Editing Category talk:Video Games
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision
Your text
Line 1:
Line 1: ==Housekeeping== ==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. --[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] 17:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC) + 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 [[Cresent Hawks Inception/Resources]]). This way each game would have a simple two pages rather than the multiple pages some have. --[[User:Dmon|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 [[Talk:MechWarrior I/Strategy Guide|recent convo]]. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:31, 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 [[Talk:MechWarrior I/Strategy Guide|recent convo]]. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC) Line 11:
Line 11: :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).--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] :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).--[[User:Dmon|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.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC) ::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.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 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) --[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] 14:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC) − − ==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. --[[User:Dmon|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? --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 16:24, 16 February 2012 (PST) − ::I favor we bring the MekTek arcticles back to the wiki, i think there is no reason.--[[User:Doneve|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. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 04:53, 17 February 2012 (PST)
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Housekeeping== | ==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 [[ | + | 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 [[Cresent Hawks Inception/Resources]]). This way each game would have a simple two pages rather than the multiple pages some have. --[[User:Dmon|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 [[Talk:MechWarrior I/Strategy Guide|recent convo]]. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:31, 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 [[Talk:MechWarrior I/Strategy Guide|recent convo]]. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
: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).--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] | :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).--[[User:Dmon|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.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | ::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.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||