Talk:InFamous
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the The PlayStation Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of PlayStation products. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
[edit] Game examples in description
In all cases, I do appreciate the use of these examples---they just are NOT required to explain or "describe the gameplay." You can simply put how the gameplay is, all of that stuff, but you don't NEED those examples. It's extraneous information. You never See Splinter Cell defined by the Playstation Only series Metal Gear/MGS. Or Valve's portal as a Microsoft title Prey. They just are NOT needed.
I completely understand the irony that Xbox titles are being used to describe this game for the PS3, but that is what I've seen the various reports of this game use to describe the gameplay, likely because these are the freshest examples. I'm not trying to slam the PS3, just not using original research. --Masem 22:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
"Some usage of copyrighted materials without permission of the copyright holder can qualify as fair use in the United States (but not in most other jurisdictions)."
What do you mean exceeds fair use? Fair use is when you don't have permission to use it..not how many images can be used. Check the wikipedia guidelines. I could upload 1000 pictures on this page if I wanted. Also, he's right. No use for MS titles for this game.
THAT DOES NOT EXPLAIN THE FACT THAT YOU SAID I CAN'T USE 5 images. Fair use just says you can't use images without the copyright owner's permission.
I do see what you're saying...but six is HARDLY over the top. Now 10 on the other hand you can argue.
-
- Quoting from the link:
Wikipedia's policy that is being cited as basis is from Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria items #3(a) and #8:
3. (a) Minimal use. As little non-free content as possible is used in an article. Short rather than long video and audio excerpts are used. Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary.
8. Significance. Non-free media is not used unless it contributes significantly to an article. It needs to significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way that words alone cannot. The use of non-free media in lists, galleries, and navigational and user-interface elements is normally regarded as merely decorative, and is thus unacceptable.
The focus of both of these items of policy is to limit the use of copyrighted, fair use imagery as much as possible.
-
- No, there is no hard set number for what is minimal, but this basically spells out you should only use as many non-free (as in copyrighted) fair-use images as necessary to convey the meaning of the article to the reader. In this case, this game JUST got announced, and we don't have any game info beyond the E3 news. Because it's hard to tell just from the images and the trailer what the game is like, using multiple non-free images would be violating both of these policies. No, it's not hard set, but if we don't police it now, a wikipedia editor will police it their way if they should find this page with this many images. --Masem 02:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh. Masem, I'm sorry. I think I should be more discreet. I understood we have to use less images as possible, but that's only IF we didn't gain permission to use these pictures. I got these pictures directly from Sony Employees at the SCE booth as I work for PSU.com---a media website invited to both the KZ2 conference and Sony E3 press event. I was given permission to use these images anyway I sought fit as long as they weren't sold for money. Does that make it better??? - PrinceofGames 19:11 (PST)
In addition, I have uploaded the copyright specifications to EACH picture used (I skipped this because I didn't have time---I fixed them all now.)
- Even if they gave you permissions, this can cause problems, again from the above link:
Q: The copyright holder of these images said it was ok to use them on Wikipedia. Since they gave us permission, why can't you let us use it how we want? This is silly! A: Jimmy Wales, who is the founder of Wikipedia, took a stance against this class of copyrighted work in may of 2005. See this letter from him stating the new position vis-a-vis such works. Some of Wikipedia's policy descends from that letter, in particular Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Images_and_media item #3 which allows for the speedy deletion of any media tagged as used with permission or used under a non-commercial license.
Wikipedia supports the concept of downstream use for commercial purposes. I.e., any party is welcome to use the content of Wikipedia for any use, even if it means that such use results in a profit. This is an important concept to understand, and is fundamental to Wikipedia. See 'Mission of Wikipedia' above.
- I'm not saying get rid of them all, but be aware that just because you got them from Sony doesn't mean they can be used freely.
- Also, be aware that some of your images have appropriate fair use rationale or the like (at least as I write this, I see you say you're doing this, but make sure you include fair use rationale on those in addition to copyright). These could be speedily deleted without that. --Masem 02:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay. I understand completely. I also observed fair use rationale and removed 2 images that I felt aren't truly needed.
Contacted by Wiki Officer. Fine to use 6 for yourself.
- Ok, but your images are still not tagged right and they're going to be deleted (by bots) if you don't correct them. Each of them needs a Template:Non-free media rationale and you need to include a something like Template:Non-free game screenshot as per Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline. --Masem 03:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Just did it :)
Nice table!!
[edit] Name per MOS
We probably should settle on how we're going to handle spelling of the name for this game here. MOS:TM does not have a case that matches this specifically:
- While "iPod" and "eBay" are cited as a allowable cases, this is only when that first letter is pronounced on its own. I can see stretching this for "in" in "inFamous", but, it's not like "nSider" or the like.
- Outside of these cases, we are to ignore any weird spellings; even if they state it is "inFamous" in commericial works, the advice there is that this should be titled and called "Infamous".
Thus, I would head towards "Infamous" as the name for the game per MOS. --MASEM 18:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
