducted a small number of interviews of my own. That is not to imply that my opinion gets to trump all others on Wikipedia or that I don't need to present good sources for my positions just like everybody else, but it does mean that I do know what I am talking about when I describe the generally sad state of video game history scholarship, though people like Marty are doing their bit to improve things.

Bridies was sarcastic from his very first revert, which led me to take a couple of cheap shots at him that I know I should not have, but his baffling disregard of information provided by people like Marty and myself that have researched the industry in some depth and the way he tries to belittle people with more knowledge of the subject than himself is not conducive to compromise or creating a factual article. I concede that I come on too strongly sometimes and am prone to defensiveness, but if you look at my record (and I have been here a long time, two years longer than you), I do tend to prove my point, reach a compromise, or stop pushing my position in the end. I stand by my statement, however, that editors like Bridies do more harm than good when they try to get involved in evaluating information when they lack a sufficient understanding of the topic. I know I would never even attempt to enter a debate on an article about mathematics or physics because I would not be able to provide any constructive analysis and would get in the way. Well, not sure if this rant accomplishes anything, but there you have it. Indrian (talk) 02:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Warshaw

I removed Warshaw's statements on ET because he is not a valid source for making such a claim; he may have programmed the game, but that gives him no expertise or special knowledge on how Atari disposed of it. If you read the interview he's also just stating what he thinks happened, not that he knows it did or did not happen. Such a vague source (total speculation by a layman) doesn't justify inclusion of a contentious claim. Herr Gruber (talk) 13:59, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Copyedit and some opinions needed

I have been recently editing the anime/manga character article Naruto Uzumaki to reduce the usage of in-universe information and expand out of universe using Cloud Strife as an example (I would use Lara Croft, but I find that one very complicated. In fact, the last times I edited Cloud's was using Lara's as an example... XD ). Everything seems fine, but I still requested a copyedit in the guild of copyeditors. However, I thought that it would better if you could take a look in the article considering your experience at editing and see what else could be improved before a nomination to GA. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 00:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Removed the other media image and expanded the caption for the Part II image. I found one sketch that talked about Naruto's Part II design but I don't know if it would more suitable.Tintor2 (talk) 15:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
I made test of Naruto's description based on Lara Croft's here. Do you think it's okay?Tintor2 (talk) 23:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Done. Moved to the article. Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Another collaboration?

Hey. A new face around WPVG--User:Electroguv--is dramatically expanding Lucasarts adventure game articles. He just finished a meaty Development section for The Secret of Monkey Island, and now he's preparing to work on Full Throttle. He says he's done with Monkey Island for now due to time constraints, and I offered to write the Reception section for him, since I don't have much trouble locating reviews for old games. I don't know what your schedule looks like, but this sounds to me like a good opportunity to take another Lucasarts article to GA. If you could condense the remaining post-release material (much of it cruft) into a coherent Legacy section, we'd be a Gameplay and Plot section away from completion. What do you think? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:31, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Naruto Uzumaki

I user tagged Naruto Uzumaki for copyedit even though it was already copyedited. Do you think it really needs another one?Tintor2 (talk) 14:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The article automatically failed its GA nomination per user Redtigerxyz notes. I am concerned about his notes regarding that the article should actually focus more in the in-universe traits from the character to the point of creating wikia-like sections like abilties and personality, so I sent him a message. Anything you might want to add? Regards.Tintor2 (talk)
I expanded the description section to include more information as commented by the GA reviewer, but do you think that's enough? The reviewer did not reply back so before requesting a copy-edit, I would like to know if the information is enough. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 16:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I see. Thanks. I already requested a copyedit to the guild months ago, so I don't whether it will be copy-edited. I'm having some tests this week, so I will be a bit busy. Anyways, I expanded a bit the description section to explain a bit Naruto's transformations, but I still don't know if it's okay based on the lack of responses from the reviewers. Do you think it should moved back how it previously was? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
The article managed to become a GA! Thanks for your work! I hope it can be used as an example to other articles from the project. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 01:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Atari 5200

Need your experienced neutral opinion over at Atari 5200. An anonymous IP started an edit war with two accounts regarding an IGN reference (he doesn't want it there). It's calmed down enough that it now turned in to an actual discussion amongst other editors. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:50, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. My site (atarihq.com) is up for another reliability discussion (the previous discussion resulted in reliable) thanks to this discussion, apparently dreamfocus wasn't happy with the previous discussion. Would appreciate your neutral opinion there as well - Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Atari_HQ. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: newsletter

Sure. I dunno which one I'd pick, though... Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 15:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Features section

Hey Gib. I was thinking that instead of adding a featured editor this quarter, can we have like a "From the editors" section to reflect the progress this project accomplished this year? GamerPro64 23:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I can add some other great events that happened to the project this year. Abd I can ask David if he can hold off his feature til next quarter. GamerPro64 20:16, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Tatsunoko vs. Capcom

No problem with resuming this after the holidays, take as much time as you need. Quick note, though, I'm gonna make one adjustment to your improvements to the cover image's page while I'm thinking of it... JEB215 (talk) 00:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

FYI, I'll be out of town from tomorrow through Sunday, so if you post a reply and get no response after a day or two, that's why. JEB215 (talk) 02:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Interview

Hi Guy, thanks for the offer, but I honestly don't think I'm involved in WP enough, or involved at the project enough to have anything worth saying for the newsletter. Thanks for your continued participation at the wikiproject, especially with the other demands on your time. All the best for the new year. Someoneanother 15:48, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars

Hi,

I noticed you, Sabre, Electroguv and Blackwing did such a great job with the Monkey Island article, I was wondering if you could improve the Broken Sword 1 article. I fixed the article quite a lot, and its mostly finished, the only problem remaning is the overly-long-and-detailed plot section, and maybe the prose. Best --193.111.221.60 (talk) 17:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Free use and arcade cabinet pictures

This is something I wanted to ask you about personally. I'm looking to make use of this image in the article regarding the game in some fashion, but I recall a long while back you were trying to do something similar with a Simpson's game. What came of that?

Jinnai's pretty certain that it's not possible due to copyrighted material being shown (my guess being here the characters), but wouldn't that be like saying we couldn't use a photo of a musician with the photographer's permission just because he has a Mickey Mouse tattoo visible?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Jagged 85

Hey,

I have noticed a disturbing trend in video game articles in the last few months that I think warrants attention, but probably also warrants a more diplomatic touch than I sometimes bring to a conversation, which is why I am approaching you with this on your talk page. It involves the user named above, Jagged 85. Jagged is a prolific wikipedia contributor whom I do not believe acts with malice in his editing, but seems to go on massive editing sprees where he does not read sources closely and misrepresents their contents. I have had occasion to correct some of his edits in the past, but became really concerned when I learned he was the subject of an RFC over his editing of Islamic articles that presented overwhelming evidence of the same pattern of behavior. That caused me to look over some of his video game edits more closely, and it seems the same is happening here. Note that not all of his edits have been bad. In fact, he has uncovered some great stuff such as new install base figures for the Sega Master System in Europe, but he appears to be distorting the truth regularly, and he makes similar edits across multiple pages in such rapid succession that it is hard to catch them all.

I will not go into great detail about harmful edits on your talk page, as that is best handled on a dedicated topic or page, but a few examples bear mentioning so you see what I am saying. He has used one clearly mistaken source to change an article when that source is contradicted by every other reliable source out there [1] [2] (all reliable accounts point to 1980 release); he has cited to a source for information not contained within that source [3] (Source says Pac Man sold 350,000 units but does not claim those were US sales alone) [4] (Source gives a few sales figures to put Xanadu in context, but does not make best-seller claim) [5] (source discusses the importance of scrolling and the fact that the NES is capable of hardware scrolling, but does not claim that the NES was the first console with hardware scrolling, which is inaccurate); and he has misrepresented info in sources [6] (Uses a Retro Gamer article to give 2 million SMS sales in Brazil, but article states that Tec Toy sold 2 million systems by 1996, meaning SMS, Genesis, and Saturn) [7] [8] (This one is really bizarre and happens in two parts. In the first edit, he adds a claim of 200,000 units in sales in two weeks and fastest-selling game ever with a Crash magazine article as reference. I tracked down that article, and it just discusses the merits of the arcade game with no mention of the home versions or sales at all. In the second edit, he adds a second magazine source to back up those claims, but that article says the game sold 200,000 copies in "two minutes" not two weeks, making it a figure of speech, and then says this makes it "just about" the fastest selling game ever, so it is not actually making a claim to speed of sell though).

Now, anyone can make an honest mistake, lord knows I have accidentally added bad info to wikipedia before, but Jagged has established a pattern. The edits sourced above are only a small sampling on video game articles, and you can see his history of these problems goes back much farther and deeper on other topics. I am afraid that without intervention, the cumulative effect of his edits will begin to undermine the integrity of wikipedia's video game articles, particularly since he presents an appearance of delivering authoritative information through sourcing when the source is not making the claim attributed to it. Note that I have not discussed any of this with him directly yet, as I wanted to proceed cautiously and in a non-confrontational or accusatory manner, so whatever comes of this, bringing him into the loop should be the first step. I am not trying to blindside or trap him.

Anyway, I sincerely hope you will give this matter some attention, as it appears to be serious. I am not asking you to do the legwork or take the lead in finding and presenting evidence; I just want a neutral and diplomatic set of eyes as this situation develops. Indrian (talk) 21:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I know you are gone and all and may not be coming back, but I just wanted to amend this to say that this user is not doing nearly so much editing of video game articles now so the problem may have solved itself. Just did not want you to see this if you come back and think its still a concern. Indrian (talk) 02:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Crash

Just wanted to give a heads up that my latest article in RetroGamer is coming out now (100th issue special). It's about the crash, hopefully clears up a lot of the more common missconceptions (which seem to be throughout the crash article here). At least as much as I could in the limited space I usuall have. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Raiden (Metal Gear)

I placed the article Raiden (Metal Gear) on a peer review some time ago, but got brief responses. Do you have any recommendations? I have doubts regarding whether creation section should be splitted. Also, I noticed that there are several writers giving an in-depth analysis of the character's role in Metal Gear Solid 2 (he represents the player) as well as his actions in following game (how he is a different type of hero from main protagonist Solid Snake) and I was wondering whether it could listed as a sub-section within reception. Any thoughts? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 20:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A Class Status for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

I spoke with Nolelover and we're interested in working to achieve A class status for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. We would appreciate any tips you could give us, especially your thoughts on what aspects of the article need to be improved. Thanks. Vyeh (talk) 19:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Atari Book

Not sure if you saw it - ataribook.com --Marty Goldberg (talk) 06:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Strike series

Hi there, I recall you had a "Making of The Strike Series" Retro Gamer article, used in the Desert Strike article. Just wondering if there's anything useful in there for either Soviet or Nuclear Strike. There's some interest in scraping together enough for separate articles for those games, or at least improving their coverage within the series article. Thanks, bridies (talk) 09:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Managed to get hold of this, just for the record. bridies (talk) 07:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Capcom Five GT

I've nominated PN03 to be part of the Capcom Five Good Topic. See the nom here! Axem Titanium (talk) 15:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

My Book

Just wanted to let you know my book, Atari Inc. - Business Is Fun, is finally out.--Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Final Fantasy

This is a note to let the main editors of Final Fantasy know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 18, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 18, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Final Fantasy

Final Fantasy is a media franchise created by Hironobu Sakaguchi. It centers on a series of fantasy and science fantasy role-playing video games (RPGs), but includes motion pictures, anime, printed media, and other merchandise. The first game in the series, published in 1987, was conceived by Sakaguchi as his last-ditch effort in the game industry; the title was a success and spawned sequels. The video game series has since branched into other genres. Although most Final Fantasy installments are supposedly independent stories with different settings and main characters, they feature identical elements that define the franchise. Plots center on a group of heroes battling a great evil while exploring the characters' internal struggles and relationships. The series has been commercially and critically successful; it is Square Enix's best selling video game franchise, with more than 100 million units sold, and one of the best-selling video game franchises. It was awarded a star on the Walk of Game in 2006, and holds seven Guinness World Records in the Guinness World Records Gamer's Edition 2008. It has also introduced many features now common in role-playing video games and has been credited with helping to popularize console-based RPGs in markets outside Japan. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Precious

Final Fantasy
Thank you for quality articles on the culture of science fantasy role-playing video games, such as Final Fantasy, and for "pumping good content into the Kingdom Hearts articles", you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 338th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated List_of_Castlevania_media for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2013

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2013
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2013, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed between 12-14 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the initial messages I sent out went to only WikiProject members and users that had over 15 reviews).

So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:

  • Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. Now, one of the most important criteria is that you have at least 15 independent reviews. If you are reading this, you are likely 3 (or less) reviews short, so if you review another couple nominations, you can become a recruiter! If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available".

NOTE: If you are interested in becoming a recruiter but do not meet the 15 review requirement, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters and put your status as "Not Available" until you have reviewed enough nominations.

  • Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along.

A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk)

This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Template merger discussion

Since you were involved in the original discussion to split the video game generation templates, I thought you'd want to be involved in the current discussion to merge them back.--Marty Goldberg (talk) 15:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Consensus for whether there should be a separate section Lords of Shadow series

Hello you're invited to vote and express your views on Template talk:Castlevania series#Separate section for Lords of Shadow series?. KahnJohn27 (talk) 10:23, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article List of X-Men video games know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on December 2, 2013. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/December 2, 2013. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors Giants2008 (talk · contribs), Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) or SchroCat (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. Thanks! © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 23:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

An X-Men booth at the 2006 Electronic Entertainment Expo, promoting X-Men: The Official Game

Beginning in 1989, X-Men video games have appeared for home consoles, handheld game consoles, arcades, and personal computers. The first video games were released on 8-bit home platforms. Most X-Men video games, especially those released in the 2000s, were released on several platforms. Several companies have developed entries in the franchise, including Paragon Software, Software Creations, Konami, and Capcom. The titles are action games that pit the X-Men against Marvel supervillains, typically taking the form of beat 'em up and fighting games. X-Men characters also frequently appear in Marvel games that focus on several of its comic book franchises, including Marvel vs. Capcom: Clash of Super Heroes and Marvel: Ultimate Alliance. The franchise holds several Guinness World Records, including most games based on a superhero group, first tag-team fighting game, first superhero first-person shooter, and most number of simultaneous players on an arcade game.

More