This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

There is currently a vote going on the Scrolling shooter talk page whether to merge it to shoot 'em up. The shoot 'em up page is younger than teh scrolling shooter, but bthere they are somewhat redundant. To add to the confusion there is Shooter game. What is the correct name of the genre? and what is a sub category of waht and what should be hte main article

Please weigh in. thanks!! --Larsinio 19:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Shooter game should be the overcat, with FPS (I know there's not an article, just using it as an example) and Scrolling shooter below it. Unless there's some nuance to Shoot 'em up that I'm missing, make it a redir to Shooter game. --Syrthiss 19:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I would also think that Shoot 'em up should be a redirect to Shooter Game Chris M. 01:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Shooter game>Shoot'em up>Scrolling shooter sounds good to me, with either most of the scrolling shooter content in shoot'em up moved to the subarticle or merging scrolling shooter into shoot'em up. also expanding the non-scrolling area in shoot'em up. --72.137.173.201 03:15, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

A little merge help would be needed from someone who would know a thing or two about Fire Emblem series - just advertising this here in hopes someone more qualified and less burdened with other tasks would take the bait, I don't think I'm qualified or anything. Basically, there's a problem brewing at Mythology in Fire Emblem and List of Fire Emblem references. I've rambled a bit about this at Talk:Mythology in Fire Emblem. Basically, the problem is, there's two versions of the same list, and people are spuriously working on both. Also, both articles (and some sections in the list) are titled horrenduously. I have kind of mixed feeling whether the list should exist at all, but I think it's a somewhat tolerable topic. Any ideas? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 22:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I am under the impression that ((solution)) is the appropriate tag for videogames, and that ((spoiler)) is for non-interactive fiction. I've changed this in the CVG project page. If that's not the case, please leave an explanation here and revert will you? Arru 08:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this is a good idea, since the spoiler tag is usually used when spoilers regarding the story of a game are included. Game solutions should never really be included in Wikipedia articles, since that kind of content goes on Wikibooks. If you read the WikiProject page carefully, this has been described already. Thanks for explaining your change on the talk page, though. Cheers! Jacoplane 09:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

?? We still give summaries on the story. We're not Wikibooks, Gamefaqs or a tips guide either. I agree with Jacoplane for leaving it as "spoiler." K1Bond007 16:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed keep it as spoiler --Larsinio 16:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Also agreed Chris M. 02:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, spoiler. --Naha|^(talk) 05:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking it might be a good idea to include some videos of video games in game articles. I'm thinking about short videos that show important aspects of the game. For an example of video media files, see the New Horizons launch. As you can see, video files on Wikipedia are encoded in Ogg Theora. I was thinking of using an emulator together with video capture software like Taksi, Demo Studio, or CaptureWizPro, perhaps using VirtualDub to do some reencoding. I have a couple of questions:

1. Would these videos fall under fair use?
2. Is what kind of license template should be used?
3. Does anyone know of othere screencapture programs that might be better suited for this?

Any other feedback welcome too. Jacoplane 00:21, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. Maybe on some high-profile articles. But I think screenshots and a link to a web site that has them in WMP or Quicktime (such as IGN) is good enough. Thunderbrand 16:10, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea, we could show off graphics and gameplay of a game with these very easily. But I'm not too sure on the fair use implications, and I'm not sure if things like Machinima and Speedrunning (things that would definitely benefit from videos) would fall under fair use. - Hahnchen 17:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

My $.02: Short, low res clips (probably 10 seconds 'maximum to illustrate a point or as example probably fall under fair use. This would be simmilar to the use of screenshots, only a little stricter because they have the potential to reveal storyline properties and such. If the machinima is a free work (as most are) there should be no problem, but whether or not it is necessary is a valid question. Regarding videos of an actual game, it would be ok if it is a trailer, press release, or advertisement, but is less likely to be okay if it is user taken footage. An exception to this would be game "tricks" such as Halo's Warthog Jump, to illustrate the point.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 15:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It is more likely to be okay if it is user taken, because the direction of a video (choice of what to play, moves executed, camera use...) is as much a creative act as the scenery is. Fredrik Johansson - talk - contribs 16:33, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

As was notified on the CC talk page, I went ahead and merged all characters into a list except for Kid, Serge, Lynx, and Harle. Deckiller 16:05, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I propose creating an infobox for video game characters, similar to the infboxes we use for video game consoles and other games.

Structure

name at top

Image

First video game apperance

Designer (optional)

Occupation/role (optional)

Games appeared in (optional)

Aliases

Notes

What do you guys think?!! --Larsinio 00:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure. What articles would you propose adding this to? I kind of like articles like Mario as they are, with an image that doesn't clutter the page too much. Perhaps you could make a proof of concept somewhere? Jacoplane 00:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Could be useful, although many games with enough signifigant characters, most particularly fighting games, have game specific character boxes and should definitely remain as such, seeing as how there is a lot of info about characters in one game that may be completely irrelevant about a character in another and vice versa. I suggest using this only when no other template is present (but it is an excellent idea), and making as many of the parameters as possible optional, including the 2 new ones.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 00:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I have created a test version on Pentarou. Please comment on it. Feel free to fiddle with it on that page so we can get a relatively defined and mature infobox - going

When I look at Link (Legend of Zelda), I don't think an infobox would improve it. Also, some game characters already have specific infoboxes (or similar) tailored to their game, see Zidane Tribal, Terra Branford, and Mega Man X (character). I don't think a system-wide character infobox would work out that well. --Pagrashtak 02:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I ran across this article the other day and analyzed the site for its content, hoping that is as extensive as say Memory Alpha is for Star Trek. I was dissappoined when i saw almost every article was a stub, including major games like Super Mario Bros.!! In many articles they take content from Wikipedia as a good bul of the material. I did a good analysis of it, and made changes to teh corresponding wikipedia page noting about the scope of the content compared to the wikipedia. User:AlphaOne, the founder of Encyclopedia Gamia was not at all happy, and claims that Wikipedia gaming articles lack the depth that gamia gives it. I heartily disagree. I mean look above and check out the EXTENSIve articles on every single cahracter of King of Fighters, or the 300 or so starcraft related artciels (maybe not 300 but you see my point).

Well actually what is my point?

1) I need a third party opinion about the content afo encylopedia gmai for use on the wiipedia page about hte external wiki 2) I am suggesting that if we recognize wikipedia s the superior outlet for such material, which i think we agree on, I suggest we start migrating material from Encyclopedia gamia's articles that are more in depth and put it to wikipedia. their dark forces article for instance is more in depth. NOt all ath e conten should be ripped, and it shoudl be definatley copy-edited. But what do you guys think?

P.S. I could use some help in direction of where to go with Contra (arcade game). The article needs to be improved and i need some pointers :) --Larsinio 20:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Merging material from other places is all good, but it must be allowed by their copyright, and you should credit to source as a reference. ··gracefool |☺ 21:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking of setting up a Current computer and video games events (or Current gaming events), similar to other such pages (see: Current events articles. Seems like an easy enough thing to do, and would provide a nice page to keep track of which games have been released. What do people feel would be the best name for the page? Jacoplane 14:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Or simply Current video game events Jacoplane 19:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Tally:

• Current computer and video games events: 3
• Current gaming events: 0

The first is 'more correct' and ties in with the wikiproject. 'Gaming' is very general and could cover things that aren't relavent to CVG (not neccesarily a bad thing). And while I wrote this, the page was created anyway! --Tom Edwards 14:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I created the page, I figured we can always move it if we decide on another name. Jacoplane 14:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

lets keep it specific and wordy --Larsinio 14:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the first name is better. By the way, it's a really good idea and I will contribute to it. Mushroom 14:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

We already have 2006 in video gaming. At the end of every month, we can archive the pages e.g. January 2006 in computer and video games. 2005 in sports and December 2005 in sports are good examples of what I imagine for this. the 2005 in sports article is not organised chronologically, but by topic. It is also more focused on providing raw facts, and the monthly current events article provides a bit more narrative. Personally, I think these pages complement each other well. Though I could imagine that others might find these pages to be a bit redundent. Thoughts? Jacoplane 17:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:Current computer and video games events sources, source article needs to be created. Jacoplane 19:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. I don't really have an an opinion on this page. It would just have to be updated a lot to be relevant. Thunderbrand 00:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I honestly don't care so long as someone updates it. I hate to be somewhat negative here, but I have a feeling this is just gonna be the flavor of the month. After a while, I figure it'll die off. Note 200X in video gaming type of articles that don't really get updated with the events and business stuff. So long as this is being worked on though, it would be nice to see this stuff somehow incorporated at 2006 in video gaming. K1Bond007 02:57, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Part of the reason why I created the page is so that there is a nice overview page of current events and which articles are related to those events, so they can be easily updated. Anyway, I'm glad you don't object, because you've done a lot of work on the [[year in video gaming]] articles, and I didn't want to step on your toes. We'll see whether it is updated frequently enough though. I would imagine it should be easy at the end of every month to take the major events that occurred and add them to 2006 in video gaming. From January 2006 in Computer and video games I think Rockstar being sued and the "DS lite" warrant inclusion. Jacoplane 16:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Well I definitely don't object. Just hopeful that it gets updated. I moved the 3 bullets (since that was it) we had going on at 2006 to January (with sources) and I just linked to the months on 2006 in video gaming. I don't know how the layout will work. That's something that probably needs to be updated instead of just having a list. Maybe a side bar with the months and move the trends section up to the top. I don't know. I'll think about it... K1Bond007 06:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

FYI, I've removed most of the clutter from the article such as events & release dates and moved them to Template:Current computer and video games events. This also enables editing directly in the sections on the side, and means the main current events page only has the news stories. Jacoplane 17:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I've been playing around with the look & feel of the page. If anyone has any other suggestions as to how the page could be improved, that would be most welcome! Jacoplane 03:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

At the moment both the WP:CVGI and Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Peer review are mostly inactive. Since both these pages are focused on improving the quality of non-stub articles, perhaps merging these two pages would get more of a response. I also think Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Noticeboard should be merged perhaps. Then we would have one page besides the GCOTW where all requests can go. Having 4 different pages is just too much for most contributors to follow... Jacoplane 01:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree; feedback for the Xenosaga review, among others, has been quiet. Deckiller 01:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Also agreed, per above amongst other reasons.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 01:51, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Combine them into "WikiProject Computer and video game weekly peer review"! Seriously, something needs to be done. I think the noticeboard probably needs to be killed; any requests intended for the noticeboard could go to the peer review/CVGI/weekly collab, or just a post on the main discussion page. Merging the CVGI and peer review won't fix the CVGI, though. Part of the problem is the layout of the main CVG page, it's pretty bad (no offense intended to those who've worked on it). There are a lot of subpages in this project that I wasn't aware of until recently because they're very well hidden. How many others here were aware of our list of CVG featured articles? The link to it from the main CVG page is on the text "featured articles", so I never clicked it, assuming it would take me to WP:FA (I think I'll go fix that right now, actually). I think the first step is a redesign of the front page. --Pagrashtak 02:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

What about this-- A page for which articles are nominated. Let's say they need to get 5 votes in one week or something. From then on they can stay on the list and we'll update those articles until they are at least a Good article, at which point they can be removed. This should provide some focus on multiple articles, and remove the "weekly" requirement of the AID. Peer review is too much a request for comments, and really I don't see very much advantage to having a seperate peer review just for video games. I would start by nominating a bunch of the "essential articles" and we can then work together to improve those. Something like Wikipedia: Computer and video games workshop. CVGI, CVG Peer review, and the notice board would become formally inactive. Thoughts? Jacoplane 02:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Alternatively, we could only focuse on the essential articles for now. Then there would be no use for nominations, we would just work through the list. Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Essential articles/Workshop. Jacoplane 02:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Support merging the Improvement Drive, Noticeboard, and Peer Review into a single Workshop. Nifboy 03:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Support merging the Improvement Drive, Noticeboard, and Peer Review into a single Workshop. The workshop should be dedicated to essential articles right now, with the goal of getting each essential article to the point where only a full wikipedia peer review would be the next point. Theres lots of holes in obvious articles like Racing game or Origin Systems, that need to be addressed, and that we simply dont have enough weeks in the year to effectively cover by GCOTW. --Larsinio 14:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Support the workshop idea. We only need two places to organise collaborations: Wikipedia:Gaming Collaboration of the week for expanding stub articles; and the workshop for improving the quality of longer articles to good article status, before a full Wikipedia peer review. --Nick R^Talk 14:45, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I've started a proposal at User:Jacoplane/Workshop. I think we should take some time to design the page, and when we feel we have a good proposal, we can ask all the members of the WikiProject for their opinion. Jacoplane 18:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't really make this clear, but please edit the Workshop page! It might be in my userspace atm, but since the WikiProject will hopefully be adopting this, we need as much input as possible. Jacoplane 04:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

You know, it's interesting that that Wikipedia:Join in collaboration thing just appeared. It seems to be just the thing we're aiming to do with the Workshop. -- gakon5

Is there an automated way we can generate the listing for the To Fix page... I was thinking run a comparison against all arcade pages and then comparing ot hte list of pages that have the infobox arcade template. And then running a similar item for video games pages. I do not know how to accomplish this --Larsinio

If all the pages are already in a category or have some naming in common I/someone might be able to do it with WP:AWB. --Syrthiss 17:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (computer and video games) is dead. Now it needs to be revived. Recently, user WikidSmaht made some major changes. Among other things, he proposed better disambaguation - that is, articles should be named with their console name, like Mario Tennis (Nintendo 64), and all series pages should be clearly albeled (like Mario Tennis series). i really don't like the changes that much. But I think this Wikiproject needs to take this up, fix, discuss, whatever, and make the naming conventions an official guideline. - Hbdragon88 06:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I feel that it is unnecessary to put the console in the page name, since I feel that if a game has a multi-console release all the versions of that game should be covered on the same page, otherwise you end up with 4(ish) pages with 95% of the content identical. As far as the Series go, I definatly agree that it should read SERIESNAME Series, since will help with ambiguity issues. (if I go to the Super Mario Brothers page will I get the SMB Series or game 1). Seraphim 06:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? I noticed these, are there any others? Please post your suggestions here. Thanks a lot! Gflores ^Talk 17:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

We started working on these a while ago on this page, but haven't made very much progress yet. See here for good/featured articles. Jacoplane 18:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Ive been trying to updat the essential articles as I can. Artiles such as the The Oregon Trail (computer game) and Personal computer game show enough promise for 1.0 IMO. If you can help us evaluate our articles listed as essential, it would be much appreciated. Im kind of arbitrarily rating them. --Larsinio 18:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

That's exactly what we're looking for, that's a great resource. Unfortunately there is a lot of work to be done for 1.0 with just a few active participants, we'll try and help (evaluate) when possible. Thanks again! Gflores ^Talk 18:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

You may want to include those in the project. I recently improved those of Tim Schafer, Eric Chahi and Michel Ancel but there are many others needing attention. Some bios such as David Perry contained lots of promotional language.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Technitai (talk • contribs) .

I just added a whole new section to Shoot 'em up describing and overviewing run and gun games. I am ready to make appropriate article for run and gun. I have a few questiosn first, however. Firstly, should itu be run and gun, run and gun game, run 'n gun or run 'n gun game? Secondly please check over my entry on shoot em up to make sure that run and gun encompasses both overhead and sidescrolling games (from Contra (arcade game) to Commando (game)). Thirdly, is run and gun a sub-genre of shoot em up (as I state), or is it a completely different hybrid/top-level genre. --Larsinio 19:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Nice job on the run and gun article, Larsinio! Jacoplane 03:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

To get more information about the games, you can get FAQs, Walkthroughs, and Codes from www.gamefaqs.com 70.111.251.203 04:00, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

However we cannot use those FAQ's to create an entire article without the writers conscent. Fair use only covers minor use. Seraphim 07:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Should we include our to do in our project notice? I've noincluded it in to see what it looks like. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Personally, either way is fine. Thunderbrand 00:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why not. I could imagine that eventually someone might complain that it clutters up a talk page somewhere, in which case they can simply remove the template. Let's give it a shot, see if there are any major objections. WP:BOLD. Jacoplane 03:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't like it. It's pretty busy and will add a lot of content to an article's talk page that isn't related to that article. Do any other WikiProjects do this? Making the CVG project link more prominent would be a better solution. --Pagrashtak 05:09, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Some used to. We shouldn't choose to do this or not do this based on other WikiProjects though. As I see it, WP:CVG is one of the most active - active in discussion, improving articles, etc. Do what suits us. I don't see a problem with this - I'd remove the "expand" list though. Arbitrarily chosen, large, and some have been on there forever. No point. Just link to the main stub category. -- Addendum: we could always hide it. See ((Cfd)) as an example. K1Bond007 05:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, i'll implement that. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 12:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 13:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I like it. nice job. Jacoplane 13:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Editors of game-related articles might be interested in the mass RuneScape deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape skills. Kappa 03:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm proposing a new stub here. Please feel free to comment on it. Thanks. Thunderbrand 20:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. I think we need some more stubs: shmup-cvg-stub and fps-cvg-stub for shoot em ups and first person shooters, repsectively.

Shooter-cvg-stub kind of covers those already. Thunderbrand 20:35, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Got an icon in mind for it? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 07:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Nah. I wouldn't really know what icon to add. (I'd probably throw in the generic controller icon). I guess if you want you could add one when the stub is created. Thunderbrand 15:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I've applied an appropriate education icon. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

You never listed it in the stub section. I've taken care of it. ;) Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot about that. When I make a new stub I always list it at the "master list" but I forget to list it at this Wikiproject. Thanks. Thunderbrand 15:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Super Mario 64 has been nominated to have its featured article status removed. Nifboy 06:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I've made a shortcut for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Peer review; WP:CVGPR. LordViD 20:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

It's going to redirect to the workshop (see above) shortly. Nifboy 00:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Does wikipedia still categorize by last name? I usually help organize the Category:Computer and video game characters. We've always categorized by last name. But in Category:SNK characters User:MegamanZero says it is unacceptable to categorize by last name, especially in Category:King of Fighters characters. I asked this question here a long time ago when sorting Category:Capcom characters and everyone agreed that sorting by last name was the way to go. Also, can anyone check if the pics used in the snk characters' sections are legal. I can't really determine it. --Dangerous-Boy 06:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that all names are sorted by LASTNAME, FIRSTNAME in the western world, where possible. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 07:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

WP:CG says sorting people by last name is preferable. Although the Japanese have reverse name order compared to English, most Wiki articles use English name order, and in a case like May Lee (King of Fighters), you're clearly correct for ordering it by last name. The only time I can think of when this might not apply if knowledge of the last name is either exceedingly obscure or controversial (Luigi, Ryu, Bowser, none of whom have their last names in the article title). Nifboy 07:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, many (if not most) characters are known only by their first name. It's not really fair to expect players looking for an article about Terra Branford, one of the protagonists of FFVI, to look under B, because Branford isn't actually used anywhere in FFVI. Then again, Serah Kerrigan is just usually referred to as Kerrigan. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I merely cited it as perferable to sort by first-last due to the fact the articles are tititled as such, and the wikipedia is English. Hence, most english users will refernce in the pattern of left to right as per usual. It also is inconsistant, as american character and the like are not cited as last name first, despite the Japensene origins of the game. -Zero^Talk 01:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

You just need to use your own judgement. "Normal" names like Sam Fisher should definitely be alphabetized by last name. When it come to Donkey Kong, I'd prefer to alphabetize under D, because I think a user looking for the name Donkey Kong would be much more likely to go to the D section first. This is apparently a point of contention, as I've changed the Donkey Kong article to be alphabetized under D before, only to have it reverted. --Pagrashtak 03:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

My own judgement indicates it would have more basis to list by the standard american order. However, I would like an estabished concensus on this, as I an argeement on the matter would be helpful. -Zero^Talk 15:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

If there's no objection, I'll proceed with the First, last name format. -Zero^Talk 15:02, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, I object to alphabetizing everything by first name. What exactly are you going to proceed with? --Pagrashtak 22:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

The KOF characters series articles. -Zero^Talk 14:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I object.--Dangerous-Boy 09:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, characters should be sorted by last name if they have them. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. It is the case that this really doesn't matter too much. I have no qualms about this. -Zero^Talk 20:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Off topic, but I noticed that those pages used a pasted or substed infobox. Where is the proper one? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't know.--Dangerous-Boy 20:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I've seen that Dangerous boy has used the fact of an editor's agreement as an sign to change the cats. As far as seen, I've noticed no concensus reached, and the discussion to be yet completed. Dangerous boy's overzealousness in wanting the change the categories impeded his view to realize this. As such, I suggest an admenneum. Both Dangerous boy and myself shall write 100-word essays on weather the cat's stay the same from the time I created the articles, or are sorted by last name. The essays must be clear and consise, provide correct factual observations and be able to support the thesis. I'm doing this because throughtout the entire ordeal, Db has yet to provide an reason why he wishes to sort the articles by last name. Perhaps this can evicerate this oversight and we can establish concensus. -Zero^Talk 06:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Um. Am I missing something here? You stated:

Whatever. It is the case that this really doesn't matter too much. I have no qualms about this. -ZeroTalk 20:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I think a vote would be much effienct on this issue. A little yes or no would do. --Dangerous-Boy 07:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Are you going to do the essay or not..? -Zero^Talk 07:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

No. A vote on this matter is much more effienct. --Dangerous-Boy 07:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an democracy, and m:polling is evil. We establish concensus whenever possible. I'm trying to be as fair on the basis of this dispute as possible, and its the best you'll recieve. If you cannot expalin your reasoning, then its best the matter be left alone. -Zero^Talk 07:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Then why did u ask for a consensus? It obvious, the many of the users did not agree with your reasoning of catogorizing everything by first name. My knowledge or sorting is that all names are sorted by LASTNAME, FIRSTNAME in the western world. WP:CG says sorting people by last name is preferable. That is what I am doing and that's how all of the categorzing of the computer and video games characters are so far. It would be out of place for snk characters to be categorized by first name when everything else is sorted by last name. So far, the people that have responded to this issues seem to generally sort by last name except under extreme circumstances.--Dangerous-Boy 07:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

WP:CG does not support your thesis. It merely states its preferable, and it fails to construct an point concerning fictional characters. And I'm afraid the people responding to the issues are irrelevant, as I fail to see what established basis for your dispute you're refering to. Weather you construct the essay or not, I shall, and in your previous pharagraph, you still haven't explained any reasoning for the categorization. -Zero^Talk 07:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

If you state that these people are irelevant, then why should I care what you say? They are fellow users. Why insult them in such a way? --Dangerous-Boy 07:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You know what you're doing. You deliberately misconstued my comment. Please don't it again. You already have the agreement of my opinon to an point, and up to a point that is acceptable. I've no argument with you or your activities on Wikipedia, which seem to be in good faith, but you shouldn't expect to be able to be able to carry out any actions here without expalnation or correct factual observations; because they're unacceptable. Explanatory concenus applies to pages created anywhere on Wikipedia, in any namespace, for the purpose of transclusion. -Zero^Talk 07:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I believe that we should sort by the character's full name whenever possible. Princess Zelda is sorted by "Zelda", that is all we know of her name; "Princess" is not included because it is a title, and should not be part of the sort key. Samus Aran is sorted as "Aran, Samus" in the western sorting order because this is the English language wikipedia. Even in the phone book people are sorted by last name. As for Terra Branford, yes she is sorted as "Branford, Terra" because we know her last name (it is also part of the article title as well ;) ). In short: LAST-NAME, FIRST-NAME MIDDLE, ETC. is my position on the matter. Examine the Fictional characters category for more examples, info. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 09:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, sorting any other way doesn't make a whole lot of sense. —Locke Cole • t • c 10:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Fictional characters aren't exempt and we don't need a "special rule" saying they are. Nifboy 14:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Seems good to me. This is perfectly acceptable; The cats stay as they are. -Zero^Talk 15:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

The infobox doesn't behave itself well at all fontsizes - especially at larger font sizes the text in the infobox stays small, whereas the linespacing increases. It looks very ugly, and it should be fixed, in all pages containing the infobox. You could of course consider templating the infobox, or part(s) of it, because that would make it possible to fix these kind of mistakes in the future without having to edit every single page containing this infobox. Shinobu 21:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Er... the infobox is a template, and has been for at least a year (see ((Infobox VG))). Also, I can't seem to duplicate the behavior you're talking about (I've tried on both Internet Explorer 6 and Firefox 1.5). I don't suppose you have a screenshot? – Seancdaug 22:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Theres a +size and -size buttons on a browser for a reason. In firefox you can just hold control + mousewheel to change font size. It is impossible for wikipedia to take into accoutn everyones UI theme or resolution. The infobox is currently fine the way it is and is a attempt at a wide variety of compatibiulity --Larsinio 22:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I suspect you might have stumbled across a deprecated table. If you refer us to the page in question, someone will convert it, or you may do you yourself if you wish. --Pagrashtak 00:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

His edit history suggests OpenArena and Open Quartz as likely candidates, both of which I have now converted. — Ian Moody ^(talk) 04:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Pages with deprecated infoboxes should be tagged with ((newinfobox)). Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:41, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I personally have been looking all over the internet for a good unlockables guide. I finally found one and put it into th SC3 page. It is a little long but I figured that it would be a godsend for gamers like me who have been frustrated looking for it. My other thought was to make a link to the page where it will be solo. This way it will not obstruct the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D-MAN-2021 (talk • contribs)

I'm assuming you're referring to Soul Calibur 3? I did a wiki search for "SC3" but found nothing; Googling "SC3 game" I found Soul Caliber. The article for SC3 does have an unlockables list now, so that must be it. However, unlockables, stats, etc do not belong on Wikipedia, they belong on Wikibooks. -- gakon5

Star Control 3? :P Gakon5 is right, use the Computer and video games bookshelf on Wikibooks for this kind of stuff. Jacoplane 20:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

What they said. Wikipedia is not GameFAQs. Nifboy 20:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering what kind of stub to put pinball game articles under. Would ((sports-cvg-stub)) work? Thunderbrand 01:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I've wondered the same thing. I say put them in the sports category. Jacoplane 01:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

We should really make a new stub either ((pinball-stub)) (preferred) or ((cvg-pinball-stub)) Its possible that there will be articles on pinball machines, and theres definately a lot of components and mechanics of the game that might warrent enough articles for a special stub. Pinball's inclusion in sports is weak at best, and is definately not what peopel initiaoly classify it under. --Larsinio 14:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

An article on a pinball machine wouldn't have a stub template called cvg-stub, would it? I'd say maybe make two, for real-life pinball and pinball video games (although there should be a stub already for real pinball). -- gakon5

I don't think there should be a stub for pinball games. There aren't that many articles about them and only very few stubs. Sports-cvg-stub seems to fit for now. Thunderbrand 17:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

It just occured to me ((arcade-stub)) would be a larger, more appropriate category, but it doesn't exist. The mildly inactive Arcade project has a partial list of arcade stubs here. Nifboy 18:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll support the creation of ((arcade-stub)) and/or ((pinball-stub))! Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 10:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I've proposed the creation of ((arcade-stub)) here and have made a prototype in my userspace. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Created. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 01:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Now someone just needs to go through Category:Arcade games and stub articles. I've done the list from the arcade project and through A. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 01:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll probably get to it since the cvg-stub cat. has run kinda dry for me. Thunderbrand 01:41, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have any good ideas about a redesign of Portal:Computer and video games? Would be cool to get it to Wikipedia:Featured portals. Jacoplane 03:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Put a section for the top 2 games for US, UK, and Japan. --Larsinio 05:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Well better yet copy Portal:Australia, as an initial step. And then add gaming in the news, a whole big thing of big topics in gaming. Add a big general paragraph about computer and video games in general. --Larsinio 05:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Not so much a redesign suggestion as a request: throw up a sidebar or shrink your window a bit and check out the featured picture. --Pagrashtak 02:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you mean. What kind of sidebar? And what do you mean by checking out the featured picture? jacoplane 09:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

At 1024x768 screen resolution the portal looks fine, but bringing up a sidebar (such as boomkmarks or history) shows the problem, as the featured picture is forced out of its box and underneath the ones on the right. At lower resolutions like 800x600 the problem is there from the start. — Ian Moody ^(talk) 14:24, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been more explicit. I use Firefox and have a bookmarks or downloads sidebar up more often than not, so the featured portal usually has the problem Ian Moody described when I visit it. --Pagrashtak 17:15, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to see an organized way to elect featured CVG articles. Probably do it like GCOTW or FAC; nominate, vote, every month put up a new article, like that. Another thing would be to expand the list of articles; probably the most important. Looking at other, awesome/featured portals like Cricket and Australia; they attempt to cover every base article-wise. For a portal on video games, you'd have:

• Tech stuff (Computer and video games, Video game console, etc)
• Systems (Xbox 360, Atari 2600, etc)
• History of CVG (History of computer and video games, along with its child articles)
• Companies (Konami, Nintendo, etc)
• etc...

Heck, basically everything we already list under Categories, but expanded more. -- gakon5

We've currently got a bunch of articles about specific yeears in the CVG industry (see 1980 in video gaming, 1992 in video gaming, 2003 in video gaming, etc.). I've got a question about the titles: first of all, the standard template used on all of these pages emboldens, for example, "1980 in computer and video games," which seems to adhere to our naming conventions. Moreover, looking a similar articles (such as 1980 in games), it seems that at the very least we should be using "in video games" rather than "in video gaming." Would anyone object if I listed the lot of these up at WP:RM to change "in video gaming" to "in computer and video games"? – Seancdaug 15:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, speaking as one of the few that wants to do away with the redundant use of "computer and" and just go with "video games," I'd suggest we go with "in video games" (without the 'computer and' part). But the "xxxx in video gaming doesn't bother me all that much. — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Frecklefoot. I'm not too keen on the whole "computer and" bit either. They're all video games, IMHO. At some point, when I have more free time (sorry to Frecklefoot for delaying this too) I plan to start discussion again or propose to go back to plain ol "video game." But that's another discussion; see my and Frecklefoot's old rough draft. I'd say "X in video games" is the way to go. They originally were this, but were changed for unknown reasons. I'm fine either way though. It's not a big deal. K1Bond007 19:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I would support a move from Current computer and video games events to Current events in video games or something similar. I've never liked the name as it is now. Jacoplane 00:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I think we need to stop using ESRB rating images (as well as other rating systems) in our articles' infoboxes. They are marked as fair use; we need to use fair use images only when necessary. Criterion 8 of Wikipedia's fair use policy states "The material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose." Adding the images doesn't really help the article, it's just decorative. Replacing the images with plain text will also be easier to read, as the small images are often a blur. --Pagrashtak 05:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Fredrik Johansson - talk - contribs 09:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. I agree. Don't forget system logos that have been cropping up recently such as on Psychonauts. K1Bond007 05:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. – Quoth 10:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I think as long as there is a page which lists what the ratings mean as well as an image of the ratings (and perhaps the ratings in the info boxes link to said page) then it's useful. The images are informative. Not enough to be on every game page, but enough to be able to be found from any game page. Chris M. 18:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Since no one has objected, I've updated the infobox instructions to specify that no fair use images should be used other than the box art. Pagrashtak 23:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

What kind of stub would dance games go under, such as Dancing Stage Max? I was thinking action, or maybe even strategy since you have to time your moves and whatnot. Thunderbrand 18:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

• Once arcade-stub gets approved it'd likely go there. As is it's tagged as a plain old cvg-stub which is good enough for me. Nifboy 19:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but some of them aren't strictly arcade games. Some have been released on home consoles. Thunderbrand 01:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Arcade stub is approved. ;) While it is true there are home versions, you still need similar hardware to the arcade game to properly play the game. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Seeing that Nintendo has two templates about it (hardware and developers), I thought about making one to Sega. I'd even sketched it out:

What do you think? And can someone help me?

igordebraga ≠ 22:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the size could be reduced significatnly if you remake it in a style similar to ((Half-Life series)), or just by reducing the width of it. -- gakon5

Yeah, I like the HL style better, since the bold headers are sometimes a bit hard to make out. Nifboy 05:17, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I've made it, but i'm trouble with "Accessories"... igordebraga ≠ 18:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you guys know, that a load of Jack Thompson stuff has been created and is on AFD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strickland vs. Sony - The articles aren't going to get deleted, because they've been unwisely blocked together. Some may be of encyclopedic value, but some are not. Some guy, a gamer no doubt has tried to catalogue everything Jack Thompson has ever done, including livejournal aliases and an article on the non event of the Jack Thompson and the Jacob Robida murders. As I said, they aren't going to be deleted, but I'm sure some of them will be up for AFD again, separately, so just letting you guys know. - Hahnchen 06:11, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I've noticed a recent trend in series templates; that of the Show/Hide features. Seriously, what's the point in having that? The template comes at the end of the article in near all cases, and thus is doesn't really have much of a use. -- gakon5 20:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

You don't always need to see the information. That's probably why. --Thorpe | talk 22:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I can understand that.. if it's at the start of the article. Maybe it's just me then; that is, I don't find myself using the Show/Hide thing on templates ever. -- gakon5

Contrast Mario, which has one navframe template, to Donkey Kong (arcade game), which has two. It appears that an article with more than one navframe causes the template to default to hide, making the page easier to mavigate. Someone knowledgeable tell me if this is correct. Anyways, having the ability there doesn't cause any harm even if not used, so I don't see a problem with it. Pagrashtak 03:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm a little bit confused over the naming conventions for gaming consoles. For instnace, we have the Nintendo Virtual Boy and the Nintendo GameCube, but just have the Game & Watch, Xbox, and PlayStation. An anon recently cut-and-pasted moved the NVB to VB and the G&W to NG&W articles, hence why I ask. Is there a standard? If not, shouldn't we a definitive one?

I also looked at the logos and this is presumably why the Nintendo GameCube article is named like so. However, there's no sign of "Nintendo" in the Virtual Boy logo at all. - Hbdragon88 04:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

There isn't a standard and I'm not so sure we can really come up with one. Officially the GameCube is "Nintendo GameCube." I think the Virtual Boy is just Virtual Boy though, as is Game Boy. To my knowledge only Sega and Nintendo "officially" have their brand name in with the system name (e.g., Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast, NES, SNES, N64, NGC etc.) — I wouldn't go strictly by the logo. K1Bond007 05:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I've been wondering this myself. Personally I would prefer the article being "GameCube" and "Virtual Boy" myself. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 03:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Somehow "GameCube" doesn't feel as natural as "Nintendo GameCube" to me. Likewise, "Sony PlayStation" feels natural, but "Microsoft Xbox" strikes me as horrible. I know it's completely inconsistent. Just to be technical, the official name is not "Nintendo GameCube", it's "NINTENDO GAMECUBE". Pagrashtak 05:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I say keep Nintendo GameCube where it is but move Virtual Boy. Jedi6 05:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, Pagrashtak, it doesn't matter weather it feels natural to you or not. This is an encyclopedia, and the naming convention is formatted to correspond with the reader. -Zero^Talk 05:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC) I'm sorry. I was not attempting to be incivil. That was quite rude of me. -Zero^Talk 07:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

What does "The naming convention is formatted to correspond with the reader" mean? That contradicts "it doesn't matter whether it feels natural to you or not." Plese try to be civil. Telling someone they don't matter isn't a good way to get them to work with you, and it doesn't make you look very nice either.--Naha|^(talk) 06:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, Zero, I'm not just an editor, I'm also a reader. Right now I happen to be offering my opinions as a reader on a talk page, which is perfectly valid. Pagrashtak 06:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

We need some sort of standardization - even if its just to "offically" say that game system articles are to be named by the offical name given to them by their producer. While I'd like to all of the articles actually be named the same way (preferably with the company name in front), this would/could mean changing the names of some articles from the offical name of the system to our/Wikipedia's "naming convention" standard - and that doesn't sit right with me. It is unfortunate that individual companies do/did not standardize the naming of the systems themselves. We should strive to be as accurate as possible. --Naha|^(talk) 05:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Not trying to rub anyone the wrong way; my apologies. I'm simply quite confused as to why the thesis of "it sounds natural" would be valid in inducting an article naming convention. We're not naming an product for wholesale at JCPenny's. -Zero^Talk 07:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

It's not; it's simply an opinion; however, I don't think Wiki should be bound by rule of logic (See: Ignore All Rules). I agree that I like it as "Nintendo GameCube" and "Xbox" and I don't think standardization is necessary. Nifboy 06:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me if there is any validity to Zombie Outpost? It started out as a vanity article (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zombie_Outpost&oldid=40267380) , and I don't know if this is even a real element to StarCraft. Thanks. Eenu 16:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Nominate for deletion, no referneces, no idea of relevance. If you wont i will. --Larsinio 17:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Agree, looks like a clear candidate for deletion. I've prodded it. --Muchness 17:19, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

If a game has been cancelled but there is an article on Wikipedia about it, it can still be kept up right for archival reasons (Fear & Respect was recently cancelled)? --Thorpe | talk 12:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. If a game is really notable then I could see. I am not sure about Fear & Respect. Someone will probably AfD it one of these days. Thunderbrand 13:09, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

If screenshots or previews had been released then it probably can survive. If it was just vaporware it should be AfD. Jedi6-(need help?) 20:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the need to AfD cancelled video games. Keep in mind that certain vaporware products have enough notability to warrant an article (the Duke Nukem Forever argument). It's really a case by case basis. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 02:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Ansatsuken is up for deletion! --Dangerous-Boy 02:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

It’s okay. We've come to a clear consensus, but it worries me that people are not utilizing afd for its true purpose. All the qualms brought to the table at deletion review could have all been doe on a talk page. I do hope people read the deletion policy from now on and learn to discuss issues beforehand. -Zero^Talk 16:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Goomba, Golden Age of Arcade Games, and Bulbasaur have all just been nominated to have their Featured Article status removed. Take a look at the nominations at Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates and try to address any problems you can. I've already started on Goomba. Pagrashtak 22:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I think its a good idea if we change all years on video game pages to XXXX in computer and video games. Perhaps we could just limit it to hte infobox. We would definately need a bot to do this. 1) DO you think this is a good idea and 2) how do we go about getting a bot to do this. --Larsinio 18:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I would be against this. Most pages have the category "XXXX in coputer and video games" at the bottom and all you have to do is click on it and the first thing in each category is the article on that year. Thunderbrand 20:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

^^^^ What he said. Of course I'm not really sure if that's what is being discussed here. First time I read this I was thinking Larsinio was talking about 2006 in video gaming..? I'd be against changing that too, but that might be different discussion altogether. K1Bond007 06:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I created a new category Freeware games, for games that are released, or eventualyl turn into Freeware. Please update your watched pages, thanks! --Larsinio 18:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I've only just spotted this, I didn't respond to the earlier show/hide query above as I hadn't seen it until now. But now, every navHead template automatically hides, no matter how many or how little of them there are. Have a look at Street Fighter, Half-Life, Mario and Donkey Kong.

These are absolutely useless. The nav templates are for easy browsing for new and possibly inexperienced users. It means that a newbie doesn't have to know about categories or lists to jump to a related article. However, hiding the template like such absolutely ruins this idea, most general users wouldn't even spot the "show" button. I've made a post about this at the Village Pump, I'd even revert the changes myself if I knew where the CSS files were. - Hahnchen 05:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, you gave much better reasons than I did for why NavHeads should be removed. Me, I still support getting rid of the things.

I checked out the Streetfighter article linked from this message; the templates seem to hide themselves automatically once the page loads. That is, I scroll down and as I do they close on me. Whoa. Also, they seem to be messing with the colors in ((Nintendo Wars series)). Look at the source; all colors are red but the thing seems to want to set them to gray. Whazzup with that?

-- gakon5

It doesn't affect templates that didn't use NavHead but coded it out themselves like Template:Star Wars. Jedi6-(need help?) 21:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I am guilty of creating several templates with this show and hide. I did not like how the templates took additional time to "load" the class, in order for them to appear. I have since changed the design of most of my templates, and I will be reverting the rest progressively. compare Template:1942 series and Template:Gradius series. --Larsinio 21:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Just a comment about these two templates. I really dislike the floating text in the Gradius one as far as templates go, although I've seen it used in a number of other templates. I'd rather see a different design personally. I don't like the hide/show feature either. I think it's useful for some templates, but not ones dealing with computer and video games (more for Wikipedia functions: how-to and notices). I'd rather see designs in the style of ((Alias)) or ((TomClancyGames)). Of course I suppose I am biased since I created the latter style, although it isn't exactly my fav, but widely used. K1Bond007 21:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Ooh! A agree with 'Bond about the floating text; one day ((Kirby series)) went from a standard style [1] to the floating text thing [2]. I would've reverted it but I discovered every other gaming template started doing the same thing. I don't like how the floating text is... floating outside the template.

I agree that the "colored headers with usually centered text" style used in ((Alias)) et al is the best style. In fact, I think all gaming templates should look like that. I might be a good way to standardize templates in our region. That's something I was thinking about bringing up eventually here. -- gakon5

What do you mean by floating text? Also, gakon5, could you please add a date-stamp to your signature? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠

Originalyl i liked the colored seciton header templates, but I feel that uniformity is more important than particular color matching. Im in favor to something like Template:Gradius series, either weith or without floating text. --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 01:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The floating text seen in the Gradius one. I don't know the correct term. I really dislike that for footer templates. That should, IMHO, only be used as a descriptor for tables (e.g. 2005 in video gaming). Also, where is your date stamp? I don't see it. K1Bond007 04:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Nintendude created an article for a Flash game called Super Monkey Poop Fight. He has since added "see also" links to it to articles that are, in my opinion, only tangentially related (Donkey Kong (arcade game), Nintendo Entertainment System, Monkey). Lightdarkness prod'ed the article, but Nintendude, understandably, removed the tag. I mention this here because I don't know if this game is notable or not. I was hoping the CVG Project might be able to comment and, if necessary, nominate the article for deletion at WP:AFD. Also, keep watch for articles linking to the game; in my opinion, it's a dubious "see also" for pretty much any article. The fact that some obscure topic mentions a more notable topic does not automatically mean that that obscure topic should be mentioned in the article on the more notable topic. Thanks, — BrianSmithson 21:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned up the article somewaht. Its pretty weaselrific.. --larsinio ^{\----(poke)–}/\^{–(prod)----/} 22:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm skeptical about how notable this is. Ten thousand hits? Really, that's not a lot; and even if it was, Google hits don't make things notable automatically. Also, "some people thought this was the funniest game on the Internet" is a bit of a stretch. Looking at the link, only one person said it was the "funniest ever," and we all know how commenting on the internet works:

• LOL FUNNY so funny monkys and tsuff!!11 lol 10/10!!!
• dude taht wux so awlsomr11 sweet man funny :))

Oh, and the flash on Newgrounds has only received "More than 100k views." Not that impressive. Just my thoughts. -- gakon5

AFD - Hahnchen 01:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Why would somebody think that an article with 1000+ google hits is not notable. I created that article hence the google score. --Nintendude 00:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Lately, a lot of character articles have been popping up, especially in Fire Emblem and Punch-Out!!. I was wondering if anyone was interested in removing many of these character articles? Put a message on my user talk if interested. - A Link to the Past (talk) 09:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that seems feasible. I've posted on your talkpage concerning this. -Zero^Talk 15:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

A stub i had made, template:fighting-cvg-stub is up for deletion [3]. Please vote keep for it. --larsinio ^{\----(poke)––(prod)----/} 23:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

This stub is no longer at risk of being deleted, I have populated 74 articles with this stub type. --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 17:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, I'm looking for someone interested in putting up a Category for Sega, and its consoles. I know that there's a lot already, but as far as the list goes for articles on games, it's a bit discouraging. Let me know if you want to help.

Um. There already exists Category:Sega and its dozens of subcategories. A list of games is either one of the subcats of Category:Games on Sega platforms (ex. Category:Sega Genesis games) or linked to on List of computer and video games. I'm not sure what else you want. Nifboy 05:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah okay, umm I meant a Sega Template, but anyways, I think some of the lists are outdated... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hucz (talk • contribs) .

There is a sega template, if this is the one you are referring to. see: Template:Sega. Thunderbrand 02:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)