Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:VG)
Latest comment: 3 hours ago by Dabmasterars in topic Talk:Always-on DRM#Rewrite
Learn more about this page

Cover arts for games that changed

edit
Latest comment: 9 days ago7 comments6 people in discussion

Hello y'all!

A few years ago, I changed the cover art used in Imperator: Rome to this as the prior one was just the logo, which isn't standard practice. However, when I was looking for the image before changing it, I came across two cover arts; the one that was used at the launch and a later one used after the game underwent a complete reboot.

I chose the latter, but have always wondered if I should have chosen the former. Is they're any standard procedure for which one should take precedence? — Knightoftheswords 04:50, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think I've always felt that the main point of the cover arts (besides just visualization) is better context. I always imagine a reader who physically has the game in their hands and wants to be absolutely sure they're reading the right article. From that perspective, the better cover art would be whatever readers would be most familiar with. Given Rome: Imperator is only a computer game and maybe doesn't even have a physical box, most people would probably be familiar with the game through digital store fronts that are updated regularly. The latter was probably the correct choice but I don't think it would have been a big deal either way. Whipmywillows (talk) 06:05, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
What is familiar can be a very subjective exercise. This seems like something editors must have grappled with earlier, hopefully more recently than here and here?
If I were creating an article from scratch and selecting an image from many iterations, my preference be the original release cover, with the exception of a non-English cover where an English release has been made. If grasping at straws between simultaneous English US and EU releases, I'd say it doesn't matter with a weak preference to the market the developers are based in. When differentiating simultaneous identical physical and digital covers, I'd go physical if one exists as it tends to have more identifying visual elements, but that's also a weak preference. VRXCES (talk) 08:46, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
In the book wikiproject, their advice generally has always been the cover of the first print in the first country of release (eg Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is both the UK title and one of its first covers, but not the cover you'd find in the wild today). Masem (t) 12:26, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
From MOS:VG:

The identifying art should be from the game's original release.

There is a good copy of the original at MobyGames that could be uploaded boldly. IceWelder [✉] 12:45, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
WP:VG used to have guidance that was basically WP:ENGVAR but for box art, and it's still what I use, even though I'm not sure it's around anymore, given how no one's citing it. Basically, use the most recognizable one, and it's that's contentious, there's no reason for change and you just stuck with what was there first. Sergecross73 msg me 18:24, 9 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Alright, thx! — Knightoftheswords 20:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

New Articles (July 27 to August 9)

edit
Latest comment: 8 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.23 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 18:09, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

July 27

July 28

July 29

July 30

July 31

August 1

August 2

August 3

August 4

August 5

August 6

August 7

August 8

August 9

Two weeks in one. --PresN 18:10, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Two weeks in one? What a deal! Panini! • 🥪 18:41, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Three pinball video game articles on one list! (one written by me) Wilbers (talk) 11:05, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Additional sources

edit
Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi all. This might interest some folks but sources from my sandbox , might be of use. (slowly adding stuff there). Not all of them from reliable sources but a lot are and not all are used.

@IceWelder @Vrxces @Rhain might interest you guys. Timur9008 (talk) 09:22, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Much appreciated. Your ability to dive into archived URLs to find good stuff is very appreciated. I've also been thinking of doing it for CNET GameCenter and Games Domain Review where they have indexes that aren't captured anywhere online. Personally, putting these on the 'suggested sources' template would be the most help to use these as I stumble across them. VRXCES (talk) 06:44, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Project milestones

edit
Latest comment: 5 hours ago14 comments9 people in discussion

I notice that we have recently passed two project milestones for Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/goals: creating 2,600 GA-class articles and 50 Good or Featured Topics. Congrats to those that have contributed to that milestone - GA/FA review is a large effort!

Now that we have space to move forward with new milestones, what should these be? VRXCES (talk) 21:23, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I had asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 186#Goals (again!) a couple months ago; though there wasn't a lot of response. The items raised there (with counts to go) were:
--PresN 22:54, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I still think adding screenshots is a noble cause. GamerPro64 02:13, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
That would be Category:Video game articles requesting screenshots: 10,308 articles. --PresN 02:16, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I would caution somewhat against systematically adding lots of screenshots. If all you're doing is going through a big list of video games, turning the game on, and screenshotting the first moments of the first level, you probably aren't demonstrating very much of the game. I've patched up articles in the past with screenshots where there were basic gameplay elements I would love to have demonstrated visually but the screenshot just didn't have it. As non-free content, I feel like I would rather they were chosen well by someone who knows the material rather than sped through.
I would also still be very happy to have a stub focused goal. Though probably not over 700, that's probably a bit too high in retrospect. Whipmywillows (talk) 04:57, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I would agree. I'm kind of surprised we have a tag for adding a graphic. While I find it fun and good to use, its not viable for copyright to just show off what the game looks like. The copyright arguments usually need to say we need to show off something which wouldn't be clear by text and we should be specific. Like, the screenshot for Jr. Pac-Man is a particularly bad example of showcasing gameplay. What might benefit would be a video or animation showcasing the scrolling maze which might not be clear to people who haven't played the game. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:50, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
The last one (Articles with an Unreferenced section or Refimprove tag) should be one of the new milestones IMO. Timur9008 (talk) 04:48, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Having citation needed / unreferenced section as one of the goals would be nice, it's a category that's easier to clear without deep familiarity with the article topic. ~ A412 talk! 05:17, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I think reducing the Requested Articles backlog to 0 would be my favorite suggestion. Some notable pages have been sitting around for nearly a decade, and it's gotten so bad that an "archive" page had to be created. If an article lacking sources is bad, an unmade notable article is even worse. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:43, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I think this is a good suggestion, it's something that's not class or subject matter-based and serves a unique benefit to the project. VRXCES (talk) 07:27, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
An additional possibility could be the opposite of the previously completed goal. We're currently sitting at 22,888 Start, and 7401 Stub class articles, for a total of 68.6% of all articles being below C-class. Trying to reach 50% would be too massive a goal, but maybe some kind of reduction in these 2 classes could be accomplished? 13akoors (talk) 23:02, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I like this idea, just for reference though getting down to 50% would be 8,204 articles, 60% would be 3,786 articles, and 65% would be 1,578 articles (based on a current total of 44,171 total articles and lists).
I would be perfectly happy if the two goals were:
  1. Eliminate the requested article backlog (per ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ)
  2. 35% or more articles C-class or better
Whipmywillows (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
35% might not be reasonable; if we want that one, I'd pick 30%. As a point of comparison, in 2014 we set a goal of reaching 25% of articles being Start+. We were at 16.7% at the time. It took us 10 years to reach it (source), so we averaged 0.83% a year. It took about the same 10 years to go from 5.2% B+ to 10%, 0.48% a year. So, if we're currently at 27.9% C+, reaching 35% is also likely to take a decade (assuming a rate in the middle at .655% a year; we've been improving our lower-classed articles at double that average rate in the last 2 years, so if we assume that will continue, call it 5 years). 30% will probably take 3+ years (or if the current trend continues, about 2 years). If that's what we want to do then that's what we want to do, but personally I think the point of these goals is to inspire action, not just track improvement, so I think any goal that takes more than 2-3 years isn't as helpful as it could be.
On the same note, I would oppose trying to clear the article creation backlog as a goal. It's a noble idea, but it's inherently a list of articles that no one cares enough about to actually make, so it's not really likely to inspire action. --PresN 01:34, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
1) Saying that nobody cares about requested articles is an assumption that everyone is aware of them.
2) Even if people are aware of them, isn't the entire point of a goal to inspire people to do things they otherwise wouldn't? See also: Every drive on Wikipedia. The goal to improve stubs to start articles also caused people to improve articles that they otherwise "wouldn't care enough about to actually make". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:01, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Undertale and Deltarune concerts peer reviews

edit
Latest comment: 6 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello! Just coming in here to tell people about the List of Undertale and Deltarune concerts article that is currently being peer reviewed. I plan to eventually nominate this for FLC once it's in a better state, anyone can leave suggestions to help improve this list - as if its successful, it'll be the first featured content in the video games wikiproject about a concert. Monathephantom (talk) 15:17, 14 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

This tool could help the WikiProject to increase the coverage of video game articles

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago9 comments4 people in discussion

Dear community,


For my master thesis, I developed a tool to visualize shared content between Wikipedia language versions as well as content unique to certain versions. The tool aims to inspire editors of all language editions to find topics not available in their language yet and to also give visibility to the content of smaller language versions.


https://wiki-gap-finder.toolforge.org/


The database behind the tool was established using Wikidata items and their sitelinks to related Wikipedia articles. The items can also be clustered into topics, which are currently assigned with the help of the Language-Agnostic Topic Classification model. There is also a video games topic!


I found that for certain Wikiprojects such as the Video Game one, this tool could prove useful to find articles about video games that are not in English Wikipedia yet. If you are interested in checking it out, please check it out and fill out my feedback form, which is linked on the tool page. I am in urgent need of user feedback data to evaluate in my thesis and so far, the response is too sparse to be considered for evaluation!


Please also note that currently the tool is optimized for Desktop use. I apologize for any inconveniences while testing on mobile, and for any user experience and processing times that do not work well at the moment. If there are any technical issues or if the API does not respond, please contact me.


Thank you so much to everyone giving it a try! Brotbaeumchen (talk) 17:29, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

A great deal of these are not on English Wikipedia because they do not pass Enwiki's notability guidelines though. -- ferret (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your reply. Do you still believe this tool could prove useful? I searched for video game related articles covered in Japanese for example but not in English yet, and I have the feeling that you could find some interesting/obscure media that way. Just now for example I found out about the existence of a Vii Console from China that mimics the Nintendo Wii, and I feel this could be some notable content being added to English Wikipedia. Brotbaeumchen (talk) 18:25, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I personally don't believe that is a notable topic, no. -- ferret (talk) 18:30, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I wish you luck on your thesis. There are two problems you are going to face within this WikiProject:
  1. It is not hard to identify gaps in our coverage. Go to any large list of video games and pick out all the ones without articles, you will very quickly have more than you can ever reasonably deal with. Our bottleneck is not identifying topics, it's putting in the work to research and write the articles themselves.
  2. Different language Wikipedia's often have less strict notability requirements than we do. I am often disappointed when I go to a Japanese or French video game article and it only has a handful of unreliable sources or even no sources at all. That Vii article you linked only has sources from two places. One of which is way too short to be considered significant coverage, it's not enough for an English Wikipedia article.
So, to sum up, this tool would only add to our incredibly long backlog of material without effectively sorting through which ones are notable enough in the first place. Whipmywillows (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your explanation, it helps a lot! I will include this in my evaluation. Brotbaeumchen (talk) 21:26, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
What you really need is an agent that can try to apply WP:N and WP:RS (And probably review WP:RSN and WP:VG/S), and surface topics where sourcing seems probable to help filter out simply "this game exists, and at least one wiki has an article" to what might actually pass for Enwiki inclusion. Many local runnable models could do this degree of work, but of course not everyone has a suitable GPU to prototype a system and run it. The recently released Muse-Glimmer from Meta, as well as Gemma4 and Qwen-3.8, would be good agent/tool focused models for such an endeavor. The goal isn't to have them write an article or anything, but to gather sources, consider them, and surface plausibly WP:N-passable topics... preferably with the source list as a starting point. -- ferret (talk) 21:37, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • @Brotbaeumchen: I think it's a good idea, but as others have noted, other language editions is a tougher signal to parse. For a safer approach, I think it's best to focus on uncovered topics that clearly have sources. I've given an agent a Metacritic list of reviews URL(s), a link to WP:VGRS, and said "organize this by reviews from VGRS sources, unreliable sources, and unknown sources, then create formatted citations." The actual hard work will still be on a human to read these sources (do NOT trust LLM summaries as usual, do NOT have it actually write a Reception section, but just the formatted cite is fine) and write the article. If you want to make it easier to build articles on notable games, I would suggest: A) Query Wikidata for items which are video-gamey due to having identifiers like "Steam application ID" or "vglist id" or "OpenCritic id" but lacking English Wikipedia articles, B) Query Metacritic / OpenCritic for their reviews, C) Get a count on VGRS reviews. Three is the usual minimum desired, but it might be good to start with a higher threshold like 5. D) Tell the agent to create formatted cite web / cite magazines (this will probably involve re-usable scripts for how to parse specific websites to figure out author, date, etc.; encourage the agent to write those and reuse them), E) Create a page in projectspace with the relevant games and the formatted cites. That'd basically be a "starter pack" for anyone who wanted to have the sources for a Reception section at least ready to go for games very likely to pass English Wikipedia notability guidelines. SnowFire (talk) 22:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Thank you for your elaborate response. I will try reflecting about this in my Outlook/Future Works section. Brotbaeumchen (talk) 23:35, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Help with Masanori Kuwasahi

edit
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

After reading a Wéstern The King of fighters guidebook I managed to write a small article focused on his creator Masanori Kuwasashi. However, I don't know much about his entire career as not even the SNK wiki or the Tenchu wiki have big article about him. If anybody knows of a source that could be useful for the game designer, could you provide it at least as a further reading section or talk page so that I could expand on it? Cheers. Tintor2 (talk) 21:47, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Added some suggested refs on the talk page. Good Luck! Whipmywillows (talk) 22:47, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. Sadly my listening skills with that audio aren't very good. Tintor2 (talk) 23:08, 15 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

K2 (video game company)

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

While expanding Masanori Kuwasashi I learned that he was one of the founders from one of Capcom's subsidiaries companies K2 and made the article K2 (video game company). It might need revisions from users who are better at writing these type of articles. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 17:19, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bgsu98 has nominated List of WWE 2K Games video games for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:04, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Need some input at Template:Street Fighter

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago23 comments6 people in discussion

TPI81AF made some modifications to the template recently similar to some other overhauls they did, and while I objected to it looking closer he did have a valid point: the template had a really bad verticality issue. There were other some other problems with the setup, such as the related games that are canon to the Street Fighter franchise being separated way down the template.

As a result, I overhauled it to be closer to Template:Pokemon and Template:Final Fantasy, both equally massive franchises with a slew of character articles of their own. I felt this showed at least a design consensus to lean into, and this structure seemed satisfactory to those involved.

Until woodensuperman decided to roll it back to the last 'good version' because he said it was (to quote him) "f**king awful", and then added the Marvel and Tekken vs. titles back in, despite both having their own dedicated template. I rolled it back twice, trying to encourage conversation before making these changes given there was a dispute and encouraged discussion on the talk page, and got told I should "try it on a sandbox first" for my efforts.

So that's why I'm here bothering you nice folks on this Tuesday morning because I feel we need some sense of consensus on how we should be approaching these templates. Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:13, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed TPI81AF has made some bold changes to navboxes. They seem to be on a mission to make piped links wherever possible, to... save room (?). Like the navboxes on Diablo, Doom and others.
I have stated that making this is not necessary and is not helpful at Template talk:Call of Duty series#Condensed layout.
TPI81AF has the same discussion with (Oinkers42) at Template talk:Super Mario#Deduplicating text.
I feel they don't fully understand what this means, like this edit on {{Halo series}}, is in no way an improvement. Maybe if there's more input here we can come to some consensus for all these navboxes. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:46, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I feel I should jump in and clarify, right now the issue with the Street Fighter template is more woodensuperman just kind of dashing in; TP181AF definitely should have probably done more discussions, because at both the Pokemon and now the CoD and Halo templates it shows his changes aren't exactly seen positively.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:49, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Adding on the Template:Video game genre conversation from about 3 weeks ago. I've mostly disengaged from the conversation at this point, but it does seem like TP181AF needs to have more discussions before making changes. 13akoors (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
With whom, exactly, would I be discussing before making a change? I have no way of knowing which parties may feel aggrieved by a change until after it has been effected. Even after a change has been made, some involved editors that are directly pinged seem to be adamantly reticent. To paraphrase the essay on the BRD cycle, it is first recommended to boldly edit where no one has edited before. Only afterward may the RD materialize. TPI81AF (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
You could bring it up here, or on the template's talk page. (Oinkers42) (talk) 20:22, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
You have yet to reply to many of my attempts at discussion with you. Please do so on the relevant talk pages. TPI81AF (talk) 20:24, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Can you please stop sending me (and other editors) Template:Talkback messages for discussions that I am (they are) already aware of? (Oinkers42) (talk) 20:44, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I have no way of knowing your state of mind short of your explicit revelation. A simple "I am unwilling to discuss this with you" on the talk page would suffice. Alternatively, you could simply choose to ignore the ping. I am not sure how sending Template:Talkback to other editors could be affecting you personally, but I apologize if it has. TPI81AF (talk) 20:55, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Probably just a cultural norm you're not familiar with on Wikipedia yet, but generally one notification about talk page discussions is plenty. For example, if someone has already commented once, you can probably assume they're either following the conversation by then, or have nothing more to say on the matter. The number of talk page notifications you've left on Oinkers42's talk page is indeed excessive. Sergecross73 msg me 21:08, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Sergecross73: In some of those discussions, Oinkers42 hasn't left a message. I was also trying to follow the steps in WP:DISCFAIL to the best of my ability. It instructs to leave two talkback templates a week apart. Since there are three or four discussions being withdrawn from, following the instructions exactly necessitated leaving a commensurate number of talkback templates. Once it is suspected that an editor is unwilling to discuss, where should I deviate from the steps outlined in the essay? TPI81AF (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
The only one I have not responded to you yet was the Donkey Kong discussion. For that one, I was trying to find the exact discussion that caused the consensus for us to stop doing the handheld/home console split. I took a break from that discussion for a bit to handle the other discussions as well as aspects of my personal life. In all other discussions, I have either responded (or in one case, you sent the talkback message quickly after the start of the discussion. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:27, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
The instructions I followed said to leave the talkback template and the talk page message simultaneously. In the other cases, I sent the talk page messages before I was made aware of the essay. If you plan to follow up on the Donkey Kong discussion, I will patiently await your response. When you can, please tell me if you plan on continuing any of our other discussions. It is unclear to me whether they have been withdrawn from and additional clarity would be very appreciated. TPI81AF (talk) 21:33, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
In my opinion, the way the templates are laid out were perfectly fine before these current edits. Something, something not broken, don't fix it after all. I also want to mention that one of the editors has a problem understanding WP:AGF in my opinion. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
According to SQS, that is an improper argument. TPI81AF (talk) 21:23, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Several people have disagreed with your bold restructuring of navboxes. That's refusing to get the point. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 21:39, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
If you have substantive concerns about specific changes, you are free to reply to the discussions on the relevant talk pages. TPI81AF (talk) 21:59, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Everyone you appear to be arguing with are experienced editors, that neither want or need your guidance on talk page etiquette. They already know. And I'm certain they'll respond to you if/when/as much as they desire when they're ready. Please worry less about them, and more about you. Sergecross73 msg me 22:04, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Plus nobody wants to be spread thin across that many talk pages, especially when the issues are common across the board TPI81AF.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for deeming me an “experienced editor”. (Oinkers42) (talk) 22:09, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
What should I be worrying about, specifically? I have read every relevant MOS page and WP essay I could find to ensure my following of the many rules and customs here. I want for nothing but to amicably resolve content disputes through discussion, but that cannot happen if one of the implicated editors refuses to discuss. I have since turned to WP:DISCFAIL and attempted to exactly carry out its instructions. If there are more learning materials that I should read, please send them to me so that I may learn from them. TPI81AF (talk) 22:31, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'm just saying, no one needs you dictating where or how much they respond. Add your stance to the debate. Answer or argue follow up comments about the debate itself. Then let the discussion play out. Some discussions take a while and it's best to edit other things in the meantime. Do that rather than hassling others on if/how they respond. Sergecross73 msg me 22:43, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I will try to keep this in mind. TPI81AF (talk) 23:01, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Proposed split of List of Pokémon

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have proposed a split, given that it's a featured list it could use some input. Put simply, I think that Pokémon as a fictional being could use their own article instead of just being sent to the list. The list can still exist, but possibly more pared-down. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:18, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

New Articles (August 10 to August 16)

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.23 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 19:30, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

August 10

August 11

August 12

August 13

August 14

August 15

August 16

--PresN 19:30, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

OutRun threw me off at first. It's a series article, video game article is Out Run. I've posted a move discussion since I don't believe we should be deciding disambiguation by coin flip. Whipmywillows (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Proposed Template:Pokémon spin-offs

edit
Latest comment: 7 hours ago10 comments5 people in discussion

Template:Pokémon spin-offs has enough content to warrant existing. The main argument against its existence presented here, is that its contents overlap with the existing Pokémon mega-template. There are already 9 templates for individual generations of Pokémon whose contents entirely overlap with the Pokémon template that would be deleted were this rule to be consistently applied. I also think the Spin-offs group in the main template should be removed to return it to a more manageable size, but the new template should exist regardless of whether its contents are entirely duplicated. TPI81AF (talk) 23:55, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I support you on this one, at least. The main video game template is an enormous navigational mess. Sergecross73 msg me 00:06, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I agree that the template need reworked, though I'm not sure I would start with making a spin-offs template. I think the best place to start would be to clean out the non-video game content from the video game template itself. Probably there should be a separate template for the individual Pokemon pages, rather than having them in the Video-games template.
Additionally, i have no idea why the TCG and Competitive sections are on there. Those are only vaguely related to the video games (besides the TCG-specific video games). That section should also probably move elsewhere 13akoors (talk) 00:14, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I feel one big problem with splitting up that template is reader understanding; a lot of stuff related to Pokemon is interwoven, so if you're trying to explain Mystery Dungeon you're almost immediately going to have to link to the Pokemon species list and so forth. That's what people were arguing about on the other talk page.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:36, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Looking into this template further, I think this might actually be a larger scale issue. Why is the Pokemon template not a top level template, like Template:History of video games? That way, you can have a separate template for the games only, the Pokemon only, and then put both of them inside the Pokemon main template?
I agree that Pokemon has a lot of interconnected things to it, but just because a person can look up other topics, doesn't mean we need we need to make the templates that way. If a person is explaining Mystery Dungeon, and need to link to a Pokemon, they can easily go through a the trouble to expand one drop-down to get to them, rather than having them immediately next to them, as the current generations do 13akoors (talk) 00:46, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Nested templates like that are a blight upon the land and an incomprehensible mess to parse as a reader. Just because you take a chunk of a template and make it collapsed doesn't make any of the readability issues go away. --PresN 02:37, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure how we could go about improving the template at all at that point. Unless we just argue that the Pokemon (creature) articles, music articles, etc should just be tossed entirely, at some point we'd need to separate things out, which necessitates collapsible sections and/or separate templates.
What alternative would you suggest to making the video games portion more readable, for example? 13akoors (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Wouldn't making the template nested simply allow individual sections of it to be included in pages without otherwise affecting any functionality? I didn't notice any difference between the History of video games and Pokémon templates until after looking at the source. TPI81AF (talk) 17:13, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Agreed. For all intents and purposes, the Pokemon template already is a nested template. It's just one that does it manually, rather than having separate sub-templates. But the idea is the same
I would probably advocate for putting this up as a WP:TfD. I would argue there either needs to be a separate template, or a separate section on this template, for the individual creatures. That would be a good start for cleanup. If someone wants to suggest alternative ideas, they can do so there.
If consensus is reached to split the template into separate sub-templates, then I'd recommend making the template be either all video games, or all games (which would mostly just add the TCG to that list). I think restricting out all the non-game content would make the list plenty more readable, and remove the need for a separate side-game template 13akoors (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I really think there are enough Pokémon spin-offs at this point that it should probably exist independently of whether they are included in a Pokémon video game template. TPI81AF (talk) 18:10, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

PS3 exclusives.

edit
Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments2 people in discussion

One piece pirate warriors 2 and also probably a ton are missing. Also puppeteer is on ps5 Zorogiri (talk) 04:09, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

One Piece: Pirate Warriors 2 is also on Vita, if you are wondering why it's not in the category. It's not a PS3-only "exclusive".
If you see an actual error, you can WP:BEBOLD and fix it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:26, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
I forgot about that Zorogiri (talk) 04:27, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Highlighting your WikiProject at WikiConference North America in September

edit
Latest comment: 1 day ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I'm collaborating with @Lucy Iwualato develop a presentation she will give at WikiConference North America, "Intro to WikiProjects for New Contributors."

We are looking to highlight WikiProjects that score highly on both having good tools in place to onboard new contributors and broad appeal (interest to a general audience + specialized knowledge and skills not needed to start participating). Your project was suggested as an excellent example during the recent Wikidata WikiProject Days.

Please let me know if you have any concerns about being included as one of our case studies. If there's anything in particular you'd like us to highlight about your project, that would also be great to hear from you. JMMaok (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Talk:Always-on DRM#Rewrite

edit
Latest comment: 3 hours ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The "Usage and criticism" section of the Always-on DRM article is in dire need of rewriting. If you'd like to share your thoughts and ideas, please reply in the aforelinked thread instead of here. Dabmasterars [RU/COM] (talk/contribs) 12:28, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Easier idea: Merge to Video game piracy#Anti-piracy measures since it's apparently only used in video games. A large amount of the article is unnecessary examplecruft. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:53, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Sure, though that also requires trimming and inserting only specific cases/examples. Dabmasterars [RU/COM] (talk/contribs) 21:35, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

2000s Japanese phone game ports in the infobox RFC

edit
Latest comment: 11 hours ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've asked about a month ago at template:infobox video game about how to/should we have the cellphone video game ports of Japanese games in the infobox. It can be read here. I'm just confused if these count as versions one can buy for the infobox as my understanding of these is that they are not like appstore purchases, but more like subscription services to play the game at the time. If anyone could weigh in on whether these should be included, it would help me on some articles I've worked on. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=1370391592"