Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 4

Recent infobox changes
Without any sort of discussion the infobox was recently changed. Personally I liked the previous version, but what does everyone else think? I was contemplating reverting this, but thought getting some discussion on this would be best. K1Bond007 05:06, May 21, 2005 (UTC)


 * Revert. I also prefer the previous version and I think the copy/paste code in the infobox's discussion should also be considered for reversion, since its current state leaves room for the mistake of putting the info. on the wrong side of the pipe. – Quoth 14:58, 21 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Rv, the previous version was just fine, although by some reason it left the rating field even if empty. wS 01:33, 22 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Revert. It looked better before with the colors in one column. --Poiuyt Man talk  18:18, 22 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I've somewhat-reverted it. The Table of Content colors are still there, but it is now colored differently in the left column. --Poiuyt Man talk  23:01, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Infobox gridlines
I've noticed that the infobox looks different in Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox (other than the color changes made recently). Specifically, the borders between cells don't show up in IE. I've taken screenshots:

Internet Explorer Mozilla Firefox

Which appearance is intended to be the correct one? IMO, I think the lines look better, as they separate the contents. The coding needs to be altered to make the appearance consistent in both browsers. --Poiuyt Man talk  18:37, 22 May 2005 (UTC)


 * It was built in Firefox. I knew about this problem for Internet Explorer (there were actually a few other problems that I or Mrwojo fixed), but I could never solve this one. K1Bond007 18:44, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

It seems I've found a way to fix it, but there's probably a more elegant solution. I've removed border="1" from the table, instead specifying border: 1px solid #bbbbbb in the style tag of the table and for each cell. See how it looks here: Template:Infobox VG/Fix --Poiuyt Man talk  22:22, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone have any objection to replacing Template:Infobox VG with Template:Infobox CVG/Fix? Appearance-wise, the two are identical in Mozilla Firefox. In Internet Explorer, the second adds the gridlines that are meant to be there. --Poiuyt Man talk  22:32, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
 * No objection here. Looks good and nice work. After making the change though, you should have that sub-page deleted. K1Bond007 23:53, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've made the changes to the actual infobox. I changed the border color though so it matches the Table of Content colors exactly. --Poiuyt Man talk  23:04, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Infobox value plural(s)
Speaking of the infobox, how about changing Developer(s) --> Developer, Publisher(s) --> Publisher, Mode(s) --> Modes, Rating(s) --> Ratings, and Platform(s) --> Platforms (the normal cases)? This makes the infobox look a lot less cluttered. Fredrik | talk 00:00, 23 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Personally, I've never minded the "(s)" and I think it provides a much higher degree of flexibility in the infobox. For instance; many games have different publishers for each country they are released in, and some have only one playing mode and platform. I feel that how it is currently, makes for a more precise infobox. – Quoth 01:43, 23 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Problem with that is sometimes there isn't just one developer or publisher, or mode (or sometimes just 1), etc etc etc. If theres enough support for a change though, I'll do it. K1Bond007 03:05, May 23, 2005 (UTC)


 * I'd have to agree with Fredrik, because technically, a game can belong to more than one genre, and can have more than one release date as well (in different countries). Fredrik's changes describe the most likely values in each field, which looks less cluttered indeed. I don't think it would affect flexibility, since "Developer: Konami, Nintendo" doesn't sound worse than "Developer(s): Konami, Nintendo". They aren't full sentences, so not using plurals doesn't affect readability. --Poiuyt Man talk  22:17, 23 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm pushing precision and exactness, not readability. By all means, they're both easily understood but grammatically one is more correct than the other. The question is; is it worth sacrificing grammar for what little you gain in aesthetics? Unfortunetly these days the answer is often yes, but that's just a personal gripe of mine. If people would like the plurals excluded, I'll live with that :) – Quoth 02:41, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Ludography
Is there any consensus on what to call the list of games made by a particular person/company? Authors have bibliographies; do game developers have gameographies? This word seems well-established according to google, but the less common "ludography" seems to be more accurate, etymologically speaking. I vote for using the latter: it's accurate, and won't cause pronunciation difficulties. Any comments? -- jet 57  (u∴t) 10:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC) 22:09, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. You 22:17, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Is ludography even a word or is it just a coined term? For dev pages, I've always done (probably copied from someone else) "Game developed by ____." I really have no preference on this, although I am afraid that if we go with ludography that no one will know what it means. As it is theres only 2000 returns for the word on Google. K1Bond007 23:59, May 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * I too have been using the "Games developed by ____" section heading for game company articles and I think it's more instantly understandable than using ludography and less awkward looking than using gameography, and as K1Bond007 pointed out; ludography returns a very minor hit count from Google. Also, two  out of the four   online dictionaries I tried return positive hits on the word ludography, both of which have either just copied the text from the Wikipedia ludography article or provide a link to it. I feel it should not be used in any form of template until it is properly standardised and in relatively widespread use across the gameing industry. – Quoth 01:28, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Handheld confusion
There seems to be a great deal of confusion over where handhelds belong in the 6th & 7th gen. The GB micro is 6th, despite being unreleased, whilst the PSP & DS are 7th and are on the market. This makes no sense to me. IMHO the 7th gen starts when the first 7th gen console is released, therefore the PSP, DS & Gizmondo are all 6th gen.

The Game boy advance has been on the market for years now. As the Micro adds no new hardware, it's just a cosmetic change. There's no need to put it in a separate category from the Game Boy Advance, any more than there is to put the GBA SP in a different category. Kertrats 12:52, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Its not really about when a system is released.
 * The Game Boy Micro is nothing more than a redesign of the Game Boy Advance SP. Its the same thing so it belongs in the same gen as GBA and GBA SP. Its very debatable which gen the DS is apart of, but PSP is normally considered 7th. There is no indicator as to when the 7th generation began or will begin when it comes to handhelds. For consoles its easy to say because there's only 3 and they all come out at about the same time. Handhelds have major redesigns, updates, offspring, numerous manufacturers etc. I think how we have things, see Sixth generation era and Seventh generation era, is fine. At some point it may become necessary to remove handhelds from these "generation" articles because their history is difficult to manage as noted here and on the talk pages of those generations. K1Bond007 16:59, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Category consistency
I've been cleaning up a few inconsistencies in Category:Computer and video games recently and there's one that's been bugging me for a while. The categories for characters, magazines, music, retailers, and websites do not follow the Computer and video game... thing present in the other categories and articles. Do you think that renaming them to Category:Computer and video game characters, Category:Computer and video game magazines, Category:Computer and video game music, Category:Computer and video game retailers, and Category:Computer and video game websites would be more appropriate and worth it? I notice Mrwojo noted this on Category talk:Video game characters but I thought I would mention it here since more people will notice it here. Also the categories should alphabatized according to the content, not just Computer and video games... or Video game... but that is a minimal task. Should we set them up for renaming? Any thoughts? --TheDotGamer Talk 16:09, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * If you list on CFD for rename I'd support. K1Bond007 17:50, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * They are now listed if anybody else is interested in voicing their opinion. --TheDotGamer Talk 20:21, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Joining CVG Project
I'm a gamer, and wikipedia user, and would want to know if i could join this project. So far, i've only made one game-related article, but i've greatly contributed to some others. Also want to know where i could get more specific info on this project - like when the weekly meetings are for editing an article. Thanks, Elitejeff123 22:23, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * There are no requirements. Just goto the project page and add your name. There aren't any meetings either. This is just a project to give editors that occasionally edit on game articles direction and focus (for lack of a better description - see the mission statement). Also look into participating with Gaming Collaboration of the week. K1Bond007 22:29, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, K1Bond007 Elitejeff123 23:39, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Welcome, and feel free to join in on the GCOTW. My first approved submission is this week, so I thought I'd pimp it out a bit. Kertrats 02:04, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hot Shots Golf
I did a bit of NPOV'ing and clarifying to clean up the article a bit, but if someone else could look it over, that'd be great.

How do you want cleanup handled?
I just added Edenia to your cleanup list, and I added a {context} tag as well. Is that how you all would like things to be done? Thanks for your work, BTW. JesseW 07:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's fine. Thunderbrand 21:01, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Game-screenshot template?
I was going through, and found it a bit of a pain in the ass to put up with all the random movie screenshots etc. It'd be nice if we could put them into their own sub-category, using something like Template:game-screenshot, with the same notice, different category. Thoughts? Slike2 04:16, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * You mean this Category:Screenshots of computer and video games? There already is a Template:Game-screenshot, already covered on the project page too. K1Bond007 05:13, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Obviously I don't mean that, though I really should have checked for its existance first. Thank you. Slike2 17:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)