This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mika1h. 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.
A search bar has been added to the archive box on the VG project talk page. Searching the discussion archives is now much easier.
Feature: Video game notability
Video game related articles fall under niche categories on Wikipedia: "Culture and the arts" and "Everyday life". Because of this, they are often required to demonstrate notability more than other topics. Wikipedia defines notability as "worthy of notice", and considers it distinct from fame, importance, and popularity. Though it is acknowledge to be related to fame and the like, it is important understand that being famous, important, or popular does not mean a video game article should be on Wikipedia.
Being notable means that a topic has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Wikipedia's policy also stipulates that this only presumes to "satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." This means that though an article may meet the criteria on paper, it is up to the community to decide if a topic truly is notable and/or violates other policies such as WP:NOT. In short, just because a video game, character, or related topic exists, does not mean it should also exist as a Wikipedia article.
Dealing with non-notable topics
Articles that do not meet the criteria are either deleted or merged into a relevant topic.
WP:Articles for deletion (AfD) handles the deletion of non-notable articles, among other types, and has an established process to begin discussions about reasons for deletion.
If an article is a subarticle of a larger topic, merging it into the larger topic article is a more desirable action. For example, the main character of a video may not be notable, but has received some mentions in reviews. It would benefit both topics, the character and its video game, to include the content into the article of the video game; essentially using a small, weaker article to strengthen a larger more notable article.
Things to remember
The best way to show notability is to provide reliable sources about the topic.
Notability is less about keeping articles out of Wikipedia and more about making sure readers are provided articles about significant, quality topics.
While you may think a topic is notable, others may disagree. Try to keep a clear perspective when assessing notability so discussions can reach a consensus.
AfD is more of a last resort and is not always the best course of action to take.
Consider starting a merger discussion first, as some editors may not fully understand why an article they started is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This issue we are trying a new type of newsletter feature: "Featured editor". This is a chance to learn more about the various editors who contribute to the Video games project as well as the roles they fill. If you enjoyed this new feature and would like to see similar interviews in future issues, please drop us a note at the VG newsletter talk page.
David Fuchs (also known as Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs), is a long time video games editor that has written a large number of the project's Featured articles. He has been ranked high on Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations, and has assisted in reviewing and editing more many. Recently David has begun to assist with image reviews for Featured article candidates, and branched out into other types of articles in addition to video games. He can normally been seen on the project's talk page offering advice and his input on the various discussion taking place there.
What drew you to Wikipedia, and what prompted you to begin editing?
I got involved due in part to (I believe, my memory is fuzzy) finding the site while doing research for Advanced Placement Europen History during high school. My earliest contributions (in December 2005) were creating topics based on what I learned, as well as creating an article for my high school with another friend. I soon became involved with editing topics related to Halo video game franchise, specifically the article on the parasitic Flood.
What got you involved in writing Featured articles?
I think for most editors it's a shiny accomplishment you are striving for, and natural for most editors to try and get an FA. I first nominated an article for FA in 2007, after about a year of inactivity onwiki; it didn't pass as it was poorly written and didn't follow our guidelines for writing about fiction; I also took a couple of tries to get my first video game FA (Halo 2).
What article(s) are you most proud of writing or exemplifies your best work?
I suppose Myst is a sort of accomplishment I can point to; I started work on the article on May 2 2008, when it looked like this, and submitted it to Featured Article Candidates one day later. I think that's some kind of record, but I dunno. In terms of being a good read or something I'm very happy with, however, I'd have to look at my more recent work, specifically Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and Bone Wars.
How do you pick the articles you work on?
Whatever hits me. There's many articles I haven't gotten around to editing and improving as planned because another article has caught my fancy.
What advice would you give to editors seeking to write quality articles?
In the words of one of my favorite cartoon characters when I was a child, "We must do reeea-search!" Even in video games, online sources don't usually cut it. Even after getting an article to FA, make sure you continually trawl the internet and elsewhere for more information to add to the topic.
Note: This is an abridged version. To read the full interview, click here.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (NES) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Since I saw you contributed to the article around its original GA listing, I figured I let you know in case you have something to contribute. Thanks,MuZemike21:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
The VG Project Collaboration of the Week is a new effort to improve important video game articles of low quality. Every week, an article is random selected by AnomieBOT from the Stub-, Start-, and C-class categories that are rated either High- or Top-importance. Such topics can offer a reader a good deal of encyclopedic information about video games, but are often too underdeveloped or lacking the proper level of writing and sourcing to accomplish this.
All editors are welcome and encouraged to participate by offering their insights and suggestions. Having a pool of different editors, both old and new, will help maximize improvements to the articles as well as our editing skills.
History
Collaborative efforts have come and gone within the VG project several times before. The first such effort, the "Gaming collaboration of the week", began in October 2004 as a result of the several otherweekly collaborations popping up on Wikipedia. It proved to be quite successful at improving articles to meet Wikipedia's standard at the time, but the effort eventually saw less and less participation. A second effort, the "Improvement Drive", began in August 2005 with the intent of improving articles to FA-quality. However, few nominations and articles were selected. The decline in participation in the collaborations and peer reviews resulted in a third effort. It began in February 2006 as a workshop, but never got off the ground.
Numerous discussions have taken place on at WT:VG to jump start collaborations and improve the process to prevent its decline again. While previous collaborations selected any video game article, most editors felt focus should be on video game topics more encyclopedic in nature—topics that are also generally in poor shape because of lack of attention. A common problem mentioned was that previous nomination processes were lengthy and hindered participation. The current idea to automate the process was brought up by JohnnyMrNinja, which was further discussed to iron out the details.
Current collaboration
The current collaborative efforts began in mid-January 2009, and several articles have been improved by editors. The random choice is intended to minimize the selection process, which allows editors to focus on article improvement. Improvements include better organization of content, massaging and copy editing the prose, removing excess non-free images, and much more. The random choice is also meant to encourage participation from editors of varying interest and help prevent burnout. If the present selection is not to your liking, wait until next week. Editors are encouraged to add Template:Collab-gaming to their watchlist to see which article is selected. Recently selected articles are:
Please read carefully the new criteria for video game articles. Popotan meets the mid critera as it has "[a]chieved wide commercial success, critically acclaimed or had wide sub-culture effect outside of their country of origin".じんない22:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video games Newsletter released its first issue a year ago. The newsletter is meant to help connect editors, keep them up-to-date with the activities of the VG project, and improve the knowledge of our members. We've compiled a list of questions to help gauge the effectiveness of the newsletter's first year.
Answers will be accepted for a three week period following the deliver of the March 2009 issue on Wednesday, April 1, 2009. Just to clarify, this is not an April Fools' Day gag, and we would really appreciate honest criticism. Information obtained from this poll is intend to alter the newsletter for the better. So don't feel you should hold back or give answers similar to everyone else.
The VG Barnstar is an award given to Wikipedians recognized for efforts and contributions to improve and develop video game related articles.
The VG Barnstar is one of many Wikipedia Barnstars designed to be given to editors that have helped further the overall quality of Wikipedia. It was created in February 2006 by Jacoplane—see past discussion for details—and has been given to numerous editors since. Sometimes editors with multiple Barnstars use an alternative way to display them: ribbons.
Barnstars are designed to be given by anyone, so don't be shy as everyone enjoys appreciation. If you have noticed or have been impressed with the work of an editor, feel free to let them know by placing {{subst:Barnstar VG|"message" ~~~~}} on their talk page. The template uses a parameter to include a message expressing the reasons behind the award.
Due to an apparent lack of interest, the WPVG Newsletter will be switching from a monthly publication schedule to a quarterly one. The next issue be delivered on July 1, 2009, and will pertain to the second quarter of the calendar year. If you have any comments regarding this, or suggestions to improve the newsletter, please post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter.
Thank you for translating some of the terms on the above article. I cannot read Finnish, so I need the help! I am happy to correct the grammar in sentences when they are completed, so I have started doing that.
Regards,
-Google Translate-
Kiitos kääntämällä joitain ehtoja edellä artikla. En voi lukea suomeksi, joten tarvitsen apua! Olen iloinen korjata kieliopin lauseita, kun ne valmistuvat, joten olen alkanut tehdä niin.
Is that a guideline or your personal opinion? Most all of the Dance Dance Revolution articles cover more than one game, which is why they tend to have more than one year. The games are different enough to be called different games but not enough to merit their own articles. If the Video game project says first year for individual games I'll make sure to exclude ports and re-releases, but different releases should have their release year I think. æronphonehome18:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean by different release for example? Extra categorizing was for home versions, reissues or regional versions which are not entirely different games AFAIK. --Mika1h (talk) 19:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Dance Dance Revolution Hottest Party 2 was also released as Full Full Party in Japan, with an altered song list. Dance Dance Revolution X is the same engine, but the arcade, Japanese PS2 and North American PS2 releases have different sets of songs, which for a music game is different releases. In the case of something like DDRMAX Dance Dance Revolution 6thMix though the game was ported almost 100% faithfully to the PS2 with two added songs. It's not exactly a clear line and that's why it takes major differences to put a release in a separate article. But are you making these edits because there's a guideline or manual of style suggestion that says so? æronphonehome19:41, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
It was discussed a couple of times at VG project's talk page: [1][2]. Also in category pages it reads "video games first published in XXXX". Addition to that every other media article like films or albums uses only the original release year. --Mika1h (talk) 19:51, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Okay, for ports and rereleases I'll shave off the categories, but for the articles that cover more than one game I think there should be a year cat for each one. æronphonehome20:04, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
iirc the general rule is to have links to explanatory articles so the reader isn't possibly confused, it's no different to links in the article itself so how is it otherwise Elm-39 - T/C/N17:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
oh, I was mostly going by WP:NAME, especially about the red link (speaking of which can I put that back? an article will probably come up soon). I also thought that list titles were somehow exempt from some part of WP:NAVBOX. Elm-39 - T/C/N13:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I just fed the fair use images in SWAT 3 you tagged the other day (File:SWAT3 loadoutscreen.jpg, File:Swat 3 0004.jpg and File:Swat 3 0005.jpg) through Irfanview, and reduced them to 500x375 (and optimised them a little too). Are they any better now? I still have the originals, I can always shrink them some more.
I've noticed you recently assessed my World Grand Prix article but left it at stub-class even though there was no stub on the article. Why didn't you upgrade it to start-class? GVnayR (talk) 15:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Because I'm going through the list of articles which have no importance rated. Right now, I'm only rating importances not quality. If you think it's above stub-class, you are free to rate it yourself as start, c or b-class. See instructions at assessment page --Mika1h (talk) 18:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Dude, if you think the page needed the European version of the boxart more than the American version, by all means, change it back to the other image, but don't overwrite the image file I uploaded with a different one. That's just a dick move. :(
I maintain that the main picture should be of the version the page was named after, but I included the European box art in the page as a picture. Is that an acceptable compromise? Master Deusoma (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
If you would have read my edit comment, you would have noticed that I linked to a video game article guideline (WP:VGIMAGES) which states "Where different cover designs are available for different regions, the one from the region in which the game has been developed should be used." Maui Mallard was developed in the United Kingdom so it should use the European cover art.
Also, "Video game covers should generally only be used in the game's infobox, and only one cover should be present." and "Cover images can only be used in the body of the article if there is significant commentary on the cover itself, and not just to identify the game as part of a new section on the port". As far as I know there is no significant commentary on the North American SNES cover. --Mika1h (talk) 23:10, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I intend to revise those articles following the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Carmageddon2Box.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
User:Bovineboy2008 keeps removing the 2010 video games category from Sonic Colors. Earlier he was doing the same thing to Kirby's Epic Yarn until someone kept reverting his edits & he apparently gave up. Since he appears to not be a vandal based on his other edits, I figured he can be reasoned with. The reason he removes the category is because he doesn't seem to understand that upcoming games can be in the 2010 video games category. Seeing as you often add upcoming games to these categories, I am hoping that you can explain to him why he is wrong on this subject. SNS (talk) 02:22, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Maybe because he can't understand the Italian source that is used. A translation or English language source should be used if available. Also where does the 24th of September date come from? It didn't seem to mentioned in the source. --Mika1h (talk) 06:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
No he was removing the 2010 video games category from Kirby's Epic Yarn earlier with claims that upcoming games don't belong there. He even undid one of your edits on that article [4]. As for that date, it probably doesn't mean anything. It seems like something IPs keep adding to the article. SNS (talk)
Could you explain that recent edit? I thought regional releases would go in the same template as mentioned in the documentation. What confuses me even more is that you seem to have split the templates, but not for each regional release. Is there a specific pattern we should follow? Again, it just confused me, don't take this as an offense. Prime Blue (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
From the template page: "If it is desirable to list release dates in a specific order (e.g. chronological), specify each region with a separate call.". --Mika1h (talk) 19:32, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I see. That was added by Stratadrake three years ago. Do you think there is any particular reason behind that? To me, it seems pretty weird to suggest to use separate calls for regions, especially since that would mean that multiple flags in a single call would not have had to be implemented for the template at all. A separate call for versions and platforms is reasonable and necessary, but for single regions, it looks more like a waste of space. Prime Blue (talk) 21:23, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Ah, now I understand. Might probably be better to add some code to the template to make it sort dates automatically. The current solution is kind of clunky and not very user-friendly. Prime Blue (talk) 11:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks a lot for the Sonic Colors edit, I was trying to find a way to fix the whole blue ray thing, never even thought of cropping. I owe you one. =D SSB Fan (talk) 03:19, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey. About that thing on the todo template: looking here and here, I don't see any evidence that the article is featured. The FAC isn't even archived yet. What is that page that you and User:GamerPro64 are going by? I don't understand why that would be updated before anything else. Sorry about the whole disturbance; I thought GamerPro had just made a slight mistake. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I notice you just moved the article, Ani*Kuri15 to Ani-Kuri 15. Is this a new official localization? If so I think we should provide sources for this. The asterisk character is clearly part of the original Japanese title (アニ＊クリ15) and in fact the animenewsnetwork and crunchyroll sources you cited in the edit summary for the move claim that "[t]he title of the collection, Ani*Kuri15, is abbreviated from the words 'anime' and 'creators'" (emphasis added). The twitchfilm.com source you provided refers to shorts associated with a program called "Ani Kuri" that I believe may be the show, アニクリ instead of アニ＊クリ15 (Ani*Kuri15). Because none of the sources you cited in the edit summary for the move refer to the program by the title "Ani-Kuri 15," I think it's wisest to retain the title found in the majority of the sources (i.e. "Ani*Kuri15") for the time being at least. I have restored the article to its original title. If you still think a move might be in order then feel free to bring it up in talk. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 01:27, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
GitS:SAC merges
I've "closed" your proposed merges to Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex. You failed to post a rationale at Talk:Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, or discuss your reasons forproposing the mearge in anyway. If ytou still believe the articles should be mnerged, then you're welcome to add the merge tags again, but please open a discsuiion on the target article's talk page (Talk:Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex). If you don't klnow how to do thios, I'd be happy to help you. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 12:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mika1h. 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.
