Category talk:Video Games

[edit] Housekeeping

we have lots of articles in the Video Game Category all for the same things but most of them seem a bit random and lack any kind of real article. {eg Crescent Hawks Inception and its sub-articles Crescent Hawks Inception/Hacking Guide, Crescent Hawks Inception/Strategy Guide 1 & Crescent Hawks Inception/Strategy Guide 2. I propose that each Video game gets proper article just like any other article and a section at the bottom called RESOURCES much like we do now but instead of a list of links and downloads we have a wikilink to an article containing all the downloads, strategy guides and other more OOC technical stuff (eg Crescent Hawks Inception (Resource)). This way each game would have a simple two pages rather than the multiple pages some have. --Dmon 17:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ideally, each should be one article with maybe a "for more, see other article". So yeah, I agree with you. Someone just needs to step up and take charge, if that is where their interest is. You might also be interested in reading this recent convo. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Right now I am on shift at work (five consecutive night shifts... oh the joy) but after I am finished I intend to polish up as many unit articles as I can. if after my next work cycle (so about two weeks) nobody has stepped up I will give it a crack. (EDIT) also by that point MekTek should of released the MW4 games for download hopefully so I believe that could generate a bit of extra traffic ;-)--Dmon 18:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Call me cynical, but I imagine we'll be waiting a bit longer than your backfilling for the the re-release of MWIV. (Though, I am sorta considering getting a new PC for just that reason...) Absolutely agree with you that we could see more traffic, and I'd rather have Editors who know what they're doing 'fix' the article(s) so that a clear framework is evident. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
The official line is still mid August as far as I know, for MW4M and the MechPaks at least. I am also wondering if we should have something on MekTek and their expansion packs as I believe they are to be intergrated into the re-release. --Dmon 19:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
No reason there shouldn't be, IMO. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 19:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Any ideas on how to handle the MekTek content? --Dmon 19:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Nah. Should be similar to the other articles, is all. It shouldn't be hit wit a fanon tag, either. Instead, maybe just mention that it is not considered official (per our Policy:Canon), unless it is?--Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
That is one of my current problems, I am not sure if it is official now. If it is it also drags up the question about the custom 'Mechs in the MechPaks, this will put them in a similar situation to things like the BattleTechnology 'Mechs (I must admit I would be happy to see one or two of the MT 'Mechs become canon).--Dmon
Then until we have proof otherwise, we should assume it is not official. The only thing we do know about the organization is that they are entitled to re-release MWIV. As for their 'Mechs being profiled here, I personally would not stop it (at this point). I /would/ consider them fanon, but would maybe agree that having the 'Mech name followed by "(MekTek)" or "(MekTeck creation)" would help them stand out. However, that may be a bridge for another time.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 22:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I have started changes as per this discussion... could an admin delete all the pages with Deletion Tags and could you also remove the redirect on MW4M so I can build its own page (I dont know how to find re-directs to delete 'em) --Dmon 14:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Housekeeping Stage Two

Returning to this subject... Now that we do not have any fanon on the site should some of the Video Games be moved to the Fanon wiki? Neveron, MechForce (Video Game), MechWar are all fan based, MegaMek and the MW4 expansions by MekTek Studios are also fan based but seem to have a lot of support from TPTB so arguaby might have enough pull to stay or at least be mentioned on the wiki some place else. --Dmon 13:15, 16 February 2012 (PST)

I think fan-made video games should have articles on them. This is different from fan-made content in the sense that the article are about the subject, rather than the subject themselves. Is there some reason we should not have these articles here? --Scaletail 16:24, 16 February 2012 (PST)
I favor we bring the MekTek arcticles back to the wiki, i think there is no reason.--Doneve 16:37, 16 February 2012 (PST)
I'm fine with articles about significant BT-themed projects, such video games. I'm unsupportive about a series of articles about 'Mechs from fan games; I'm fine with 'Mech articles from licensed games. I don't think fan-projects (such as histories, TROs, command articles, etc.) about alternate universes have any place here, and we do have the policy of allowing fan-generated meta-sources about licensed products, when they're significant enough. Scaletail hit the most important criteria on the head: an article is appropriate for such a significant amount of effort. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 04:53, 17 February 2012 (PST)