Talk:Prince of Persia (2008)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:
To-do list for Prince of Persia (2008): edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
    Priority Help Upgrading the DEVELOPMENT section, possibly in sub-sections  

    Contents

    [edit] I added a cleanup tag

    And by cleanup, I mean "massive" cleanup. This article is basically an advertisement right now. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 10:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] I suggest deleting this page

    The name "PRODIGY" is just a rumour. It has not been officially confirmed. Though many would argue that this rumour has a strong possibility to be true, its a rumour nonetheless and thus outside the scope of an encyclopedia. I think that a developed section in POP article is enough for now and a new article on this matter should only be written when more information is officially disclosed.necromancer (talk) 09:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

    The game has been official announced by Ubisoft. What ubisoft has not announced is the name. So far a new prince of persia is coming. Until a new name comes this page will remain when the new name is announced this page will be moved to the new name. --SkyWalker (talk) 09:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Name of this game

    According to Game Informer, this game's working title is Prince of Persia: Heir Apparent, not Prodigy. I'm going to move this page to that title if no one objects. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 05:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

    No, that isn't the name of the game, it's the name of the Game Informer article. Multiple things support this: the subtitle is not directly below the "Prince of Persia" logo, and I'm pretty sure it would be if it was the subtitle, but that's just speculation. The real thing is that it doesn't say *anywhere* in the article that this is what the game is called, in fact it says multiple times "The new Prince of Persia", not a title, etc. Had it been named "Heir Apparent", they would have referred to it as such in the article. Thirdly, Ubisoft still hasn't made an official announcement confirming this as the name, they still refer to it as their "New Prince of Persia game", and the official teaser website doesn't say "Heir Apparent". So, no, I do not agree that this game will be called Heir Apparent, I just think Game Informer was say "The new saga of Prince of Persia is now apparent", so they named the article that. Anyways, that is clearly the article's name, not the game's. Go look at the magazine again please. Dude527 (talk) 00:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

    Look here: http://www.gameinformer.com/NR/exeres/73EE8233-708E-4B9F-9FCF-C1DB66ED6BFC.htm ... It says nothing about the game's title. This is not the game's title. Dude527 (talk) 00:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

    My mistake. Sorry dude. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 06:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

    Don't move anything until Ubisoft gives official confirmation about the game name.--SkyWalker (talk) 12:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

    Until the game's title has been confirmed, I've moved the article to Prince of Persia (2008 video game), and it should stay that way until further notice.--EclipseSSD (talk) 12:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

    I fully agree. The latest Ubidays opening conference and the first trailer had the game simply titled as "Prince of Persia", so please, be reasonable - let's wait for the official name from Ubisoft. wlodi (talk) 21:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

    It says here(http://www.psu.com/Ubisoft-shoots-down-Prince-of-Persia-rumours-News--a0003700-p0.php) that they have not decided on any name yet. It also says there is a release date between October and December, but I think we should wait for other confirmation about the release date. 216.114.214.12 (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
    Agreed. Moved the page to "Prince of Persia (2008)". Thank you for the reference. Dude527 (talk) 15:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


    Dude ??? Agreed to what ? Both the two recent posts before you says we should wait & should not move the article, At Least NOW. Nothing is confirmed & we know that. But the maximum probability is being "Prodigy" & that's what maximum people will search with. Do Anything such things AFTER DISCUSSING WELL in talk page not only posting a message. For the last 3 days, I have made this articla a START-CLASS from an Stub So, You should at least maintain the rules to deals with a Start-Class Page. Dont make pages move frequently.
    If the name comes other than "Prodigy" & declares to be "XYZ" then we can then directly redirect it there. But If you make it move to 2008, then you will have to move it again. (I kno... its not a STRESSFUL task... but still... is it worthy that much ? Except of lengthening Contribution list ?) – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 17:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    Deblopper, as you know, Wikipedia is factual-based, meaning we can only contribute information that we know to be true, much like a real encyclopedia. Well, right now, all we know is that Ubisoft confirmed that they have not chosen a name yet. That's our only facts, and we must abide by them, therefore, naming this article "Prince of Persia: Prodigy", is breaking one of the 5 pillars. And, Deblopper... Don't take credit for making this article start-class. Many people contributed, you're just one of the many, not the only one. Dude527 (talk) 17:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


    I am not taking credit, I just told you that, its an Start Class article & you have to take it like that... And moreover... Read the Second Stanza You will get it all. And then I hope you will find the rest of your questions answer over internet by searching them, rather form others, like me. And i hope too, thtat you will move it roll-back as Prince of Persia: Prodigy yourself, & if not, then I am again moving it after 6 hours. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 18:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    You said "I made this article Start-class", etc, etc. And that link you sent me clearly states that Ubisoft has not officially named it yet. Shall I pull a quote? "First, what do we call it? Though the Ubidays press materials listed the title's name as Prince of Persia Prodigy, the very same name recently trademarked by the IP-owner Jordan Mechner, Mattes wouldn't confirm that that was the final title: "I don't think we've announced the final title." That means that they haven't announced it, which means it can't be the name of this article UNTIL they announce it. Dude527 (talk) 22:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


    Yes. That simply states that, the best believable name of the game is "Prince of Persia: Prodigy". As per Wikipedia, its an Open source information mine, which itself says that "You should not believe totally on Wikipedia", It contains things that's MOSTLY BELIEVED TO BE TRUE, & now that is it. Its not a "Bible" or "Kur-an" and have no intension to be. It welcomes editors to edit, and in all the cases it needs any COP, it asks for a Task Force team and makes one, so please don't be adamant, consider other peoples opinion too.
    As this name used in press and site registration, its the MOST apropriate as the Article name. Prince of Persia (2008) is true obviously even after the final Label is released, so it will always have a redirection to point to the Labeled article. So, Until they announce it, we will have to consider it as POP PRODIGY.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disclaimers
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_war#What_is_wrong_with_edit_warring.3F
    Those were for your information. Consider placing this article to its rightful place i.e. Prince of Persia: Prodigy. In either case I am moving it in 12 hrs, this time is for your consideration & updation. I thought You "might be" offline the past 6 hrs. depending on which part of the world you are living, So I guess you will be online atleast within this 18 hrs time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deblopper (talk • contribs) 03:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
    Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The disclaimer is no reason to put information that could possibly be wrong up. The game is confirmed to be released in 2008, but it's not confirmed to be sub-titled "Prodigy". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which is fact-based, we do not add speculation on it. Guessing the most likely name, no matter how likely it is, without it being confirmed with a reference, is considered speculation. All the sources you have posted thus far are original research. We strive to go based on facts, and you telling me to consider other people's opinions isn't valid for an encyclopedia, as they are based on fact, not opinion. This game clearly is not confirmed to be subtitled "Prodigy" and when confronted with the question, Ubisoft stated that they weren't sure if that is what it was titled. I'm not doing this out of personal bias, nor wanting to "keep the page my own" per se, I'm doing this to keep this article as factual as possible, as no speculation should be found on Wikipedia. The disclaimer does not mean we post information that could possibly be wrong, it gives us no margin for that. Dude527 (talk) 03:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


    From your given link, I have found this as the 1st point :-
    Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.
If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented.
Examples of appropriate topics include the 2010 U.S. Senate elections and 2016 Summer Olympics.
By comparison, the 2020 U.S. presidential election and 2040 Summer Olympics are not considered appropriate article topics
because nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. Avoid predicted sports team line-ups,
which are inherently unverifiable and speculative. A schedule of future events may be appropriate if it can be verified.
    I was just wondering about the 1st 2 lines, aren't you? When we have all the "Well documented Speculation" about the name, why should we hick-up to keep the page name to "Prodigy"? Eventually, you MUST consider the OPINION OF OTHER EDITORS JUST BEFORE YOU. That is what a talk page is for, DISCUSSION, & considering other people's opinion, That's what the Creator of this section did. He was too considering to move this page but took the opinion of other peoples opinion Democratically. Same applies for you. I am not posting no link or reference for you this time, just telling you Wikipedia would have no problem if we name it to prodigy, if you are not agree, you have to find it out how. Your 18 Hrs. still isn't over, I believe you will update yourself within this time & move back the page yourself. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 10:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
    Please, do not change the article name. "Prince of Persia (2008)" is the best way as we don't have the final name of this game announced yet. That's why I think we shouldn't name the article as Prodigy, I think it's simple. wlodi (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
    That quote applies to events, not game names. And this event isn't "almost certain", because they denied the name when asked. You don't seem to understand that an encyclopedia is based on facts, not opinions, therefore, only facts belong on it, verifiable, true facts. Right now you're just speculating on the name of the game, we don't place things based on where they're most likely to go in the future, shall I quote this for you? "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." Meaning no speculation allowed. Wikipedia is no crystal ball, and we don't anticipate future events. Even if you have good reasons, and some original research, which, by the way, is all that you have right now. You're taking the fact that they have the domain, and Ubidays labeled it as so, and even though they denied the name, we still must put it because fans are speculating it? No, if you move this page back, you will be treated as a vandal for breaking the rules of the crystal ball, and adding original research to the article. We must keep encyclopedias factual. Dude527 (talk) 16:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


    The matter isn't abaou Vandalism, Vandalism have strict rules for that & I am certainly not falling in this, more over its not I, I was telling you behalf of the other editors. Now you count the votes, its 3-2. What I was saying that, Think its kinda named as XYZ, and we already have made a page for this, The world nearly believed the name, though its not confirmed. Later on let the name published to be ABC, then we can make the MOVE directly from XYZ to ABC. But what is happening here is, You are moving it from XYZ to ALPHABET then myt be to ABC or XYZ again, whichever comes out. Now, Am I clear? And, thnks that you cares about the 3RR. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 17:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

    Do you not understand the crystal ball rule, Deblopper? And the discussion isn't about votes, it's about debate. And so far, according to the rules, we are the correct ones, because what you are adding is speculation, what we are adding is fact. Besides, it's 3-3, if you count that guy at the bottom, if we're considering votes. Dude527 (talk) 17:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

    Well, I am not moving this article now, for two reasons : i) Moving this again to Prodigy, then again to the published name goes against my own words, ii) The vote IS 3-3, so we should leave it as-is. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 18:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

    Actually, GamePro is calling this game Price of Persia: Prodigy. [1] I'm not going to !vote in this poll, but, yeah. J.delanoygabsanalyze 04:14, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

    Thanks for the information, but, Not only GamePro... I reckon... – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 21:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

    For what it's worth, in an interview with play.tm Ubisoft's Chris Easton states the title of the game is "Just Prince of Persia! Not Heir Apparent, or Prodigy, or whatever else you might have read online. Just Prince of Persia!" In the same interview it's also stated that there are no plans for it to come to the Wii yet. Here's the interview: http://play.tm/story/18599 Th 2005 (talk) 15:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
    I think he was getting at the notion that they haven't confirmed a name. Either that or he was stating that they have created a new game, so they don't want to subtitle it. Well, either way, the name Prodigy is clearly dispelled due to that link. dude527 (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Update Data Removing

    All editors are hereby notified to update themselves; before Pen-Thru the ready made topic, by removing update information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deblopper (talk • contribs) 02:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

    What does that even mean? Dude527 (talk) 03:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


    Bro, Everyone has the right to edit this page as per they have the updates, maintaining the manual of style. Please will you stop thinking this page as your own?
    Leave all the, update conflicts; you have reported for a biasing & punctuation error, I must tell you This topic has no option to be biased & for punctuation, you don't have to REMOVE edits. And as of my notifications, you are making "There was a video" where it was "There's a video"... Dude, the video still exists. I provided the link to it, LOTS OF TIMES, that you removed LOT times too.
    I don't know if it gives you any kind of satisfaction or not, but the way you are doing these its really not good. Please give others an option too to edit this page, you are not quite the only "POP : Prodigy" fan world wide. Please try to understand.
    – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 19:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


    Maybe you should understand that I edit where I see fit to Wikipedia's guidelines. I delete information that has no references, and I add references if I can find them, I also fix punctuation, I delete biased, or unnecessary information (Such as the lengths of the videos, that only took up space), and, if somebody contributes something in a manner inconsistent with Wikipedia's rules, I fix their edit, or I delete it if I can't fix it. I don't treat it like my own article as you say I do. I just make sure it follows the rules.
    Also, don't provide links in the article itself, they don't belong there, they belong in the External Links section. References is what belongs in the article itself. And if you're wondering why I have deleted the website's portal link, it's because it leads to the EXACT same place as the official website link, so we don't need both.
    As for the "there is" thing, I'm making it use correct grammar. "There is another video released May 22, 2008" doesn't make any sense. Dude527 (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


    >>>

    Hello, Thanks for understanding. But dude, when it happens, probably you can have a high speed Internet, so that I, but MOST of the people (mostly in middle-east) can't afford that & so they cant download all the videos. That's why we should provide a bit little more about it, as of its in a development stage.
    Moreover, I precisely know that both the links redirects to the EXACT same page, its true. But, these are different domains registered by Ubisoft for different purpose & name-alias. You said, you edit the infos you find to be biased, you should discuss about it in talk page BEFORE you remove it. About the case of External Links, They are NOT references. So, as of Wikipedia's Manual of Style you CAN post it, to make it more accessible. Because people won't always KNOW or EXPECT that there will be any link about any of the word in-between, much lower of the Article (And eventually, every Wiki visitor isn't ADVANCED user, to know the detail).
    If you find any information untrust worhty, please have a ride on your search engines, I suppose they work fine these days as per user requirement. And when this problem comes with my edits, I must tell you, I provide links for almost all information. So, Please Dont remove everything you dont know. I must tell you, the edit regarding to the "Release date : Holidays" might seem to be a little thing, but its quite good, try do somthing to improve, like that.
    P.S : I think you have American accent of speaking, that's why you think this doesn't make sense, It Does. I'm not having any personal rivalory neither no Ego. Thanks. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 20:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


    I still do not think so much of the details added are necessary. I think we should just give a quick summary. Oh and by the way, comments like "The outcome was very similar to the original leaked concept art", is considered biased, as per Wikipedia's rules, that type of information has no place here, that's the type I seek to get rid of. Thank you for understanding too. By they way, where are you from then? Dude527 (talk) 20:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)



    I just abandoned my previous ID because of my Identity exploit. So, sorry, I cant tell you (at least now) where am I from. I think you would understand. & yeah, Your edit regarding to GENRE of the game ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platforming redirects to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_reforming ) You should have correct it. It Probably don't have any resemblance with game. Does it?
    – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 20:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    Ah crap, you're right... That has nothing to do with gaming... Think you could fix it for me? Dude527 (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
    Never mind I fixed it


    There were still some more internal wiki link conflicts, I managed that for you.

    – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 21:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] 3 Sections

    Any possible way we could fuse the Technology, Elika, and Development section into one? Considering technology is part of the development, and so is Elika, I think it would be proper. Dude527 (talk) 23:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

    In my opinion, if you'd like to think this way about the whole page, you could basically merge everything into "development" as the game is still being developed and we don't know anything for sure. I think it's a better idea to create sections that describe different areas of development. wlodi (talk) 00:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

    Well, a separate section for Elika sounds good. Dude527 (talk) 01:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
    Ok, sorry I couldn't make a drawn out reply before, I was a little pressed for time. I was going to say, the technology used definitely applies to development, but I think a separate section for Elika sounds good, mainly because of the emphasis Ubisoft is placing on her uniqueness and the way she'll revolutionize the game. I was just stating that the Elika section did not belong in the "Plot" section. Dude527 (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

    Yeah, you should put a brief there too, but care about repetition. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 21:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Requested move

    I propose moving this article back to Prince of Persia (2008 video game), because although the domain name is registered, that still does not make it official. It could simply mean that they are protecting their assets and trademarks to the franchise. The website also redirects to a site with a title of Prince of Persia (no Prodigy). For example, Blizzard Entertainment recently acquired the domain Diablo3.com from a fansite, but that does not mean that there will be a Diablo 3, despite speculation. Therefore, I suggest moving the page back to PoP (2008), until an official announcement from Ubisoft, because it currently violates WP:CRYSTAL, and it just pure speculation.--EclipseSSD (talk) 11:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

    Please watch-out for the previous talks. They explains clearly. #1 & #2 for your consideration. And I am removing the remove tag from the Talk page & The Request page too. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 21:45, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Ubisoft tag for images copyright

    Please, do use "Ubisoft-screenshot" tag to set the licensing for images you upload for this article. This is how this tag looks:

    Ubisoft allows the users to publish screenshots of all their games under a free license. For more information, read the agreement.

    OTRS icon The permission for use of this work has been archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system; it is available as ticket 20051200210003144 for users with an OTRS account. To confirm the permission, please contact someone with an OTRS account.

    Ubisoft, the copyright holder of this file, allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that they are properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted.

    		 
    It is the right licensing for screenshots from Ubisoft games. 89.78.180.141 (talk) 14:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Name of Donkey?

    The article states that his donkey is called "Lady with Treasure". I think someone has misunderstood the words "laden with treasure" from the Ubisoft interview. This is what I believe Ben Mattes actually says: "He is just coming back from his previous adventure, with his donkey laden with treasure that he's kind of scored on his previous quest...". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.13.212 (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

    I am not too sure about it. Could not find no written document about it. I think we should let the Editors have a watch on this video again & then think & post here. You CAN change the name if you want & have good faith to do so. Other Editors, Please post here and wait for others for positive reply before changing or altering or deleting it. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 16:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
    There is no written document, but I changed it because, well listen to the interview with Mattes. He says "[...] on a donkey, laden with treasure [...]", not "[...]on his donkey, Lady with Treasure [...]". Don't get mad at me for changing it, I did to contribute to the article, because the citation that we have there says what the donkey is, and the day we post a citation saying one thing, then have the article say another thing, is the day of Wikipedia's downfall. If someone CAN find a written citation, all the better, but for now, all we have is the spoken interview. Dude527 (talk) 03:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

    Ha ha ha, I am mad dude, can't change myself for you [:P]. Well, as of this, its fine... you did it right and I myself found it so later. I was just expecting other viewpoints. Thanks for contributing. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 02:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Citation Needed

    "The inspiration to create Elika was drawn from supporting characters from other media, like Elizabeth Swann from the Pirates of the Caribbean film series; Padmé Amidala from Star Wars; and Arwen from The Lord of the Rings trilogy."

    Do anyone know the reference for this quote (used under describing the character "Elika") to be true and stated somewhere by Ubisoft? – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 20:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

    There was a citation posted, did someone take it down? I will try and find it. Dude527 (talk) 01:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    Ah, I found the problem. The site administration removed the article. This citation is no longer valid, I will remove it, and hopefully we find another. Dude527 (talk) 01:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

    Oh, now I got it... he he. – Deb ‖ Poke • EditList ‖ 21:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)