Talk:Spore (2008 video game)/Archive 19

Marketing...
I wanted to start a new section about Spore's marketing...because I think it's really quite bizarre and out of the ordinary for video game marketing...

like these posters http://media.nowpublic.net/images//11/1/1111349365884fb1692a2b464d5612c4.jpg

Anyways, I'm kind of new to Wikipedia, and it wont let me start a section!!! Whats the deal?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wabam (talk • contribs) 22:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The article is semiprotected due to IP abuse. This unfortunately also catches new accounts (i.e. younger than 4 days old and under 10 edits) as well.  If you have at least ten edits, all you'd have to do is wait until your account is four days old, and then you can add the section.  Alternatively, request unprotection here. -  Jéské   ( v^_^v  Kacheek! ) 23:34, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You'd probably need to illustrate what is so bizarre about it or notable. A random picture doesn't quite do it. If a reviewer or another news article is commenting on the marketing that is a good sign a section is needed.--Crossmr (talk) 02:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Lawsuit filed
Someone has apparently filed a class action lawsuit against EA in essence demanding the ability to monitor, control, and remove Securom which is essentially a rootkit. Securom has also caused many people to have driver issues, as well as restricting some programs from even functioning. Also, many people are considering Securom a blatant intrusion on their privacy. If this lawsuit is genuine (and a 30 page document of this wording and phrasing would seem difficult to make up on the spot) then this will be very interesting to watch in the upcomming months. ~Anon@rpi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.113.237.216 (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I know some people who have emailed them about it, and it is indeed genuine. Many reliable sites are also reporting it now. -- .: Alex  :.  15:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Stop it with the Australian release date
I bought a copy today (September 2nd) from an EB Games store in Australia, lol.. www.ebgames.com.au states the game is out now. --123.50.153.39 (talk) 10:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC) Just... stop it. The press release issued by EA 2 weeks ago is quite clear. JAF1970 (talk) 06:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Revert them, explain it to them: then if they wont listen and they keep on re-adding it, report them. There is no need to complain here about it, since a majority of IP editors don't check talk pages. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've made a request for semi-protect already. At least til the game is released worldwide on Sept 7. JAF1970 (talk) 06:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The US is not worldwide. It is the US, a subset of the world. Things happen at different times within the world, including the release of Spore in Australia on September 4th, 3 days before the US! In fact, by the time you take time differences into account, it is more like 3.5 days!Concretecold (talk) 00:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe it should be added. Its relevant and it is correct information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasgood1 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about it being correct, but it might be worth mentioning. It's not very often that something like that gets announced in a paper, and the level of promotion of Spore in Australia is unusually high. Still it's all speculation, nobody can call it correct, especially since EA says something different. Soldant (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not the one making the edits, but EA Australia have confirmed in multiple places that the Australia date is Sept 4th. EA has confirmed the Sept 4 date is still on for Oz. - Kotaku AU, [http://www.electronicarts.com.au/en-au/community/messageboards/game/spore/thread/168335/ The street date for Spore still stands at 4th Sept. There have been no changes to the date. - YSum, EA AsiaPac Community Manager]. Spik3balloon (talk) 13:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming that you do have a secondary source to back up your Sept 5th release date, considering that a) you are defending it so hard, and b) you do not actually reside in Australia, because almost every other secondary source disagrees with you. And considering that YSum is a primary source, this is verifiable, and there is no reason to dispute this date. Spik3balloon (talk) 13:59, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * JAF refuses to allow it in the article, because it's not from the source he agrees with. Those sources are more than enough, but I can bet JAF still isn't happy. He will come here and say something such as "not in the press release! It can't be put in the article". This isn't new behavior by him either, he's been edit warring about the Australia date for a while. Plus he's used uncivil edit summaries, and been rude to editors on the talk page. Let's not forget the times where he was talking to people that apparently worked on the game, then JAF would come here and say they hated the article. Which is irrelevant, because the game makers simply didn't understand how Wikipedia articles are set up. Anyway, he needs to settle down, instead of getting so worked up over a Wikipedia article. RobJ1981 (talk) 14:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Look at the date of the press release issued by Electronic Arts "Asia Pacific territories". Not only is it the most recent data, it's also the most valid. PS. I'm not the only person who is not allowing it. JAF1970 (talk) 15:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * JAF just proved my point: only the press release seems to be acceptable to him. Also, I see no one else constantly reverting it off the article. RobJ1981 (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The most recent, official information, yes, Rob. Others feel this way, too, like User:DMacks who semi-protected the article. JAF1970 (talk) 15:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * How about we make this fair? If you don't live in Australia, don't change the release date. Seriously, walk past any video games store here and you'll see windows full of EA produced Spore advertising material CLEARLY stating that the release date here (ie, Australia) is the 4th of September (as well as the seemingly endless supply of sources that back it up, thanks Spik3balloon). Just because one source did not explicitly say it is the 4th, doesn't discount it. What is it going to take? Shall I post a picture of me with my copy at 9am, AEST, on the 4th? In the meantime you're ruining the ability of Australian users to access information from WP that is relevant to them. Perhaps if it doesn't affect you, don't edit it. There are enough intelligent Aussies to fill in our information if you don't want to properly acknowledge us.Concretecold (talk) 23:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Look at the date of both the Kotaku confirmation and the post by YSum. They are both newer than the press release. Your press release is neither the most recent, nor the most official or valid (as EA in America does not handle the release dates for Australia). Also, by not having a secondary source to back up your claims, you are not complying with All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors. This article does not belong to you, and you will have to face this fact. Spik3balloon (talk) 00:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree, I usually go to WP to find fast information about release dates and yet its not here so I have to google it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasgood1 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I usually listen to the publisher. By the way, Spore has been shipped, and stores have instructions on when to release it: Sept 5 in Europe, and Sept 7 in NA/Asia Pacific. IF stores break the street date.... JAF1970 (talk) 01:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Playing by the rules of WP, we can request that information be added to a semi-protected site, and it will be done once we have some level of consensus. I hereby request that the Australian release date of September 4th, 2008, be added along with the references provided by myself, Spik3balloon, and others both here and in the previously undone edits. In the event that consensus cannot be reached, I will request removal of the protection. In particular, JAF1970 requested the protection "at least until the games are released, since anonymous IPs keep insisting on posting unverified Australian release dates, which have been recently contradicted by EA in their press release. There's also silly edits being made as well". Firstly, even by your own admission, JAF1970, the game will officially be release in Europe on the 5th, thus the protection (according to your rules and ignoring the other issue for the time being) should expire on the 5th, not the 7th as it does currently. Secondly, the Australian release dates are verifiable numerous times over, even if a particular person at EA did not explicitly state the date. As for anonymous IPs, I will gladly post the release date if this is all that concerns you, and I'm sure many other authorised users here would also be glad to do the same. Finally, "silly edits" is something subjective to you and may not be deemed silly to someone else and in the absence of examples of direct malicious vandalism should not be grounds for protection. The WP guidelines for protection explicitly state "In particular, it (semi-protection) should not be used to settle content disputes". The subjective nature of your dismissal of the references to the Australian release date (and the "silly edits") is not sufficient for you to achieve semi-protection on the page to settle a content dispute. Therefore, if consensus here cannot be obtained for the Australian release date to be added, I will be officially be requesting that the semi-protection be removed as it currently is contravening WP guidelines.Concretecold (talk) 01:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Um, no. "Asia Pacific". I don't see how in the world Australia has migrated to Europe. Lemme go check a map. Furthermore, EA's official press release is quite explicit. The semi-protection will be removed on September 7. You know, when the game's out. JAF1970 (talk) 01:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We haven't gone anywhere. Oh and the Europeans get the game on the 5th. You know, before the 7th.Concretecold (talk) 02:10, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

PS. Regarding Kotaku, they've been wrong quite frequently. Like, claiming Spore Origins on the iPhone was the FULL VERSION of Spore. (laugh) JAF1970 (talk) 01:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh. I'm just wondering, but when au.gamespot.com has it as the fourth, and several Australian Wikipedians have verified that stores in their area have the date. And JAF, do you seek to prove how little weight your comments hold? The only way to assume that the combination of multiple reliable sources and Australian Wikipedians' verification is to assume that these Wikipedians are lying, and that's a blatant violation of WP:AGF. And your comment of "Asia Pacific". If a game is stated as being released in Europe, that is NOT a statement that it's going to be released EVERYWHERE in Europe. If EA announced it was coming to Europe on September 7, but there were verifiable sources saying it's coming to Spain on the 3rd, these sources do not contradict each other. It's common sense. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * They also have Madden NFL 09 as an Xbox 1 game. You go with the primary source: Electronic Arts. I'm trying to figure out why you can't be patient and wait. Oh, and "Asia Pacific" means Japan, etc, and Oceania. Patrick Buechner's already told me Sept 5. (Buechner, the EA VP in charge of Maxis.) Like I said, stores already have Spore.JAF1970 (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Buechner does not control EA Australia's decisions on the release date. As a volunteer moderator on the EA AsiaPac site, I have been told numerous times that the retail date for Spore in Australia is Sept 4th (with the digital download release in Australia to follow on Sept 5th). Unless, of course, every single retail outlet in Australia is deliberately misleading the public, and the posters hanging outside EB Games that state '4th September' are completely wrong, and EA Australia has been releasing bogus promotional information. Spik3balloon (talk) 02:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Let me get specific: Buechner is the VP in charge of public relations. He's very aware of release dates. (laugh) He isn't in charge, but it's his job to know everything about Spore's distribution. Globally. So he'd know. JAF1970 (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If GameSpot can't be used because of a handful of mistakes you might find, may I ask for you to find a better source? Just want you to know that I'll also hold it up to "one mistake = unreliable", your exclusion criteria. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Easy. EA Investor site (investor.ea.com). The fact is, the OFFICIAL press release omitted any reference to any Sept 4 release date. JAF1970 (talk) 16:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

By the way, Concrete is posting irrelevent info about Australian stores selling Spore Creature Creature for $2 at Development of Spore. Completely and utterly irrelevent. I didn't post AMazon and Gamespot giving away free copies with Spore preorders because game deals are utterly irrelevent to the article. JAF1970 (talk) 02:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * By the way, if you read what I wrote, I said nothing about stores selling it. The method of distribution in Australia for SCC was with newspaper only, and was/is not on sale here. Hence not irrelevant as it displays a distribution method unique to Australia. Kudos to you on not posting about Amazon and Gamespot, but they are not the same thing.Concretecold (talk) 02:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What does it have to do with the Development of Spore? Absolutely nothing. It's completely, utterly irrelevent. I could state "Well, Gamestop and Amazon used a partnership with EA to expedite online distribution and encourage purchases of Spore" but that would be hogwash. It doesn't belong. JAF1970 (talk) 02:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Look, JAF1970, if you want to suggest a better way of incorporating that information in there I'm happy to listen. I put it there because the preceding sentence is about the distribution as part of the SimCityBox. Hence, I thought it sat well with the release/distribution section. Suggest a better way of incorporating this information rather than just deleting it and running off to the admins and threatening semi-protection. Seriously, I want to see it in there and if you have a good suggestion as to where it should go, please make it. I won't undo your last change, I'll give the option to incorporate it as you would like. Fair?Concretecold (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The SimCity Box was a revelation that there was a Spore Creature Creator _at all_. Had nothing to do with the method of distribution. I may remove that soon, too. JAF1970 (talk) 02:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This might be one of those situations where someone has taken the first step to a peaceful, mutual resolution...perhaps instead of fighting we can incorporate all the information in a mutually acceptable way? (This is the time for being reasonable) Concretecold (talk) 02:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, The SimCity Box was published and distributed by EA. That in itself validates it. JAF1970 (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

God, I can't wait til Spore is released so a majority of this can simply go away. JAF1970 (talk) 02:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Released on the 4th. There has been more then enough sources to support it. How many sources have you got just the one? Wasgood1 (talk) 02:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't bother try to convince JAF otherwise. He will only believe the official press release. People could post more reliable sources, and he would find some reason to say they aren't true. When the game is out, I can bet he will do this same stuff I bet. Obviously it wont be about the release date, but it will be about other things. RobJ1981 (talk) 03:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The thing is, the goal is not to convince JAF, but to achieve consensus. It appears that there are enough people here to support it. Including you RobJ? Concretecold (talk) 03:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The consensus appears to be against JAF, but adding the information to the article (just to have him revert it) is pointless. Edit warring doesn't solve anything. RobJ1981 (talk) 03:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Completely agreed, on every level. But the page is protected. The process means that an admin will have to put it there, and no one (other than an admin) will be able to revert it until unprotection. I think. Concretecold (talk) 03:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus yet, until I've gotten people to speak on my behalf. Again, there's no need to change anything til Sept 7. JAF1970 (talk) 03:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There is need to change. There's no need for you to delete content relating to Australia. If you don't live here, JAF1970, I suggest you stop changing it and find other ways to improve the content. Concretecold (talk) 06:14, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No, there isn't. What's the rush? JAF1970 (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

By the way, this falls under the heading of the insanity that occurred a year ago when everyone was giving March 3, 2008 the Spore release date because some resellers and people like Kotaku and IGN had 3/3/08 listed. If you can find official Electronic Arts or Maxis information on a third release date for a single country, feel free. JAF1970 (talk) 03:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

But they do have a point. Spore is being advertised quite prolifically here as the 4th of September, it would seem odd that such a blitz combined with confirmation of the game being shipped would result in an incorrect date. I don't find it similar to the 03/03/08 date because there was nothing to suggest Spore was finished and prepared to ship back then. This hardly counts as "insanity". In any case, it'll be settled on the 4th; if the game is released, then the article must be updated to reflect that.Soldant (talk) 04:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Spore is being advertised quite prolifically here as the 4th of September, Then get an official EA or Maxis press release stating so. Or wait til the 4th and say, "Hey, the stores have it out!" if they're on the shelves. I understand that these sites may be trumpeting a release date -- but they're not getting their info from the people who matter (just as Amazon and other sites with the 3/3/08 release.) Get the official notice, then it's official. JAF1970 (talk) 04:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to add here :http://www.kotaku.com.au/games/2008/08/spore_oz_release_date_moved_to_september_11.html Wasgood1 (talk) 04:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * But there's no link to any EA press release stating it. All it has is an IGN Australia link. Where is the official EA stuff? Like, on Spore.com, EA.com, etc? This is official, from EA itself: The wait is almost over! Electronic Arts Inc. (NASDAQ:ERTS) and Maxis today announced that Spore(TM), the most anticipated video game of the year from the creator of The Sims(TM), has gone gold and will be available for the Mac and PC at retailers September 5 in Europe and September 7 in North America and Asia Pacific. Spore(TM) Creatures for Nintendo DS(TM) and Spore(TM) Origins for mobile phones will also be available globally September 7. I emailed Amanda Taggart at ataggart@ea.com - I plan to just so see if it's real. But until there's an OFFICIAL press release,... JAF1970 (talk) 04:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So you have a good rebuttal for all of the Australian Wikipedians who are observing all of the stores advertising the September 4 date? You have one press release that states Asia Pacific, which *drum roll* is not a statement that "every single area in the Asia Pacific region will get this game". If it didn't come out in Iran, does that contradict the "released in Europe" statement? No, because to be released in Europe does NOT mean it has to be released everywhere in Europe. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * JAF1970, do you really think an entire country is trying to pull the wool over your eyes? We're not. As for requiring an official press release for something to be considered factual (barring crackpot or conspiracy theories), there was no press release saying the pyramids were completed. Or that the Sistine Chapel was completed. Or that Nathan Buckley was born on the 26th of July. There is information to back these things up, just as there is to back up the Australian release date. Concretecold (talk) 06:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Apparently in the Kotaku link, they claim that EA have confirmed 4th September for Australia. But I'll be a diplomat and side with JAF1970, if only because there's nothing here from EA that unquestionably, and officially states that it is the 4th. However it's looking pretty likely to be the release date. Once there's something that's unquestionably official though, the article needs to be updated. Soldant (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * YSum - EA Asia Pacific (and South Africa) Community and Promotions Manager, 25th August 2008. Spik3balloon (talk) 05:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If the 4th would be right. I would think the official australian Spore or EA Store sites would back on that information but now they both claim it will be released on 7th. Also I would rather believe official sources than second hand sources. --80.221.239.213 (talk) 07:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Australian EA Store does not state a release date. And as I said above, as a moderator on the EA AsiaPac site, the release dates that they have are not regularly updated, and are usually incorrect. Spik3balloon (talk) 08:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Right now I'm trying to figure out how something as small as a release date could be blown so far out of proportion. I think I will leave now, because it is now obvious after 2 separate occasions there will be no consensus reached, even when there is all evidence to the contrary. I used to believe that Wiki worked on a basis of verifiability - JAF is still yet to provide a secondary source to back up the press release, yet still continues with the argument. Spik3balloon (talk) 08:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe there is a way to work it in the article anyway. Something like: There are rumours of a release on the 4th September in Australia. Also, http://www.ebgames.com.au/PC/product.cfm?ID=12154 its changed to the 2nd. I am starting to not trust them.Wasgood1 (talk) 08:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Why don't we just wait until the relevant release dates come to pass, and include the verifiable information then? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news site. -- Longhair\talk 08:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Exactly. That's what Wikinews is for. JAF1970 (talk) 16:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yet another example of the release date being the 4th. The thing is, while some game sites may occasionally have differing dates, this is a major advertising campaign with News Limited. EA and News Limited teamed up to do this, EA gaining enormous distribution and coverage and NL shifting more papers due to the discounted Spore content. They have time and time again stated the date as the 4th. They wouldn't get this wrong. As far as official goes, this is about as big as it gets because it is EA in conjuction with one of the country's biggest media companies. concretecold 09:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Where's EA's official press release then? I don't trust any source save primary, and I'm waiting for EA PR to get back to me. JAF1970 (talk) 16:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Here's the solution: Wait til Sept 4. If it's released in Australia then, feel free to let us know you have your copy. JAF1970 (talk) 16:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Kotaku post (http://www.kotaku.com.au/games/2008/08/spore_oz_release_date_moved_to_september_11.html) has been updated with a press release. It states the Aus release date as Sept 4th. Hopefully this is enough to end this ridiculous situation.121.44.17.218 (talk) 21:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good news, but it just sits there by itself without a link or anything else. Does that still count? In any event, only 4 days to go until it's settled. Soldant (talk) 22:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

JAF1970, why don't you be useful and add content rather than trying to maintain the page in exactly the way you want it? You obviously know a lot about Spore, so make the rest of the page better. There's no need for you to continually delete the Australian information, especially as it doesn't affect you. Everyone else is trying to contribute, and you are trying to stop them. If we were all focussed on contribution rather than deletion the whole system would work much better. You are not winning friends by carrying on the way you are, which is a shame because I'd much rather discuss other aspects of Spore with you as you seem to be quite well informed. Everyone else (including myself several times) has offered a mutually acceptable solution that you shoot down. Please, the next time you write, think of some way we can incorporate the information that is acceptable to both. If we have to put a qualifier in front of it, then lets do that. But it can't just be the "wait until it comes out" solution, as that's what you want and by that stage it is too late to inform people about the upcoming release date. Please, rather than just arguing can you please suggest a middle ground? You have rejected our offers of incorporation, so the ball is now in your court to suggest a solution to end the argument that everyone can live with. I look forward with hope to your suggestion. concretecold 01:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Concretecold (talk • contribs)
 * I don't understand the rush. The problem is that EA's official press release did not list a third release date for a single country. Sept 4 is a few days from now. This is not a news site, this is an encyclopedia article. JAF1970 (talk) 03:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * And we have reliable sources for September 4, and no specific statement on Australia for your date. If there's one source for Australia and one for Asia Pacific, we do not not use the first source, because being released in Asia Pacific at one date does NOT mean that it's released throughout all of the region on that date. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Those sources < Electronic Arts source. Again, I don't understand the rush. JAF1970 (talk) 03:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It isn't a matter of "source versus source", it's a matter of "source and source". EA source does not, ever, contradict the sources provided, because it doesn't present a contradictory statement. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Stating a date for Asia Pacific does not contradict a separate Australian date, even if Australia is sometimes included in Asia Pacific for regional purposes. Everybody completely understands that this is not a news site. But we're not reporting news or presenting it as a news item. Shouldn't this at least be mentioned in some capacity? Soldant (talk) 05:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey it will be released next week so why don't we wait till then and remove the release dates from the article. Skele (talk) 06:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The release dates should never be removed, even after it is released. The Australian release date is not news, it is fact. People should be able to find out this fact by visiting WP. The "rush" to put this factual information is due to the fact that the release information is not as valuable to someone who wants to own Spore after the game has been released. It's like putting up a statement that there was a tornado last night, which is factual and everyone knows about it but it doesn't provide any benefit to the affected people. The warning needs to come before the fact. Just like the factual release dates. JAF, you haven't responded to any opportunities to work together. You are not being collaborative, you are being dictative. Please try to be a team player in the future. We can all learn from your knowledge, and your effort in the page is appreciated, but no one will thank you if you act so stubborn and stand-offish. We're all on the same team here, and we have the same goal. Please, try to act collaboratively. concretecold 07:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It is fact? It's Sept 4 already and you have a copy? EA has not announced a Sept 4 release date for Australia. In fact, maybe Sept 4 is the ship date (which is not the release date.) JAF1970 (talk) 14:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Just a reminder: $$ship date \neq release date$$.JAF1970 (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See also:
 * —from WP:VG/DATE. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Admin here...there has been some discussion on my talk-page about this content. First, please do not continue it there: "consensus" doesn't mean "one admin", and there is no reason to hide the discussion from wider audience. Second, I'll again say what I said there, and hope it sinks in:
 * WP:CITE from WP:RS is critical. If there is conflicting info from different reliable sources, state each along with who said it. As a tertiary source, WP policy is to report what is reported and leave it to the reader to decide how credible the reported-report is, not to second-guess or choose among different reliable sources ourselves (sin-of-omission or WP:OR). "Verifiability not truth." More importantly, I'm only involved here to kill the edit-war: page protection doesn't establish what is right or endorse any particular content, it merely forces everyone to talk on the talk page to resolve the dispute rationally. DMacks (talk) 06:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So if there is a disagreement among reliable sources, it is not appropriate for wikipedia editors to pick one as being "more reliable" or "deciding" facts based on contradictory sources: report who said what and leave it at that. Removal of cited info because it doesn't match one editor's view of the world perspective is not appropriate. Repeatedly removing cited info will get you blocked from editing by WP:3RR and WP:OWN. JAF, I am re-adding the info because there is apparent consensus among almost everyone except you that it should be there, and it is reliably cited. DMacks (talk) 19:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In response to concern of an uninvolved party, I have undone the edit to the disputed content I made after protection. If there is consensus that it should be included or that any other content edits should be made, please discuss below. DMacks (talk) 20:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Full protection is absurd. It's just one person demanding everyone listen to what he says, and refusing to acknowledge a significant consensus, the fact that his source does not contradict any sources provided for the release date of 9/4, and the fact that we have provided several reliable sources establishing a release date of the fourth. The fact that JAF refuses to explain why "released in Asia Pacific on the 5th" means "released in every single place that exists in Asia Pacific" shows me that full protection for ONE user edit warring against everyone else is totally unnecessary and arbitrary. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Watch. This. Space. Irrefutable evidence will be provided within the next 24 hours. Have fun until then! concretecold 03:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Concretecold (talk • contribs)

Australian retailers GAME and EB Games are selling the game as we speak. (EB to pre-order customers, GAME as general release) Picture of a customer holding the game, purchased from GAME (Source: OCAU) Wide release expected to be moved forward to tomorrow (2nd Sept) in Australia. Spik3balloon (talk) 05:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Correction: They are selling as the stock arrives (with couriers currently sending stock from Queensland to other stores around the country) Brisbane stores are selling (source: OCAU above, EA thread. Wide release date push of 2nd Sept still stands. Spik3balloon (talk) 05:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Further sources: Facepunch Studios, Whirlpool. This leaves an interesting question. With the official Australian release date still on Thursday 4th, what does the Wiki release date become? Spik3balloon (talk) 08:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I also got my copy today. I don't know why it was set as the 1st or 2nd, but it should probably be mentioned. Soldant (talk) 04:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I got my copy too! Snagged me the galactic edition. --TheSeer (TalkˑContribs) 07:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Just to maybe help advance the subject (even though I could understand that some already got the game anyways), I've got an official release date in Denmark, for the 4th of September.. It might be in Danish, but the frame on the right of the page is clear enough. 4th of September. I guess EA can be considered a reliable source? Oh, and "Udgivelsesdato" litterally means "release date". Hope that helps. 83.151.154.41 (talk) 09:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, Spore.com talks about celebrating launch of the game being Wednesday - with is the 3rd.. I spoke to EA rep, and made sure these were the correct release dates:


 * Australia: September 4, 2008
 * Europe: September 5, 2008
 * Japan: September 5, 2008
 * US: September 7, 2008

You also have to mention in the article that the street date was broken on September 1, but not in the infobox.

Keep in mind, I don't do things the internet way - I'm a journalist. I get the info before posting, especially when the date hasn't come up yet. (ie. the former release date on 3/3/08, the "Wii version", etc. JAF1970 (talk) 18:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well JAF, as it's definitely out now, how about adding that release date? 202.139.11.11 (talk) 01:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't own the article - anyone could have done it. But I updated the article. Also, it's no longer a "future game". Wow, I can't believe that futuregame template is finally gone. JAF1970 (talk) 03:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * "Keep in mind, I don't do things the internet way - I'm a journalist." Just a little FYI, journalists NEVER report the official story. I read this whole talk subsection and you did nothing but obstruct progress made on the article, and condescendingly so I might add. You are a Wiki editor who is supposed to work with others, not shut out differing opinions. I applaud the others who behaved like adults.F33bs (talk) 03:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Mm... he's a journalist on the internet! Just like that guy was a Professor or somesuch right? unsubstantiated claims on the internet makes it true! All this argument really proved is that JAS is an obstinant idiot. 203.110.136.172 (talk) 03:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow...who the hell cares what specific date the game came out on in each different region? I can see MAYBE if someone wanted to find out when it will be released (but in this case, all the senseless arguing has ruined any confidence anyone might have had by coming to this article seeking that info), but once the game is released, the actual release date will be completely irrelevant to the article; a month from now, it would be just as informative to say that the game was released in September 2008 (or even just 2008!); the specific date is not notable. Unbelievable, the size of this talk page over such an insignificant point... 162.136.192.1 (talk) 21:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I am amazed at the stubbornness from one person who purposedly delayed information considered important to at least an entire country, against several people with good sources.

"This is an encyclopedia, not a news site" - Then this page could have been made entirely after the release. If I desire to know when said game will be lauched, I can google and easily find it. But then again, I can do the same to every single content WP has to offer, since it comes from other sources.

Using the "my friend who works at EA and knows it all" excuse to further push his point of view as the only viable source, also, it was clear that both sources did not directly oppose each other, when that in itself is, as said before, "running afoul of WP:NPOV", since he concluded that Asia Pacific also included Australia, when it had been confirmed that that is not always the case. Even with it being said so many times, he simply ignored it and continued to maintain his closed point of view.

Ignoring all and every request for mutual agreement, I do not believe this person, regarding already seen atitude, is fit to be an editor, until such things are corrected.

Such edit warring, and consequent discussion, while being easily avoidable, were pushed forward without any regard at all to the main objective of said article, which was, and still is, to inform viewers.

After pushing his will around, when the sources he so strongly opposed were proved to, in fact, be correct, not a single acknoledgment of his part, of his role, to this whole incident (which was started by him not wanting to recognise other sources which were not directly opposed with his official one).

Also, after summing it up, it is clear that the admin(s) did not manage to cleanly solve this whole mess, and that, due to that "put them closed up in a cage and hope for the best" atitude is, to say the least, lacking in (positive) results.

I am but a WP viewer, not an editor, and I feel my view of WP changing due to this particular incident, not for the better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.242.189.62 (talk) 18:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Completely agree...now that it's released, someone should change the paragraph just to read September 2008 (it's locked right now). Seems there are people who agree with me...and reading the article, it's just really cluttered with all thos release dates, none of which are notable. Like the previous person said, if you want a release date, you can find it elsewhere; this article is about the game itself. 162.136.192.1 (talk) 21:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)