User talk:Randomran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome! Hello Randomran! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, ask me on my talk page, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. And remember, no question is "stupid"; if you have anything, absolutely anything that you'd like to know, feel free to drop on by and leave me a message! :D Happy Editing! Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help My Talk Page New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 06:29, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Role-playing games 2 New articles 3 See Talk:First-person_adventure 4 Changing references 5 Removing sources 6 Spore 7 Re: rail shooters and light gun shooters 8 4X. 9 Computer role-playing game 10 Music video game article 11 "4X" and "Tech tree" 12 Re: 4X PR 13 4X (again) 14 Re: WP:SPAM 15 VG Newsletter 16 Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:JAF1970 17 New Message 18 prodding 19 The WPVG Newsletter (May 2008) 20 Mahjong 21 Hattrick AfD 22 Side-Scrolling "Genre" 23 Refs 24 Conflict of interest 25 You have no idea how right you are... 26 Stop reverting - source verified 27 Maxis keeps changing the name of that one phase 28 "Business" 29 Ace Combat 30 re: video game genre articles 31 AfD notification etiquette 32 Regarding your change to Europa Barbarorum 33 List of locations in the StarCraft series 34 Aki Ross gamecleanup 35 What do you think? 36 Characters 37 Cleanup? 38 cleanup take 2 39 video game genres, contd. 40 VG guidelines 41 Email 42 The WPVG Newsletter (June 2008) 43 Barnstar 44 Re: IAR 45 3 phases of a genre 46 Nice work 47 Dispute re WP:NOTE, etc. 48 Historical note

[edit] Role-playing games

I would like to help on the console/computer RPG articles, but I firmly believe, despite an unfortunately short-sighted resistance on the part of a few people, that this cannot be done until the articles are merged

They are not distinct. At all. There are tendencies of one or the other to lean toward certain sub-genres and styles, but these are not descriptive, nor can they be universally. Furthermore, any account of either's history and development that does not include all genres will be wrong. These articles will never meet anyone's standards of quality as long as we cater to a handful of people offering no definition, but stomping their foot all the same. Frogacuda (talk) 15:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think a good strategy would be to merge the two history articles. If you establish the inextricable way that these supposedly separate genres developed, it would be difficult to argue that they should be distinct. For instance, you can talk about how RPGs were introduced to Japan by the Sharp X1 game The Black Onyx (created by a western programmer specifically for Japan) and this opened the way for console ports and localizations of Wizardry and Ultima, which became the foundation for Dragon Quest, and established the style of RPG that the current wiki calls "console RPG."

When you discuss them separately you need to pretend that Dragon Quest came from nowhere and that eastern action RPGs never had any impact on the western RPGs and it all falls apart. So that would be my strategy. I will do what I can to help when I have the time. Frogacuda (talk) 16:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New articles

Hey, I noticed you've been creating new articles, thanks for helping out with Wikipedia! You can announce your articles here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2007-12-17 22:51

[edit] See Talk:First-person_adventure

Please respond to my post at Talk:First-person_adventure. And since you asked for reliable reference, where is yours?--Wormsie (talk) 22:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changing references

Please don't change references other people have added to point to other places. If you need to add a reference, add your own. You've changed references without changing the access date, making it look like other people added these references. Also, please use Wikipedia:Citation templates when adding references. Simply adding the URL is not satisfactory, as, if a URL to an article changes, people will not be able to find it if the author and publisher are not listed as well. SharkD (talk) 06:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing sources

Please stop removing sourced material from articles. You've removed sources and applied sources to comments that are not covered in the articles from Artillery game. You've removed sourced material and applied sources to comments that are not covered in the articles from Artillery Duel. SharkD (talk) 06:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

• Sure, I wouldn't see that as a problem. However, no-one seems to be even starting in the discussion. I'm still waiting on opening statements. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 14:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• I've made a suggestion on the case page, I'd like to know your thoughts on it. Regards, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 14:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spore

Thanks for joining in the discussion. It's good to have another level head in the mix. Dansiman (talk|Contribs) 21:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I've tried to be level. In fact, I came in agreeing with that other guy. But he's been so belligerent and the others have been pretty fair minded. I can't help but see the need for a compromise. It's silliness. Randomran (talk) 21:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: rail shooters and light gun shooters

You're right that it's deeper problem, essentially caused by people using their own opinions rather than checking for sources. Firstly, light gun games are indeed sometimes called 'rail shooters', but from the sources I've looked at (usual suspects, IGN, GameSpot etc), 'light gun shooter' is far more prevalent. Secondly, 'rail shooter' is more commonly used to describe games like space harrier, star fox, rez, sin and punishment etc. Obviously, these games and light gun games don't have much in common other than a (differing) form of 'on-rails' movement. It should be noted that using 'on-rails' to describe one particular aspect of the gameplay (movement) is not the same as saying 'this game is a rail shooter'; sources sometimes note the first person viewpoint of light gun games, but they don't consider them 'first person shooters'.

With regards to the main article on rail shooters, I believe originally it was about games such as space harrier, star fox etc. At some point, people began to add information about light gun games in. Cue much debate over what a 'rail shooter' is, on the talk page; at no point did anyone look at any secondary sources. Eventually, I rewrote the article to cover 'on-rails' movement in both light gun games and shoot 'em ups (Space Harrier etc), as well as covering 'rail shooter' as a genre category (again, more information on the talk page). 'Rail shooter' and 'light gun shooter' should really be separate articles, but I never got round to it.

As for the template/category rail shooter, again I believe it's mistaken and reflects an editor's personal opinion rather than critical consensus. When I was rewriting the rail shooter article, I looked at several articles covering light gun games categorised as 'rail shooters'. None of them cited any sources to show they were considered as such, indeed the sources I did find termed them 'light gun shooters'. I intended to do something about that, but again haven't got round to it. I don't dispute that 'rail shooter' is a genre, only it's applicability to light gun games (or at least the prevalence of the term). It should be grouped under shoot 'em ups (along with scrollers, run and gun etc), or have it's own article/category. Indeed I believe it was orignally mentioned in the shoot em up section of the genre article and I misguidedly removed it (at the the time it appreared to me to be synonymous with 'scrolling shooters'). Bridies (talk) 04:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

To sum up, it's the template that's the problem, not the genre article. Bridies (talk) 05:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure, but I think adding 'light gun shooter' to the template is probably the quickest fix. However, currently there's no article on light gun shooters, though there is a list of light gun games. The rail shooter article should be split, with the information on light gun games being used to create its own article. That would make two very short articles at the moment though. Going deeper, light gun games categorised as 'rail shooters' in their infoboxes should be changed. Bridies (talk) 17:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

'Light gun game' does have an entry in the 'sub-genre' subsections of Shooter game. Bridies (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I created a light gun shooter article and moved the appropriate content from the rail shooter article to there. I also added light gun shooter to the template. There's probably quite a few light gun games marked as 'rail shooters' in their main articles/infoboxes; I'll check for that later. Bridies (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 4X.

I'd be glad to give it a review, but I'm a bit busy these days; mind reminding me around Thursday or so (I tend to forget this kind of thing...)? · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to contribute if you have specific ideas, althought the article already contains just about everything I can think of that would be acceptable in Wikipedia. Refs are particularly difficult - I trawled extensively during the "4X notability" debate (now vanished form the Talk page, there appears to be no archive) and inserted almost everything I found. Philcha (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, right, I had already forgotten. :( I'll start copyediting the article tomorrow morning, and I'll probably have finished—and commented on—it by Saturday. · AndonicO ^Hail! 00:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, right, very sorry. I'll get started right away. · AndonicO ^Engage. 15:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, first impressions: needs a lot of copyediting (I'd be happy to help with that), and the definition is somewhat vaguely explained (though I'm guessing the reason is because there is no true definition; see the message I left on the talk page, though), the organization needs a bit of work, and too many mentions of "such and such game is a good example of this" (not really needed, at least, not too often). Finally, the "Examples of 4X games" section should be removed (the most notable ones are likely to get mentioned in the text, anyway). I'll post on the talk page when I've finished reading the article (only read a little so far). · AndonicO ^Engage. 16:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll make a better explained, more comprehensive review when I'm finished going through the article. · AndonicO ^Engage. 00:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Re "Examples of 4X games", it would be better to create a "list of" article. There's no sense in throwing away information some readers may find useful. Philcha (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm very sorry I've not been able to review properly yet; I'll make sure to finish reading tomorrow. · AndonicO ^Engage. 02:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. · AndonicO ^Engage. 15:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Computer role-playing game

hi, instead of replacing one reference with another, equally informational, I believe it is better to give reader a choice like here. You may want to consider merging the two articles, by the way ;) Pundit|utter 17:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, it is great that you're sorting these out. The only problem is that a "video rpg" is much narrower than "computer rpg". I'm one of these old guys who remember MUDs and other non-video computer rpgs. Therefore it is rather counter-intuitive for me to keep the video-rpg article as the main entry :) merging everything into "computer rpg", however, may be an option because of the big overlap. Pundit|utter 17:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

What I find confusing about the "video" in the name is the fact, that there is a whole genre of computer role-playing games that is ONLY textual, without any graphics. Thus, calling them "video RPG" does not make much sense. In my view, actually, "computer RPG" does justice to the idea :) Pundit|utter 19:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I do understand that you have your own terminology within the project, and that is totally fine. It is just that it perhaps should not be reflected in the generally accessible articles :) On Wikiproject RPG we distinguish computer-assisted gaming from the traditional one. I think it is better to try to stick to names, which are not anti-intuitive or misleading (which would be the case of "video RPG", when you consider the fact that many known computer RPG systems were entirely text, and not video based - some didn't have ANY graphics at all). Pundit|utter 21:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Hopefully some people interested in both types will come up with suggestions :) Good work! Pundit|utter 22:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It is a pleasure to discuss with you and develop Wikipedia in the atmosphere of constructive collaboration :) see you around Pundit|utter 00:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Music video game article

Hi, I noticed you added a "citation needed" tag to the top of the Music video game article in this edit. Could you please explain in Talk:Music video game what it was that you felt needed citation? It is unclear from the tag alone. Thanks! -Thibbs (talk) 05:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "4X" and "Tech tree"

Hi, how do you feel about the current state of 4X? Before you turned up I'd though I'd said all I had to say about that topic, but you got me thinking on new tracks.

IIRC you also expressed interest in "Tech tree". I'd be interested to know what your ideas on that are. Philcha (talk) 11:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

What aspects of "Tech tree" in 4X do you have reservations about?

• That 4X tech trees are usually big, and sometimes complex?
• That tech advancement is generally vital in 4X games, and often optional in other games?
• That costs of going up the tech tree are often higher in 4X than in non-4X games?
• That research mechanisms / resourcing are different in 4X and non-4X games?
• The structural diversity of 4X tech trees? Philcha (talk) 16:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll have ago at making the "Tech tree" section in 4X more concise. I actually realised while typing my last message to you that the bullet points summarized the subject well and needed little more than the addition of refs. Philcha (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I've done what I can. It's not much shorter, but I hope it's little more coherent. Philcha (talk) 19:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you saying that all screenshots of non open-source games are dodgy? If so, can you supply a pic that shows a many-to many tech tree from a suitable source and is clearer at thumbnail size than the Free Orion pic?

I don't how the Civ 3 tech tree pic's being from a mod affects 4X - it's not a game tutorial, the pic illustrates the structure and any mod has to follow the structure expected by the game code. Philcha (talk) 21:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think using FreeCiv as a "prototypical 4X game" is not a great idea: I doubt if it's that well-known, and the image is poor. I'm reinstating the Civ II image. I've checked Wikipedia:Non-free content and I think using the screen shot in 4X counts as "for critical commentary" since: the article comments on the whole genre; it presents Civ II and the other Civ games as the prototypical 4X games. Philcha (talk) 23:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention to C-evo - I'd given up playing Civ games because of the amount of micromanagement (towns and units), but I'll give C-evo a try.

The problem with using open-source games as examples is that it might be hard to find good refs for their status as 4X games (assuming their own web sites are not allowable evidence). In any case most of the developers will not complain as they're getting free publicity. The only exception might be MOO III, criticisms of which are cited in 4X; but that image is really just eye-candy and its removal would not cause serious pain provided the caption is integrated into the text first. Philcha (talk) 01:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: 4X PR

Sorry about that-I've been working on my Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project, I should have more free time this week to review. Thanks for the reminder, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 16:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 4X (again)

I think we need to discuss your recent edit to "Depth of gameplay". I like some aspects, but in other areas you've changed the meaning. For example "even if the player's ultimate goal is total conquest" was intended both to make the point that would-be Alexander the Greats have to consider these factors and more specifically to raise the point that diplomacy etc. are important in SoeSE although the only victory condition there is total conquest. I'm turning in now, so I'll leave more detailed comments at Talk: 4X tomorrow. Please don't make any other major changes in the meantime. Philcha (talk) 00:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I've posted a suggestion at Talk:4X#Depth_of_gameplay. Philcha (talk) 09:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there anything else you want to achieve with 4X? IMO the main thing outstanding is to make the lead summarise the content, but we should stabilise the content first. Philcha (talk) 14:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: WP:SPAM

Sure no problem. Anytime. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC))

[edit] VG Newsletter

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter Volume I, No. 1 - April 9, 2008 Archive before Archive After To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. Project at a Glance As of 2008-04-07, the project has: 82 Featured articles 10 Featured Lists 7 Featured Topics 1 article in Featured Article Review 184 Good Articles 15 articles for Peer review 3 articles for Assessment Featured Articles, Lists, and Topics Candidates and Reviews Featured Article Candidates Guitar Hero Featured List Candidates List of songs in Guitar Hero II Featured Topic Candidates None Featured Review Final Fantasy VII (FA) Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics in March Promoted FA: Final Fantasy XI, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Defense of the Ancients, List of Halo media, Giants: Citizen Kabuto, Grim Fandango, Spyro: Year of the Dragon, List of songs in Guitar Hero Demoted FA: Metal Gear Solid Topic: Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow Promoted GA: Grim Fandango, Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Metroid series, SimCity series, Characters of Halo Demoted GA: Final Fantasy III, Star Fox 64, Star Fox Adventures News Current proposals and discussions Well, gee, thanks 1up! 1UP.com has recently changed their rating scale. A list of affected articles can be found here. See discussion for details. Inactive project cleanup Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here. Feature The Importance of the Lead The lead is one of the most important parts of any Wikipedia article; its job to summarize the article in 2 to 3 paragraphs in order to familiarize the reader with the structure of the content that you will providing them as well as to give a quick one-minute overview of the topic. Many articles that are processed through Good Article or Featured Article assessments will be heavily scrutinized for a poor lead section. For articles dealing with video games, a common practice has developed for leads, being a 3-paragraph discussion. First paragraph The first paragraph should state the name of the game (using both bold (to identify the article's name) and italics as per the manual of style), along with any other alternate names the game may go by. The genre of the game should be clearly identified as well as the developer and the publisher. If a notable person has been cited by the game as having worked on the game's development (such as Tim Schafer or David Jaffe), this should also be noted. Release dates should be given, along with the release of any ports, remakes, or sequels. Second paragraph The second paragraph should summarize the plot briefly in one or two sentences; a high level overview is only needed to set the stage for further discussion. One or two sentences should be included to discuss the gameplay, including any notable features of the game. Third paragraph The third paragraph should cover the reception of the game, citing its general critical reaction and any significantly notable successful or failing elements in the game. If the game has won awards, this aspect can be noted, but specific mention of any award is discouraged. This approach should help you to write a good lead for nearly any game, though this may need to be altered for other games. If there's not a lot of reception information for a game, it may be worthwhile to combine the listed first and third paragraphs into one paragraph. There may be need to talk more about an aspect not normally covered in video game articles (such as with E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (Atari 2600)) which should be noted in the lead. Things you can help with: Peer review: Video game, Crash of the Titans, Xbox Live Arcade, List of Final Fantasy compilation albums, Metal Gear Solid, Shigeru Miyamoto, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess‎, Myst III: Exile, Blade Runner, Zanac Cleanup: List of characters from The King of Fighters, Hellgate: London, LeChuck Featured article candidates: List of songs in Guitar Hero Encore: Rocks the 80s (FLC), Crackdown, Halo (series), List of Sega 32X games (FLC), Alleyway Good article nominations: Ayu Tsukimiya, Music of the Final Fantasy Tactics series, Super Smash Bros., Music of Final Fantasy XI, Day of Defeat: Source Article status review: GA Review – None; FA Review – The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, 3D Monster Maze; FT Review – Final Fantasy titles Articles for Deletion: Participate in video game related deletion discussions. Images: Add box-art and screenshots to articles. Make sure to include a valid non-free use rationale. Monitor the following related changes pages: changes to WP:VG and changes to this to-do list. Announce your new articles Sign up for the new VG Newsletter. Project Navigation VG Project Main pages Main project – talk Project category – talk Portal – talk VG Project Departments Assessment – talk Cleanup – talk Peer review – talk   Magazines – talk Newsletter – talk Video Game Images – talk

[edit] Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:JAF1970

I've started this discussion on him. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Message

[edit] prodding

when you place a prod on an article you must give a reason. It should says something like "non-notable game, no sources" or something of the sort. Please go back and replace the tags on the ones you placed recently. To avoid confusing our reporting system, please delete the old one first, save the article, and then place the new tag. DGG (talk) 23:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (May 2008)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter Volume I, No. 2 - May 7, 2008 Archive before | Archive After To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. Project at a Glance As of 2008-05-06, the project has: 84 Featured articles 11 Featured Lists 8 Featured Topics 0 article in Featured Article Review 206 Good Articles 1 article in Good Article Review 13 articles for Peer review 1 article for Assessment Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics in April Promoted FA/FL: Guitar Hero, List of songs in Guitar Hero, List of songs in Guitar Hero II, Halo: Contact Harvest, Age of Empires Topic: None Demoted FA/FL: None Demoted GA: Air (visual novel), SimCity (series) Promoted GA: 24: The Game, Chocobo Racing, Crackdown, Crush 40, Dynasty Warriors 4, Geneforge, Gravemind, Guitar Hero (series), Half-Life (video game), Martin O'Donnell, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, Music of Final Fantasy III, Music of Final Fantasy VI, Music of Final Fantasy X-2, Music of Final Fantasy XII, Resident Evil: Apocalypse, Resident Evil: Extinction, Sega Mega Drive, Super Smash Bros. (series), StarCraft: Ghost, System Shock 2, The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures, The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass, Warhawk (PlayStation 3 game), Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, CD-i games from the Legend of Zelda series, Xbox 360, Voices of the Lifestream News There were 256 new articles in April 2008 Current proposals and discussions Well, gee, thanks 1up! 1UP.com has recently changed their rating scale. A list of affected articles can be found here. See discussion for details. About 14% of the articles on the list have been checked and updated. Inactive project cleanup Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here. WikiProject Warcraft and WikiProject StarCraft have been switched into Warcraft task force and StarCraft task force under the VG Project. WikiProject TimeSplitters has been deleted. Feature Writing about Gameplay The Gameplay section is a crucial component of a good video game article. Although it may be relatively easy for an experienced gamer to write such a section, care must be taken to maintain an appropriate focus and balance. The section should be written for readers with little or no knowledge of video gaming and should not be filled with detailed information about weapons, levels, or other such topics that are only of interest to the video gamer or that might be found in a game guide. Your goal for crafting a good section is to have people who have never picked up the game understand the basic mechanics. Do note, however, that it's safe to assume the reader has at least a minor knowledge of what a video game is. This section often begins the body text after the lead, but is sometimes placed after the Plot section. Games with little or no story can cover the plot in the Gameplay section. When writing about a game, use your head and common sense about the ordering. Generally, start off with a broad stroke—is the game a RTS or an FPS, etc. Don't talk about why the gameplay is like it is; generally, that is better placed in the 'Development' section later on in the article. Images can be added to better illustrate some aspects of gameplay. Generally, a single screenshot will suffice. Because of screenshots are non-free content, usage should be minimalised. Multiple images can be used, but all images should add something to the article beyond what the prose states. All non-free images require a fair use rationale to be used on Wikipedia. Things to remember Don't add in cruft about weapons, levels, and minute details of trivia; gameplay sections should serve as a primer to the game, not an exhaustive list of every facet of the game. Don't use gaming jargon which can be confusing to readers, such as "NPC" or "MMORPG". If you use these terms, state the full name and the abbreviation the first time it appears. For example, "Halo is a first-person shooter, or FPS." Wikilink! So you don't have to describe what a god game is, link it. Talk about what makes the game different from others; if you only talk about why StarCraft is a real-time strategy game, then readers could just visit the article about the game genre and be better served. Things you can help with: Peer review: Video game, Crash of the Titans, Xbox Live Arcade, List of Final Fantasy compilation albums, Metal Gear Solid, Shigeru Miyamoto, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess‎, Myst III: Exile, Blade Runner, Zanac Cleanup: List of characters from The King of Fighters, Hellgate: London, LeChuck Featured article candidates: List of songs in Guitar Hero Encore: Rocks the 80s (FLC), Crackdown, Halo (series), List of Sega 32X games (FLC), Alleyway Good article nominations: Ayu Tsukimiya, Music of the Final Fantasy Tactics series, Super Smash Bros., Music of Final Fantasy XI, Day of Defeat: Source Article status review: GA Review – None; FA Review – The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, 3D Monster Maze; FT Review – Final Fantasy titles Articles for Deletion: Participate in video game related deletion discussions. Images: Add box-art and screenshots to articles. Make sure to include a valid non-free use rationale. Monitor the following related changes pages: changes to WP:VG and changes to this to-do list. Announce your new articles Sign up for the new VG Newsletter. Project Navigation VG Project Main pages Main project – talk Project category – talk Portal – talk VG Project Departments Assessment – talk Cleanup – talk Peer review – talk   Magazines – talk Newsletter – talk Video Game Images – talk

[edit] Mahjong

Hi Randomran, nice list; could you put Aki and any other solitaire games on Mahjong solitaire instead? Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 17:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hattrick AfD

Please see here: [1]. Thanks, Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 00:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Side-Scrolling "Genre"

Thanks, friend! You've been helpful in many ways in my recent sporadic plunges into the whole Video Game arena. I have updated the Side-scrolling video game‎ article, removing references it to being a "genre". I've also stripped the "Side-Scrolling" sub-genre from the Video game genres‎ page. (Meanwhile, work progresses on my List of Super Famicom and Super Nintendo games by genre page.) Dawynn (talk) 00:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Refs

Convince me why there's 8 refs needed when 2 suffice and the facts aren't being changed. JAF1970 (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

A Serious Sam blog constitutes a valid source? JAF1970 (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Conflict of interest

Good morning. I have a small request for aid and an admonishment. Giving the request first might seem disingenuous, but giving the admonishment first could sour further dealings. Which one should I lead with? --Kizor 02:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm generally good with assuming good faith so don't be ashamed to lay all your cards out. I'll assess your request on its own merits, and help in whatever way I can. Randomran (talk) 06:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. First: this edit felt wrong - my use of English seemed off. I'd be obliged if you reviewed it.
Second: You tampon, you voted for the deletion of an article about TV show characters while calling it an article about video game characters and citing WP:GAMETRIVIA. I waived my right to complain in tearing you a new one in that discussion, but you hopefully agree that this sort of thing shouldn't happen. --Kizor 18:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

My bad. I was confused about that when I looked at the AFD as well. I saw the article because it was listed within the gaming AFDs. When I looked at the article, I saw issues of non notable information on a fictional topic. Gametrivia does a good job of summarizing the problems with these kinds of articles, and I usually rely upon that. On the other hand, I saw mentions of a TV show. I probably should have stuck to WP:N and WP:FICT and WP:PLOT rather than taking the easy way out with WP:GAMETRIVIA. But I still stand by my recommendation for deletion. This was lazy on my part, but not because I didn't review the article or attempt to seek sources. It was lazy because I got sloppy with my reasoning.

I also looked at the government simulation article and tried to improve it. The paragraph about hearts of iron still needs work, but I don't have enough experience with those games to clarify. I hope I've been helpful. Randomran (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Aye, if I was seeking to change your opinion then my timing would be as badly off as possible. I'm only concerned with due diligence in AfDs - !votes that get the topic wrong get ugly in most of all possible ways. (A personal favorite comes from last January: Six people called for speedy delete without denying or in any way acknowledging the explanation about the ineligibility of speedy deletion on the second line of the nomination.) For the record, Avatar is a TV show and has spawned a few cash-in games that have negligible impact on the main franchise.

Thank you kindly for your work on the government simulator article, you certainly have been helpful in aiding its legibility and that of later revisions. I do intend to make another pass later on because (a) I wish to put some more focus on the differences between government simulators and other genres, as similarities are common but usually very superficial - Civ IV, for instance, is about empire management but only marginally about government management. It doesn't have domestic politics. Half the time the player doesn't know what kind of state he's running until something uses his title. (b) I'm a greedy bastard. --Kizor 01:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for an amiable conclusion. I'll pay more care to the governmental thingy article and point the changes out on the talk page when I'm done. While we're talking, I saw a couple of things that took my interest in my watchlist and in bouncing here through your contributions and decided to bug you directly. Regarding a giant fish that I'm quite fond of, from my fairly anarchistic viewpoint WP:N, being a guideline rather than a policy or core policy, is a tool (not "the") for estimating grounds for inclusion. This doesn't keep it from being a good idea, just leaves room for other metrics. This was expressed and appreciated in my RfA (which was otherwise embarassing as it was during that time that I was making a hard left at Looneywood junction, but I digress). Featuring in several dozen video games over fifteen years (as well as some very unlikely places (the Far Side cartoon is a real stretch, but that image is fairly inarguable)) is a good argument for inclusion, is it not?

Regarding that Emrich article, is there a chance that I could get a copy, in private correspondence or otherwise, for my nefarious GA purposes?

Regarding my writing style, do I use the first person singular too much? It might be an artefact from my native language - where the equivalent is a fairly inconspicuous suffix - and I worry that it might make me look self-centered. --Kizor 08:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I would otherwise reply "good luck, and good editing" and go on my merry way, but I was in the neighbourhood and saw you speak out in support of massive-scale deletion to polish Wikipedia's image. Lemme just collect the quotes and build some arguments, and I'll get back to you.
I wasn't looking for any further commitments, so sucks to be me. ---Kizor 22:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You have no idea how right you are...

"Repeat what the sources say, and leave it up to the reader to interpret what's happening. ... and then who knows what could happen in a few months? The funny thing about wikipedia is that journalists read it. Just by virtue of saying "there's an emerging subgenre here", journalists will pick that up, and run with it, and then you can put that back in as research." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarranon (talk • contribs) 08:36, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stop reverting - source verified

Source has been verified. JAF1970 (talk) 18:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Changed the cit to include the verification within the cit. JAF1970 (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maxis keeps changing the name of that one phase

Now it's the Cell phase. JAF1970 (talk) 06:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Business"

You changed a number of articles, including Clonk, from "economic simulation" to "business simulation". I'm not a native English speaker, but what is the rationale behind this? Clonk has a lot of resource managment (You can chop wood, mine ore, melt metal and build vehicles and weapons from it; similar to the more well-known The Settlers), but you aren't managing a "business" as in e.g. Sim City. I have heard the term economic simulation a lot for these games, but business simulation seems rather unfitting. Sven Eberhardt (talk) 09:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that there were some fixed game categories in Wikipedia. In any case, reading the articles of the game categories, it does fit into real-time strategy much better than business (or economic) simulation. I changed the introduction text. Sven Eberhardt (talk) 18:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ace Combat

Do you think it would be possible to combine the information in Organizations of Ace Combat, Militaries of Ace Combat, Earth (Ace Combat) and Superweapons of Ace Combat into an Universe of Ace Combat article? This was done with Kingdom Hearts (see Universe of Kingdom Hearts). Thanks! RCX (talk) 21:33, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: video game genre articles

Hi there, sorry for the late reply. At one point I was trying to go through them all and take care of all the respective issues they are tagged for (mostly 'no sources'). I'm thinking of looking at the ones that are reasonably well developed and laid out (e.g. shoot 'em up and fighting game) and trying to get everything sourced (and any or removed). It's mostly the various action genres on my watchlist, all the variations on stragegy and RPGs I don't know much about. Bridies (talk) 23:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD notification etiquette

Please be sure to follow this aspect of the AfD instructions regarding the nominating process: "it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion. Also consider notifying WikiProjects listed on the discussion page. Do not notify bot accounts or people who have made only insignificant 'minor' edits. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the article and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter. For your convenience, you may use {{subst:AFDWarningNew|Article title}} ~~~~ (for creators who are totally new users), {{subst:AFDWarning|Article title}} ~~~~ (for creators), or {{subst:Adw|Article title}} ~~~~ (for contributors or established users). You can determine the main contributors of the articles by entering the page name at Wikipedia Page History Statistics." I do not believe you did so for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soul series mystical weapons or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superweapons of Ace Combat. In the first case, you should notify any user of IP with more than one edit and the same for here. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding your change to Europa Barbarorum

I see that you put a template on the Europa Barbarorum article warning that it might be deleted due to lack of notability - precisely what changes do you want made to it in order to make it notable? Please note that it would be strange if the article were deleted now as it has been around for several years as far as I know. It Is Me Here (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of locations in the StarCraft series

I've noticed that you've tagged the List of locations in StarCraft article for cleanup. Just incase this is a potential prelude to possible AfD, I just want to ask you to refrain from nominating for deletion. It is an utter mess, and its on my (fairly extensive) to-do list, but I'm currently taking a break from StarCraft related things after rewriting the FA StarCraft, dealing with Species of StarCraft and bringing StarCraft: Ghost to GA. However, I will get around to sorting it out in due course. -- Sabre (talk) 21:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Aki Ross gamecleanup

I'd like to know what you think needs to be game-cleaned up about this article. The other articles you tagged are obvious, but this one not that much IMO (especially as it's not even about a game to begin with). Thanks. Kariteh (talk) 21:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I tagged it for cleanup because there's a few parts that are unreferenced. Probably not the most suitable tag. It just needs more editors on it, hence why I tagged it. If you can think of a more suitable tag, feel free to change it. Randomran (talk) 21:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

{{Refimprove}} is probably best. Kariteh (talk) 21:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What do you think?

I don't think I asked you this, but would you consider making a request for comment on Le Grand? I haven't made it yet, but I'm strongly considering it, as his disruptive attitude is creeping into many aspects of Wikipedia (dispite many people telling him of policies, which he chooses to ignore). I was told to stay away from him, but frankly: I'm fed up with his attitude, and it's very clear others are as well. RobJ1981 (talk) 22:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

While Le Grand doesn't curse, or attack people... his views are disruptive and seem to just flood many deletion debates at times. I can start building evidence, could you help out? Request for Comment requires 2 or 3 people at least for it to remain open, but I can easily find others to be part of it. If you could email me (click email this user while on my talk page), I can give you more details (not suitable for here). RobJ1981 (talk) 22:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I could just give you an email address that I don't use much, then I wont be too worried about it getting spam or whatever from whoever else might see it. Some policies that Le Grand is probably breaking: not assuming good faith, as well as point-of-view pushing. I haven't read the policies on those completely though (but I'm pretty sure POV pushing is something we could find many examples for, if that is indeed a policy that's been broken). Plus he keeps listing another editor's opinion essay, and acts like it should be followed (but it's not an official policy, as the tag at the top of it clearly states). The "Don't Destroy" one, that I'm sure you've seen at least once. For any type of thing: deletion debates, talk pages are indeed the best bet to find things. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

robJ1981@hotmail.com (my MSN messenger name: no active email though), we can talk there. Otherwise, do you use IRC? There's no need to create a new email address if we don't need to. RobJ1981 (talk) 00:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I've started Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Le_Grand_Roi_des_Citrouilles. I don't think any alert for him has been on there in the past. With alert, it takes less time to make, and gets enough input usually. If it fails (or not much response), then RFC is the way to go. RobJ1981 (talk) 00:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

At WP:ANI, LGRdC has stated he has to leave wiki. I think it may be best for all concerned to just let this go and peacefully help create a better encyclopedia. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm usually on the Wikipedia-en or Wikia channels. Look for me. I'm usually online late at night, or in the afternoon (central time zone). RobJ1981 (talk) 04:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm currently on IRC with this same name. RobJ1981 (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Characters

I'll see if I can get to it, but I would try to build up the main character article and merge the individual character articles there. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to echo this. A merge is always preferred to a deletion if feasible--provided you actually do get consensus, demonstrated on the talk page. Yes, in case there's no agreement there we do need some better way of handing deciding on the validity of a particular merge--though I am very reluctant to propose further bureaucracy. DGG (talk) 19:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

oops, that was meant for someone else. DGG (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup?

Hello, why do you tag Ivalice for cleanup? Any specific issues that we can address, because this tag is a bit too vague. — Blue。 07:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] cleanup take 2

Hi, same question as above: what do you think needs to be cleaned up in Netrek? -- Akb4 (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] video game genres, contd.

I've decided to try starting with fighting game, I think, because there's quite a few sources on Gamespot which seem to provide a good historical overview. Specifically, I'm looking at History of Street Fighter, History of Mortal Kombat, History of Sega Fighting Games, Fighting Game Classics. I've yet to read through them properly but they should provide an informative starting point. With regards to the current fighting game article, the first paragraph of the 'history' section is good, and that's about it. I'm not too sure how the article should be laid out and what it should cover and since none of the genre articles are any good (as far as I'm aware) there's not much to go on. It should cover development, technical and critical milestones, waxing and waning popularity etc, but that might conceivably all go under 'history'. Bridies (talk) 02:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VG guidelines

You may want to check out Guyinblack's draft for "How to write a video game article"; mind you, I think there's need for two different documents, one being the quick reference, one being the discussion given. --MASEM 23:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I find myself agreeing with Masem - Guyinblack's draft is quite good, but also very detailed. The Guidelines should be a quick summary and should contain a link to a more detailed essay.

That said, I think your draft is great, Randomran! It's quick and concise, it captures the core concepts very well, and I like that you're linking to the relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines - that seems rather important since people are questioning whether we're in line with WP's policies.

I don't have time to give much detailed feedback right now, but I do think it's a great starting point. Definitely open a discussion on the main VGProj talk to see if you can get the new revision adopted. :) Good work! — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I think your draft is headed on the right path. Like Masem and Kiefer said, it's a good, quick reference and is easy to read. I like how you organized the "Inappropriate content" section and followed it with a good (and sourced) "Exceptions" section. I think the first "Overview" section focuses a bit too much on what should not be in an article, though I understand why you phrased everything the way you did. I would try to include an extra, brief sentence explaining what an encyclopedic video game article is actually for. Like providing a "comprehensive overview" or an "informational analysis and background" of a video game topic while not giving "too much weight" to certain sections of it. And regarding the content about transwikifying content, it seems a bit out of place, but I can't honestly think of a better section to put it in—just something to keep in the back of your mind while doing revisions.

All in all, I think it's a good step forward from what we currently have and I hope we can adopt it sometime soon. Nice job. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 21:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC))

Re WP:FICT, I've been probably the most active in trying to meet various "goals" for revising it since last year. The current version, which allows for limited but allowable lists of characters, is the one that is seen as the best likelihood of being accepted. --MASEM 21:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a word of warning that WP:FICT can get noisy (it is very quiet now) but I will try to drop you a line when things change with it. Do, however, be aware that in the GNG at WP:N that one of the footnotes (#8 I think) also allows for selected non-notable spinouts (WP:FICT's revision is to try to expand this point more). Again, as I commented on the talk page, I'm pretty I'm reading what you're thinking and in line with the existing guidelines, but it's just not coming out exact in the wording, but that's easily fixed. --MASEM 21:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Email

Use the email facility on my User page to send an email which encloses your email address. I'll reply; you reply to the reply, adding the attachment. That's worked twice for me, and AFAIK none of the 3 people involved has had (increased) spam as a result.

Thanks for the notification about Tea Leaves, I'll gird up my lions loins and smite the unbelievers. Philcha (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Did you get my email re the Emrich article? Or are you just busy at present?

BTW congratulations on the Barnstar. Philcha (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (June 2008)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Video Games Newsletter

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter Volume I, No. 3 - June 4, 2008 Archive before Archive After To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list. Project at a Glance As of 2008-06-04, the project has: 89 Featured articles 13 Featured Lists 9 Featured Topics 2 articles in Featured Article Review 208 Good Articles 0 articles in Good Article Review 10 articles for Peer review Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics Promoted FA/FL: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, List of acquisitions by Electronic Arts, List of Harvest Moon titles, Riven, Myst, Topic: Characters of Halo, The Orange Box Demoted FA/FL: Devil May Cry series (FT) Promoted GA: Air (visual novel), Crash Boom Bang!, Driving Emotion Type-S, Einhänder, Half-Life 2: Episode Two, Metal Gear Solid, Off-Road Velociraptor Safari, Team Fortress 2, Grand Theft Auto (series), Kratos (God of War), History of video game consoles (seventh generation) Demoted GA: Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, Sonic the Hedgehog (character), Cloud Strife, Super Smash Bros. News There were 203 new articles in May 2008 Current proposals and discussions Well, gee, thanks 1up! 1UP.com has recently changed their rating scale. A list of affected articles can be found here. See discussion for details. About 28% of the articles on the list have been checked and updated. Inactive project cleanup Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here. WikiProject Dragon Quest has been redirected to WP:VG. WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games Guild Wars task force has been deleted. Interested in a specific video game series or company? Check out some of our task forces to help improve the related articles. Atari Command & Conquer Devil May Cry New! Gears of War Grand Theft Auto Silent Hill Suikoden New! StarCraft New! Valve Visual novels New! Warcraft Feature Writing about Development Development content is very important to include in an encyclopedic video game article. It provides a history of how the game came to be and provides real world information needed for an article to claim comprehensiveness. However, writing this section can be difficult because the amount and type of information available will vary for each game. One of the best sources for such information is a developer interview. These can provide insight into the thought process of the designers and give examples of influences and obstacles encountered. Previews can also be helpful by giving a snap shot of the game before it was released and may mention development issues that were still being addressed. When writing about development, common sense should be used to organize content to maintain a sense of flow for the reader. Most times, it is best to give the information in a somewhat chronological order—though information can also be grouped by topics like audio, promotion, graphics, etc. If one such topic gets large enough, it can be split off into its own subsection or regular section. For example, Kingdom Hearts#Audio is a separate section from the rest of the development information because it focuses on the game's musical score and voice acting. Portal (video game)#Soundtrack, however, does not have as much content and is a subsection of the main development section. What to include about development Who are the developers? Which company or studio developed the game, and are there any prominent designers involved? When did development begin? When and where was the game first announced? (e.g. Tokyo Game Show, E3 Media and Business Summit, etc.) What influenced the game's story, characters, music, and/or gameplay ? (e.g. past games, movies, books, etc.) Were there any delays? Was anything excluded because of time or technological constraints? (e.g. extra levels, game modes, characters, story arcs, etc.) Things to remember Avoid proseline. Though maintaining a sense to chronology is important, this section should not read like an ordered list of events. Images in this section should be relevant to the information given and should add on to it. Source everything to avoid information being tagged as original research. Things you can help with: Peer review: Video game, Crash of the Titans, Xbox Live Arcade, List of Final Fantasy compilation albums, Metal Gear Solid, Shigeru Miyamoto, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess‎, Myst III: Exile, Blade Runner, Zanac Cleanup: List of characters from The King of Fighters, Hellgate: London, LeChuck Featured article candidates: List of songs in Guitar Hero Encore: Rocks the 80s (FLC), Crackdown, Halo (series), List of Sega 32X games (FLC), Alleyway Good article nominations: Ayu Tsukimiya, Music of the Final Fantasy Tactics series, Super Smash Bros., Music of Final Fantasy XI, Day of Defeat: Source Article status review: GA Review – None; FA Review – The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, 3D Monster Maze; FT Review – Final Fantasy titles Articles for Deletion: Participate in video game related deletion discussions. Images: Add box-art and screenshots to articles. Make sure to include a valid non-free use rationale. Monitor the following related changes pages: changes to WP:VG and changes to this to-do list. Announce your new articles Sign up for the new VG Newsletter. Project Navigation VG Project Main pages Main project – talk Project category – talk Portal – talk VG Project Departments Assessment – talk Cleanup – talk Peer review – talk   Magazines – talk Newsletter – talk Video Game Images – talk

[edit] Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I noticed how much work you're putting into policy discussions and trying to cleanup the VG project article guidelines, so I'm just giving this as a recognition of your efforts. Your civility and knowledge of policy has also been really good. Interested in going for a set of tools in the future? I'll help you along if you like. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 10:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't blame you for not wanting to go to WP:RFA right now. No one should have to undergo the extreme scrutiny and rather pathetic reasoning for opposes that currently is being undertaken there, although there are efforts to have it fixed. If you're ever interested, let me know. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 20:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: IAR

I don't believe in ignoring all rules. I'm just tired of Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles's cherry-picking of quotes and policies to stymy discussion and reduce everything to drivel by repeating the same points over and over again. I was making a point that if he/she really thinks that IAR is so important, I should be able to do what I really would like to-ban the annoying bugger and be done with it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem is when push comes to shove, we’re going to have to overrule the opposers and roll out the guideline. While some have valid issues which should be taken seriously, the other four or so are on one side of the fence or the other on notability and can’t be reconciled. Prolly those who want to axe the stuff will be more likely to come on board, but even if we pass the guideline, it doesn’t mean any attempts to delete utter crap aren’t going to be assaulted by Citron and the like saying that the guideline wasn’t really consensus, yadda yadda… Without a functioning guideline, our ability to deal with this crap basically boils down to unilateral action, which definitely won't make anyone happy. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I know. This is just more annoying then all the shit that went down over at WT:SPOILER because this is absolutely essential to a vast portion of wikipedia, not just little tags in articles. Whatever, I guess I'll go back to some writing while this gets tossed about. Cheers. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm a "he" incidentally. One could say the same about cherry picking and repetition on those against the inclusion of the articles in question. And again, I don't think calling editors' good faith contributions "crap" helps. If anything why not somehow notify the various article creators and editors of these discussions to get a better sense of what they really think? Why not get some new blood into these discussions? Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Le Grand, I know you're trying to help, but this is a conversation that's aimed at trying to diffuse a dispute rather than escalate it. If you want to continue your dispute with David Fuchs, please do it where the two of you began it. Do not bring it to my talk page. I'm asking you politely to take my talkpage off your watchlist. Randomran (talk) 18:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I left a reply for Le Grand on his talk page regarding this topic as well. I have already pointed out to him in the VGProj discussion that it's up to him to get editors he thinks will be interested in the discussion if he feels that strongly. Most of VGProj is made up of non-admins, so the majority of the project has the same limitations he has in terms of seeing deleted contributions. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3 phases of a genre

You might like one part of A Discussion about Matter, part two, and it might even be useful for a an article on some genre (RTS springs to mind): "... all artistic movements and genres passing through three phases. You have the initial phase when ideas are laid down, then the second phase when you get the great masters of the genre and then the third phase when it’s all about being a virtuoso, about not challenging the limits of your genre but rather producing art that relentlessly pursues beauty as defined by the genre with no interest in innovation or change." It also links to the article that presents that idea, but IMO the summary's much more readable. That sounds like a literary equivalent of some remarks in Trent Polack's A Glimpse into Modern Real-Time Strategy Philcha (talk) 23:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

RTS seems to have had a 1-year phase 1, a 5-year phase 2 and an extended phase 3. Can't work out how it applies for TBS.

BTW did you get my email? Philcha (talk) 05:22, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nice work

Nice work expanding Turn-based tactics. The article no longer seems like such a stub. SharkD (talk) 23:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute re WP:NOTE, etc.

I know that, I've been part of the dispute at WP:FICT since the beginning. I'm not particularly worried about it, the cleanup gets done one way or the other. NOTE has been contested by people wanting to write all kinds of cruft, but like I put myself, it follows so logically and cleanly from our core policies, it's been longstanding despite any such challenges. But thanks for the heads-up, and while I'm aware of the origin of that debate myself, might it not be a good idea to link to the FICT debate from the NOTE one, so that the context is easily visible? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Apparently I'm not either, I see, upon looking through the page, that Masem has already put exactly such a notice. So, guess no one has to worry about it anyway! Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Historical note

By the way, per Book burning, it's not a reference to "Nazis" per se, although some have actually made that allegation, but I am referring to a long historical precedent across many cultures and for many reasons rather than to any one particular moment in history. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)