Talk:Wario Land: Shake It!/Archive 2
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Developer
It is said that the game is developed by Good-feel. However, Nintendo of Europe's site claims that Nintendo itself is the developer. --Grandy02 (talk) 12:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
E3
At E3 2008, they confirmed the game will be releasing a week earlier. So the American version will come out first.AlexanderLD (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- That's nice. We knew about "The Shake Dimension"'s title long before the NA title. There is no problem in the article being at this title, and no reason to move it to the NA title. - A Link to the Past (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
U.S. Release
I already brought this up, at E3 2008, Nintendo announced they would be releasing Wario Land: Shake It! one week earlier on September 22 instead of the 29th. Here is the source so please stop undoing my edit! http://www.nintendo.com/games/detail/CtPFuNHwPv6PGNLjbDPNAodeTtJ6uQp6 AlexanderLD (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Redirect
Someone needs to set up redirects for the various titles. I know at least the "Shake It!" variant doesn't redirect here. I'd do it, but I don't know how. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 02:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- For future reference, to make a redirect, go to the title you want to make into a redirect, type (for example) "#REDIRECT [[Wario Land: The Shake Dimension]]" If you redirect a title through merging (that is, if you merge one article's contents into another), you would put {{R from merge}} after that first line, if it's for an alternate name, you type {{R from alternate name}}. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Character name problem
In the Gameplay section, it states that the character's name is Merfle, while in the Plot section, it is referred to as a "Merelda subject". This is an obvious problem. Which one is correct? 82.32.90.49 (talk) 21:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
WAIT - me again. I've had a revelation - I don't think EITHER is correct. Most sources state the name as being Melful. Now here's where I think someone got Merfle from: a mistranslation. Correct me if I'm wrong but in Japanese, aren't the L and R sounds virtually interchangeable? If someone were to mistranslate the L as an R you'd end up with "Merful", or perhaps "Merfle". 82.32.90.49 (talk) 08:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Marketing
I'm not sure that the marketing for the game deserves an entire section, but at least the http://youtube.com/experiencewii bit deserves a mention I think because of how unusual it is (especially WHERE it is; I've personally never seen something like that done through a youtube channel page before). What do others think? Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 22:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Proposed Corrections
A number of tidbits in the article are inconsistent with what has actually appeared in the North American version of the game. It is likely that the PAL version will be identical to the North American version with the exceptions of additional languages and a different title screen graphic, so the following may need to be changed.
If the proposed changes for whatever reason do not apply to the PAL version, then several notes will need to be made in the article.
- "Yuretopia" is officially referred to as the Shake Dimension in-game.
- "Merfle" is used to describe the inhabitants of the Shake Dimension as well as address them by name, as demonstrated by Captain Syrup's dialog in the conversation in the first stage and during the ending cut-scene. While a Merfle is trapped in every stage, there are in fact many different Merfles all of whom seem to be called Merfle. A later feature in the game states that Merfle will inform you of Secret Maps, again introducing ambiguity as each stage's Merfle is different, yet refers to them all collectively as the singular name Merfle... A bit confusing, but blame that on Nintendo.
- The "Merelda subjects" mentioned in the article, therefore, would be referred to as Merfles.
- Wario never comes into contact with Queen Merelda until after she is rescued. The "beseeched" sentence in the article is incorrect, as well as a later statement about her sending out Wario to save the Shake Dimension.
- Is Captain Syrup's name really Maple? I'm not up on my Wairo Land lore.
- Bringing it up yet again, there's an inconsistency with the article title and the pictured box cover. The article title doesn't need to be changed, but if it isn't then the box art certainly does. --12.214.116.18 (talk) 04:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. I really feel it would make most sense to change the article title. Since July/August when it was first proposed, Wario Land: Shake It has undoubtably become the more common title for this game. A Google search for the European title today gives around 1 million hits, while the American title gives around 3 million. That's unarguably a significant bias towards the American title. All other major search engines give similar results, with the American title winning out by at least 2:1. As well, all major gaming sites are using the American title as well. There's really no need for this article to use what by this time has become the less common title for the game. Bngrybt (talk) 18:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- For Heaven's sake, will you drop it? You established both titles are popular titles, so how in the world is there any instability whatsoever? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- That was my first post in this discussion, I'm not sure why you're so hostile. I'm just saying that the most recognizable name should be the one used. For some reason it seems to be a hot topic with you in this article and I'm not sure why. I'm just using one of the methods suggested by Wikipedia:Naming conflict, the Google test, and it shows that by far, Wario Land: Shake It is the more recognizable name. Even within the article, every English review mentioned under reception used the Wario Land: Shake It title. There should be some sort of uniformity to avoid confusion, and using the most commonly used title is the most logical way to do this. I don't see how this would suddenly show an undue bias towards the American title. I'm not even American and I think it should be the one used just to make the article less confusing. Bngrybt (talk) 23:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- So your only reason is that "they're both very commonly used, one is just more so". So it's unstable because one is MORE popular? The only reason to change a title of a game is if the current title is so inappropriate for use that leaving it there harms the article, and both having very high Google hits is not an establishment of instability, no matter how you present it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see why this is so difficult. There are two English titles for the game. This has obviously caused some confusion as to which name should be used. An article should only have one title, and that should be the title used throughout the article to avoid confusion. Currently, the article's title doesn't match up with a great deal of the article content, so one or the other should be chosen. If you read Wikipedia:Naming conventions, the very first thing it says is "Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." Hence, the most common name should be used, which is obviously the American title. Bngrybt (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- "If an article name has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should remain." From the guideline you cite. Saying that of two highly used names for this game, one is more popular, is not a good reason to move. You have to establish instability, which you would know if you really understood that guideline. You have to establish that there is a good reason to move. That would be "current title is not bad", not "current title is not as good". - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- The title isn't stable though. Half of this discussion page seems to be about the title, and for some reason with this particular game it seems to be a hot topic, most likely because the less common title is the one used as the title of the article. As well, the article is inconsistent with itself in what title it uses. The article uses the PAL title, the box art shows the American title, then the article again uses the PAL title until the Reception section, where the American title is used again. Because of this, the title is obviously the source of some confusion, which would suggest to me anything but stability. Hence, to remove any confusion, "Use the most easily recognized name". Bngrybt (talk) 02:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- You're seriously citing that "a whole bunch of people oppose the current title"? That many disagree with this title's usage for insufficient reasons is not sufficient reasoning. And, just curious, why are you suggesting that the title, which predates both the box art and the Reception section, be changed? The Shake It! box art was used because no other quality box art was available, and the Reception section uses Shake It! because Shake It! was just released. That many people disagree with this title does not become a good reason if they don't have good reasons to move it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- The PAL title only predates the American one by a few days, and I hardly see why the date we discovered the name holds more weight over which title is now more common. By that same measure, the American game was released a few days before the European, but to me that's just getting petty. I never said the reasoning was because "a whole bunch of people oppose it". As of now, the disparities between the article, box art, and title are confusing and inconsistent. That's the only point I've been trying to make. In a case like this, the more recognized title should be the one used. Bngrybt (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- And if only that were the case on Wikipedia, huh? The Shake Dimension was the title used for about a month before Shake It! was announced. Wikipedia demands that a title be unstable at its location, and you've not established instability anywhere. Drop it, seriously. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- The PAL title only predates the American one by a few days, and I hardly see why the date we discovered the name holds more weight over which title is now more common. By that same measure, the American game was released a few days before the European, but to me that's just getting petty. I never said the reasoning was because "a whole bunch of people oppose it". As of now, the disparities between the article, box art, and title are confusing and inconsistent. That's the only point I've been trying to make. In a case like this, the more recognized title should be the one used. Bngrybt (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- You're seriously citing that "a whole bunch of people oppose the current title"? That many disagree with this title's usage for insufficient reasons is not sufficient reasoning. And, just curious, why are you suggesting that the title, which predates both the box art and the Reception section, be changed? The Shake It! box art was used because no other quality box art was available, and the Reception section uses Shake It! because Shake It! was just released. That many people disagree with this title does not become a good reason if they don't have good reasons to move it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- The title isn't stable though. Half of this discussion page seems to be about the title, and for some reason with this particular game it seems to be a hot topic, most likely because the less common title is the one used as the title of the article. As well, the article is inconsistent with itself in what title it uses. The article uses the PAL title, the box art shows the American title, then the article again uses the PAL title until the Reception section, where the American title is used again. Because of this, the title is obviously the source of some confusion, which would suggest to me anything but stability. Hence, to remove any confusion, "Use the most easily recognized name". Bngrybt (talk) 02:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- "If an article name has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should remain." From the guideline you cite. Saying that of two highly used names for this game, one is more popular, is not a good reason to move. You have to establish instability, which you would know if you really understood that guideline. You have to establish that there is a good reason to move. That would be "current title is not bad", not "current title is not as good". - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see why this is so difficult. There are two English titles for the game. This has obviously caused some confusion as to which name should be used. An article should only have one title, and that should be the title used throughout the article to avoid confusion. Currently, the article's title doesn't match up with a great deal of the article content, so one or the other should be chosen. If you read Wikipedia:Naming conventions, the very first thing it says is "Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." Hence, the most common name should be used, which is obviously the American title. Bngrybt (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- So your only reason is that "they're both very commonly used, one is just more so". So it's unstable because one is MORE popular? The only reason to change a title of a game is if the current title is so inappropriate for use that leaving it there harms the article, and both having very high Google hits is not an establishment of instability, no matter how you present it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- That was my first post in this discussion, I'm not sure why you're so hostile. I'm just saying that the most recognizable name should be the one used. For some reason it seems to be a hot topic with you in this article and I'm not sure why. I'm just using one of the methods suggested by Wikipedia:Naming conflict, the Google test, and it shows that by far, Wario Land: Shake It is the more recognizable name. Even within the article, every English review mentioned under reception used the Wario Land: Shake It title. There should be some sort of uniformity to avoid confusion, and using the most commonly used title is the most logical way to do this. I don't see how this would suddenly show an undue bias towards the American title. I'm not even American and I think it should be the one used just to make the article less confusing. Bngrybt (talk) 23:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- For Heaven's sake, will you drop it? You established both titles are popular titles, so how in the world is there any instability whatsoever? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. I really feel it would make most sense to change the article title. Since July/August when it was first proposed, Wario Land: Shake It has undoubtably become the more common title for this game. A Google search for the European title today gives around 1 million hits, while the American title gives around 3 million. That's unarguably a significant bias towards the American title. All other major search engines give similar results, with the American title winning out by at least 2:1. As well, all major gaming sites are using the American title as well. There's really no need for this article to use what by this time has become the less common title for the game. Bngrybt (talk) 18:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
- If I may interject for a moment. I took an objective opinion examining the name for this article. Two of the links to reviews refer to the title as Wario Land: Shake It! while the other (which isn't exactly a review) simply calls it Wario Land Shake. Also, in doing the Google Test recommended on Wikipedia:Naming_conflict, I found 2,320,000 hits for Wario Land: Shake It![1] and 1,320,000 hits for Wario Land: The Shake Dimension[2]; a difference of exactly 1 million (I know, weird isn't it). While I do agree that "The Shake Dimension" has been around longer, I think that "Shake It!" has proved itself to be the common name. I am open to counter arguments however.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 16:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- The point that you are overlooking is that the current title must be unstable. It's not about which one is better - because this title has been used for so long, there's no good reason to switch it - there's nothing wrong with the current title, so there's no reason to change it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Please tell me what you define as "unstable". The fact that there are a lot of people who seem to want it changed implies to me that the title is not entirely stable. Not to mention that the article itself links to many references referring to it as "Shake It!". Granted there are others referring to it as "The Shake Dimension" as well. That's why I said I'm open to counter arguments. But I'm looking at the facts in this case, not subjective opinion.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- An example would be "if we leave it here, that hurts the article". Establishing that of two very popular titles for the game, one is somewhat more so, is not hurting the article - leaving the article where it's at does not harm the article, so there's no good reason to change the title. And that people want to move it without explaining why the article needs to be moved is not evidence of stability. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- My reasoning is that the title of the article seems to contradict the facts contained within it. The reviews of the game, as well as the game's own website, linked to within the article, contradict with the title. Now I'm not say the only option is to change the title, I'm just saying that either the title needs to be changed, or there needs to be a stronger justification for keeping it the way it is within the article and not just on the talk page.
- Also, I think a perfect dictionary definition of unstable would be "inconstant" which this article is.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 17:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Funny how you never once propose "changing the text to match the article". Also, explain to me why I have to justify that it's stable. It's stable unless you can show a significant problem with leaving the article where it's at. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Question, what are you talking about? The article consistently uses The Shake Dimension. That review sites are primarily American is not evidence of instability. If it were, that would be an argument that not one video game released in North America and some PAL regions cannot ever use the PAL title. And just curious - did you expect the American web site to call it by its PAL name? - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, first off, I don't know what you mean by "changing the text to match the article". All I was saying is that there needs to be a little bit more consistency between the article and the links within it. For example: "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension received a score of 8.4 out of 10 from IGN" is a false statement. IGN did not give any rating to Wario Land: The Shake Dimension. This rating was given to Wario Land: Shake It!. Another inconstancy is that the article has a link to it's official site, but that site is for Shake It! not The Shake Dimension. The fact that The Shake Dimension is used consistently is what's making the article inconsistent.
- I'm not flat out saying you're wrong or that I am 100% right. What I'm saying is that it's possible your opinion on the matter isn't the only one that maters. And the only reason I'm asking you to justify it's stability is because that seems to be your only argument against a name change.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 17:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- That is NOT instability. Why don't you read what I say? At what point does "Shake It! is the more popular title amongst these two titles for this game" mean that the current title makes the article unstable? You need to establish that if we leave it at this title, it will harm the article. Your Google hits established that BOTH titles were popular. It's not a false statement to say that The Shake Dimension received a 9.0 out of 10. Articles that use NA titles don't switch the title to the PAL title when referring to reviews from PAL sources, and I doubt you've ever had issue with it until it became helpful for you to have an issue with it. Using a title consistently throughout the article is common practice, and it's not going to change just because it's not in favor of the NA title. There's a reason that an attempt to move JUST failed - there isn't sufficient reasoning behind it. YOU have to show instability, and I don't know why you keep listing trivial details like "well, of these two popular titles, this one's somewhat more popular!" If you had this evidence back when the article first started, there would be no issue of stability because it would have been just started. But it's been here for nearly five months, you need a little better reason than that. And will you stop telling me to prove stability? It's your obligation to establish that it needs to be moved - Wikipedia would be a horrible place if someone could just come and demand proof of stability out of nowhere. The thing with stability is that it's hard to prove because there's nothing to establish it besides observation, which is POV, and your arguments is supported with no evidence of instability. Would it hurt the article for the title to remain where it is? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- You seem to be putting words in my mouth (or on my keyboard as the case may be). I have never said it was the more popular name, I said it was the more common name. You may see this as semantics, but so is your quibble about stable/unstable/instability. As far as the false statement, IGN did not review Wario Land: The Shake Dimension. A more accurate phrasing of the statement may be: "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension (reviewed as Wario Land: Shake It!) received a score of 8.4 out of 10 from IGN".
- As far as the "would it hurt the article" argument is concerned. I am of the opinion that, if the article remains in its present state, the validity of the article is hurt. Then again, that's my opinion, just as it's your opinion that it is stable.
- One more thing I'd like to address. You said "...and I doubt you've ever had issue with it until it became helpful for you to have an issue with it... If you had this evidence back when the article first started, there would be no issue of stability because it would have been just started. But it's been here for nearly five months, you need a little better reason than that." I'd like to tell you that I just came across this article today. Also, yes the article may have been here for 5 months, buy the game was just released. Before its release date, Nintendo could have just as easily changed it for any of the localizations. Now that it's out is, I think, the perfect time to debate the name.
- I won't be back to continue this issue for several hours, but please, continue with your thoughts. I enjoy debating with you, just please don't take anything I say as a personal attack.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 18:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- *facepalm* It's the SAME GAME. Why don't you explain why this is magically a problem NOW? This is how it's done. We don't randomly switch between names based on silly semantics. I asked you a simple question - why is this is a problem now? All articles do it, but now that it's an article that uses the PAL title, it's suddenly a problem. If you can't establish instability, it's stable. There is no opinion in that. It's a fact. If all you have is Google hits, then it's not unstable. Google hits are anecdotal, and quite frankly, all you've ever stated was that of two popular names, one is more popular, which shows that both names are fine. If both names are fine, according to Google hits, then where is the article unstable? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Please tell me what you define as "unstable". The fact that there are a lot of people who seem to want it changed implies to me that the title is not entirely stable. Not to mention that the article itself links to many references referring to it as "Shake It!". Granted there are others referring to it as "The Shake Dimension" as well. That's why I said I'm open to counter arguments. But I'm looking at the facts in this case, not subjective opinion.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- The point that you are overlooking is that the current title must be unstable. It's not about which one is better - because this title has been used for so long, there's no good reason to switch it - there's nothing wrong with the current title, so there's no reason to change it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Might I bring this discussion to a screeching halt, call it a dead horse, and redirect attention to the other changes to the article that I've proposed? --12.214.116.18 (talk) 23:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Regarding those changes, I managed to find the PAL release box art. I've replaced the infobox picture and moved the NA box art further down the page. I also added the official UK site in addition to the US site. I think the article more accurately shows that there are two official names for the game then it did before. And A Link to the Past, I was never saying that the article title needed to be changed, I just meant that some part of the article needed to be changed. I hope you can agree that the changes I made were appropriate.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 06:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- As far as the other changes go, I haven't actually played the game yet, buy I have played many of the others, and I don't ever remember Captain Syrup's first name ever being stated.--Scorp Stanton (talk) 06:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Looks like user A Man In Black has thwarted your efforts and changed the article back to essentially being a "Shake It!" article with a "The Shake Dimension" title. If we're going to solve this little dispute, I think it's going to require some administrative intervention. --12.214.116.18 (talk) 21:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- I am an administrator. Don't make regional changes for the sake of making changes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 23:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- For the sake of making changes? That's called vandalism, and that's not what's going on here. There's an inconsistency between the article title and the subject of the article itself. One or the other needs to be changed, and there is ample discussion supporting that the article title stays as it is. What is your rationalle for keeping the box art mismatched? --12.214.116.18 (talk) 00:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- I am an administrator. Don't make regional changes for the sake of making changes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 23:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Looks like user A Man In Black has thwarted your efforts and changed the article back to essentially being a "Shake It!" article with a "The Shake Dimension" title. If we're going to solve this little dispute, I think it's going to require some administrative intervention. --12.214.116.18 (talk) 21:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Honestly the only way to solve all these naming conflicts would be to have two separate English Wikipedias (English and UK English). It makes no sense that there's only one English Wiki, with there being two completely different dialects, and in this case, different names for the same product. All the pointless fights over Gas/Petrol and such would vanish. Am I just crazy or has anyone else thought of this? --Comrade Pajitnov (talk) 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Are we going to have a Southern, Northern, Eastern, Western, and Midwestern Wikipedia too? - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Detailed interview with the developers
Nintendo of Europe's site offers a detailed interview with the developers. It reveals a lot of development details which could be referred to in the article. The text is a translation of the Japanese-language interview from the Nintendo Online Magazine.
--Grandy02 (talk) 17:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
RfC: Should NA or Pal title be used?
The current article features an inconsistency with boxart and title. (PAL title is used, but NA box art is displayed). Since this is the English Wiki, and traditionally the english title is used (with the Japanese title provided in the article lead), a conflict arises when the game has two different English titles based on region. Current talking points:
- NA ("Wario Land: Shake It!") version was released first (Sept. 22, 2008)
- Google searches on PAL title produce roughly 850K results, while Google hits the NA title approx 3.6 million times.
Since the NA title was both first in the English market and also more widely spread across the Internet, I think it should be the one used. But I'd appreciate some outside opinions to help reach a peacful conclusion. -- TRTX T / C 12:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- The first released would seem the most logical to me. Martin Hogbin (talk) 21:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- How many times do we have to keep discussing it? There was already consensus to use the original title, as a result of the fact that no one was able to establish that the current title is bad for the article. You have to show instability, which requires that leaving the title where it's at creates a problem, not that a different title is slightly better. We do not need an RfC over an issue that has been discussed several times and resulted in the same result. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- I have seen no consensus. Only utter and absolute deadlock. Which is why I've asked for outside opinion (even if I guess I could be considered "outside" since I'm not a regular editor of this article. -- TRTX T / C 15:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Note: Upon further research, there only appears to be one editor truly against the change...and that's A Link to the Past. Conversations suggesting a change have several editors agreeing, with the one steamrolling the discussion with a disagreement. Furthermore, there IS instability, as the BoxArt depicted does not match the article title. -- TRTX T / C 15:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- How is this even remotely true? Do you think that I created the four other accounts that opposed a move in the discussion - you know, that gigantic green box right on this talk page? And I find it funny that your only option provided is moving the title. Why didn't you propose changing the box art, which is far simpler than changing the title? - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:19, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- I have seen no consensus. Only utter and absolute deadlock. Which is why I've asked for outside opinion (even if I guess I could be considered "outside" since I'm not a regular editor of this article. -- TRTX T / C 15:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- How many times do we have to keep discussing it? There was already consensus to use the original title, as a result of the fact that no one was able to establish that the current title is bad for the article. You have to show instability, which requires that leaving the title where it's at creates a problem, not that a different title is slightly better. We do not need an RfC over an issue that has been discussed several times and resulted in the same result. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
It should be painfully obvious to all that only the Japanese title is valid. Everything else is a name come up with by people who did not contribute to the game whatsoever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 03:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Can't find it
I've been unable to find a copy of this game ANYWHERE in the US! Best Buy, Target, GameStop...nothing! Am I looking elsewhere wrong? They just say they don't have Wario Land: The Shake Dimension! 96.42.112.152 (talk) 19:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
- Trying asking for Wario Land: Shake It! Because thats the name of the game. Bryan.Wade (talk) 01:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- ...then why is this article entitled "The Shake Dimension" then? 64.83.224.71 (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Bryan's statement is misleading; both titles are real. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Because A Link to the Past is insanely pushy and demands that the article be named this. --VmKid (talk) 22:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- Uh, yeah. Apparently, when the title was originally this, it's pushy to RESIST people pushing for a title change. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- ...then why is this article entitled "The Shake Dimension" then? 64.83.224.71 (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Shake It! vs. Shake Dimension
This is the American wiki. Therefore this game should be listed under its American title. There are so many instances where things on this site are forced to be in English (namely anime/manga names and terms), so how has this been sliding for this long? It's just absolutely ridiculous. Buh6173 (talk) 16:12, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- There is no such thing as an American Wikipedia. This is the English Wikipedia. Explain to me what language the United Kingdom speaks. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- It's still primarily English over PAL. I can understand an argument to have "Shake Dimension" as the listed title, but actually implementing it like that is ridiculous. Buh6173 (talk) 05:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Stop using English like it's an American thing, it's not. Shake Dimension is equally legitimate to Shake It. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- It's still primarily English over PAL. I can understand an argument to have "Shake Dimension" as the listed title, but actually implementing it like that is ridiculous. Buh6173 (talk) 05:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Keep it at The Shake Dimension, the game has been released under that name in multiple English-speaking regions. AliceSKD (talk) 06:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
The issue I have with this article is the statement "As of December 2008, Wario Land: The Shake Dimension sold about 150,000 copies in the United States." That is a incorrect, ZERO copies of "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension" have been sold in the US, however 150,000 copies of Wario Land: Shake it! have. BUT, I fear that if I attempt to put the correct info, ALTTP (or whatever name he uses now) will revert it to the incorrect statement above.Oldschoolgod (talk) 23:46, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- They are the same game. We use one name to refer to it in a worldwide sense. How do we say "Such and such game sold so and so amount of copies worldwide"? By your argument, that line cannot possibly exist, and would require us to write it in a pointlessly convoluted and confusing fashion. The fact of the matter is that the article uses The Shake Dimension in every fashion. Changing it in such a way accomplishes nothing but making the use of the title inconsistent. If you have an issue with this standard way of displaying information, take it up with WT:VG, and if you succeed, we will have to modify hundreds of video game articles which use different titles. For all Japanese sales of a game, for example, we would be required to use the Japanese title. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 01:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Additionally, if we had the information for the French version of a game, and the French version had a different title, we would have to call it by the French name when referencing those sales. Seems like a giant hurdle to change something just because you prefer one name to another. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 01:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
The point is that the title as listed does not reflect the name of the game that sold 150,000 copies in the US. If someone reads that "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension" sold X copies and then clicks on the reference and sees NO mention of "The Shake Dimension," instead sees Wario Land: Shake It! could that not cause confusion? Regardless of the fact that YOU know that it's the same game, the vast majority of people do not, hence causing confusion. To minimize confusion, could we at least add "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension (as "Wario Land: Shake It!) sold 150,000 copies?" But, this is your article, and you'll do with it as you please, regardless of the confusion it could cause to the average citizen. Oldschoolgod (talk) 16:07, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Please do not ignore what I said. I repeat: would you also ask that sales from a country wherein the name of the game is different - say, a French name, as used in the above example - be utilized in the same way? Fact of the matter is that to use your proposal would be to act in a way that is not acted upon on this Wiki. We use one name to refer to it in a worldwide setting. Readers understand that The Shake Dimension is the same game because we already told them that. Should we also refer to any review of Wario Land: The Shake Dimension that is reviewing the American version as Shake It!? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:53, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I ignored what you said, since it is irrelevant to the discussion, since a French named version would mainly appear in France and one Canadian province. Simple fact, the majority of English speaking people who use Wikipedia hail from either the US or Canada, but since this article is your baby, the majority must be ignored to suit you. Now I remember why I quit editing Wikipedia years ago, arrogance. So guess I'll satisfy your ego and cease trying to make Wikipedia a better place. Also, you might wanna add a few "pip pip cheerios" and change the spelling of "color" to this shit article to compliment the Eurocentric nature of it.Oldschoolgod (talk) 23:54, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Apparently, a better place = what you think Wikipedia should be like. Quite frankly, your departure will do nothing but make Wikipedia markedly better, if you are going to yell and scream when the direction of a discussion is not how you want it to be. Instead of arguing for what you are actually arguing for, you are clearly arguing for the logic that in all scenarios, a title should be based on its North American title. That's simply not how Wikipedia works. Wario Land: The Shake Dimension was the first English title announced, and is the title utilized in the very beginning, which Wikipedia policy advises that we go with. At this point, switching the title serves only to satisfy American fans who want the title to be familiar to them, and serves to make unfamiliar readers confused with the name change. At this point, changing the title would be to disrupt the stability of the article. If you are this upset over an Internet argument about the name of a video game, then you clearly have problems interacting with people in a normal way, especially if you act this xenophobic. So please, actually take into account how you're coming off to others, and act like an adult. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 00:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Untitled
Note to editors: the title of the page has already been disputed. Please stop asking to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VmKid (talk • contribs) 21:44, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
title fixes reverted?
Why were my title fixes reverted? I was just changing the title to the one that was more common. I've never even heard of "the shake dimension", and neither did anybody at the store when I asked for it. Shouldn't the title reflect the one that is more commonly used? Or is there some wikipedia policy that says that the more used, better title shouldn't be used? Shouldn't we be trying the make the articles as good as possible? 50.54.215.70 (talk) 21:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry; I should have explained it better in my edit summary. The title is "The Shake Dimension" in Europe, so it's understandable that they would not know of it. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 21:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I am not sure I understand why the title is the European name instead of the North American name. It was released in NA first. Usually the titles are only switched when it is released somewhere other then NA first. What is the reasoning behind this? Blake (Talk·Edits) 16:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
A Link to the Past/New Age Retro Hippie doesn't understand policy much
- recognizability: does
- naturalness (readers most likely to look for): fails
- precision: does
- conciseness: fails
- consistency: fails
- interests of readers before editors: fails
- interests of general audience before special: fails
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (video games):
- no unofficial titles: does
- most commonly accepted English name first: fails
- consistent subtitles: does
- Google: "Wario Land: Shake It" -site:wikipedia.org: About 8,950,000 results
- First link, the official site:
- Wario Land: Shake It!
- www.wariolandshakeit.com/
- 2008 Nintendo. Wii is a trademark of Nintendo. Dolby, Pro Logic, and the double-D symbol are trademarks of Dolby Laboratories.
- Google: "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension" -site:wikipedia.org: About 5,700,000 results
- (has no official site, but lists above site under YouTube links.)
- [http://amazon.com/s/?field-keywords=%22Wario+Land:+Shake+It%22 Amazon.com: "Wario Land: Shake It"]: Showing 7 Results
- [http://amazon.com/s/?field-keywords=%22Wario+Land:+The+Shake+Dimension%22 Amazon.com: "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension"]: Your search ""Wario Land: The Shake Dimension"" did not match any products.
- [http://amazon.co.uk/s/?field-keywords=%22Wario+Land:+The+Shake+Dimension%22 Amazon.co.uk: "Wario Land: The Shake Dimension"]: Showing 3 Results
- [http://amazon.co.uk/s/?field-keywords=%22Wario+Land:+Shake+It%22 Amazon.co.uk: "Wario Land: Shake It"]: Showing 6 Results
- 71.56.23.123 (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Do you have anything to refute the fact that we are supposed to use the English title originally used unless there is a compelling reason to change? (prediction: no) I suggest that you read even half of the policies on Wikipedia before you attempt to "educate" someone on any of them. And quite frankly, three million more Google hits is the mirror opposite of a "compelling reason to change". And next time, don't use arrogance when you have nothing to be arrogant about. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 01:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Naming conventions (video games)#Games:"Use the most commonly accepted English name first, if one exists. This is usually the official title in the initial English release, but not always. Subtitles and pre-titles are allowed if deemed appropriate but are not necessary and pre-titles should be replaced once an official title has been announced."
- You have stated that policy does not back up changing it from the EU to NA name, but if this article was created now, what name would you create for it? What would be the most common name, which most people would be more familiar? What does policy point towards? I thought it was for the first English name. You have stated that the EU version was announced first, but the NA version was released first. I am not sure what the policy points towards there, but if you ignored everything, and re-created the article, it would likely be created at the NA name. I think that is reason enough that it should be moved. Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- At this point, I would call it "Shake It!". However, at this point, it is coming off as a pissing contest. To change a stable article's title like that, there needs to be a compelling reason to do so. The evidence provided demonstrates that both titles are acceptable, and are clearly well-known. Being known by even a few million more people is far away from a compelling reason to change a title that does not pose a problem. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 02:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- It just seems that if it doesn't matter either way, and there are many people coming here to complain about it, then maybe you should move it. You seem to be the only one wanting it to be kept at this title, and it seems like you are just trying to make a WP:POINT. I don't care either way, but I would rather there not be mass confusion by the readers, which is shown by the comments on this page. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- With all due respect, a small handful of editors vs. 23,135 people not demonstrating their confusion doesn't exactly scream "mass confusion", and the use of such a phrase is an explosive exaggeration. How many move discussions are necessary before we can decide to stick with the perfectly acceptable title used in the first place? Again, vocal minority =/= mass confusion. Immediately, readers are readily aware that The Shake Dimension is Shake It, so anyone who is confused didn't read the very first sentence in the article. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- It just seems that if it doesn't matter either way, and there are many people coming here to complain about it, then maybe you should move it. You seem to be the only one wanting it to be kept at this title, and it seems like you are just trying to make a WP:POINT. I don't care either way, but I would rather there not be mass confusion by the readers, which is shown by the comments on this page. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- At this point, I would call it "Shake It!". However, at this point, it is coming off as a pissing contest. To change a stable article's title like that, there needs to be a compelling reason to do so. The evidence provided demonstrates that both titles are acceptable, and are clearly well-known. Being known by even a few million more people is far away from a compelling reason to change a title that does not pose a problem. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 02:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Do you have anything to refute the fact that we are supposed to use the English title originally used unless there is a compelling reason to change? (prediction: no) I suggest that you read even half of the policies on Wikipedia before you attempt to "educate" someone on any of them. And quite frankly, three million more Google hits is the mirror opposite of a "compelling reason to change". And next time, don't use arrogance when you have nothing to be arrogant about. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 01:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)