Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Nintendo/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Sourcing problems

Howdy all, I'm trying to get Super Mario (series) up to GA, but I found several sections of the Gameplay section that need some sourcing. Can somebody come give me a hand with this? Thanks, Nathan2055^talk 22:29, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh jeez, that's certainly going to be an extremely arduous path! The article has an history of issues with its scope, about content disputes, etc. My best advice is to look in the articles about the games for sources about gameplay elements. :) Salvidrim! 22:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

For the record, I'ven been actively monitoring it ever since it was actually created (in the split between Super Mario (series) & Mario (franchise) a few months ago), but I've kept mostly out of the actual content editing of that particular article, despite being involved with the individual articles. I'm glad to see it is finally going to receive the much-needed attention it deserves. Salvidrim! 22:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

This is going to be harder than I thought! Once I get the other Wikitasks I'm working on done, I'll try to devote some more attention to this article. Mario (franchise) is also a mess, I should fix that one up too once I get this one to GA. This is going to be a challenge. --Nathan2055^talk 16:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

This is certainly an extremely daunting task, which'll make it an even remarkabler accomplishment once it's done! :) Salvidrim! 17:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Listing "Virtual Console" as a platform in infoboxes?

On video game articles such as Zelda II: The Adventure of Link or even a featured article like Ninja Gaiden, I noticed that the standard to use for the "Platform(s)" section of the infobox was to list "Virtual Console" as one of the platforms if that game was sold as a Virtual Console title. It's my assertion that this creates confusion and ambiguity in such articles.

To remedy this, my proposal is to change these articles to read in this format instead: "Wii (Virtual Console)" or "Nintendo 3DS (Virtual Console)" for Wii Virtual Console games and Nintendo 3DS Virtual Console games respectively.

My reasoning for this proposal is as follows:

• The term "Virtual Console", even as per the Wikipedia article itself, states that the term simply refers to a section of an online store, which would, by definition, preclude it as an actual "platform". The platform in which each Virtual Console game is available for would, in actuality, either be the Wii or Nintendo 3DS regardless of their method of distribution.
• The term "Virtual Console" alone is ambiguous. Since Virtual Console games can either be for the Wii or Nintendo 3DS, and such Virtual Console games developed for the former platform cannot necessarily be played on the latter and vice-versa, the current standard does not allow us to know which platform we are actually noting. In other words, since not all Virtual Console games can be interchangeably played on each platform, simply listing "Virtual Console" doesn't say all that needs to be said.
• Using the term "Virtual Console" in parentheses after the platform listing still notes that the game is not available in retail stores. Therefore, no current information would be lost in this modification.

Are we in agreement on this? If so, let's get these articles changed! --Brian Reading (talk) 18:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• I've been using 3DS Virtual Console and Wii Virtual Console respectively. This is to contrast with WiiWare, DSiWare, 3DS 3D Classics and such. Salvidrim! 19:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• I'll try my hand at an AWB run tommorow. Salvidrim! 19:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• Looks like you recognized this problem before I did! Thanks for trying to make the differentiation between these kinds of games, however wouldn't it still be more proper to use "Wii (Virtual Console)" and "Nintendo 3DS (Virtual Console)" rather than "Wii Virtual Console" and "3DS Virtual Console" because these latter terms appear to be neologisms. Since "Wii", "Nintendo 3DS", and "Virtual Console" as individual terms don't constitute new words, I still think it might be better to use the method I proposed above. What do you think? Brian Reading (talk) 19:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• I think overparenthesisation (another neologism?) is bad. The information conveyed is the same, but in a clearer format. ;) Salvidrim! 20:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• Eh, I disagree about the use of parentheses. Of course, my argument about not using neologisms is based around the Manual of Style. The only information about what not to do with parentheses there can be found here. It only mentions to "[a]void adjacent sets of brackets". Since these parentheses are not adjacent, it doesn't appear to go against the Manual of Style. Is there any reason in particular why you would believe that avoiding the use of parentheses trumps avoiding use of neologisms other than aesthetic purposes? Thanks! Brian Reading (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• Clarity to the readers. Parenthesises are a logical language construction, not a natural one; when talking, you don't "speak" parenthesises. Using 3DS Virtual Console is clear -- it is a virtual console on the 3DS. 3DS (Virtual Console) may lead to confusion ("Why are there parenthesises?"). While parenthesises may not be a bad thing, I see no compelling reason to complicate the language structure by using the exact same words, in the same order, but adding logic-based constructions. Salvidrim! 20:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, but you've written it yourself. Wikipedia's audience is primarily meant for reading, and not natural speech. After all, infoboxes in and of themselves are not exactly meant to be spoken. A reader need not question why there are parentheses if they simply understand what the purpose of a parenthesis in writing is used for. In this case, it is adding supplementary information. I don't think most people misunderstand this though as parentheses are common in English. Your argument is that it is "complicating the language structure", but my argument is that you are using terms that do not exist, which are specifically not okay as far as the MoS goes. I can't say that I can agree with your argument because it appears to hinge on simple aesthetics, not function. Brian Reading (talk) 21:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• And since function, as you've mentionned, is not different between both choices, why would the most aesthetically positive choice not be the preferable one? :) Salvidrim! 21:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• I think you misunderstand. I don't believe the functionality is the same between the two methods. I do believe your use of neologisms hinders the functionality of the article's purpose (to communicate information to readers), which is why we are specifically warned against using it in the Manual of Style. By the way, aesthetically speaking, I do believe my method is more pleasing. But hey, aesthetics are purely subjective! Brian Reading (talk) 21:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

* Aye, aesthetics are personal taste. But I believe that both are functionally the same (they give the exact same information), and that the use of parenthesises, while not incorrect, may unecessarily cause confusion in some readers, while confusion will not stem from a lack of parenthesises. I think we can both agree a wide majority of readers will correctly understand the infobox information whichever option is presented to them, I just think the version without parenthesises is the one least likely to induce any confusion in any reader. I will also add my personal belief that online sources use the parenthesis-less version almost exclusively when listing platforms Infobox-style, but I am at work and do not have the Internet freedom needed to conduct research to back up this claim. Salvidrim! 21:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

• I think we will need a few other voices around here before we can really come to a consensus on this issue. Until then, I will respectfully have to disagree as far as what is more confusing. 06:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• I heartily agree that we need more input. :) Salvidrim! 06:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• If you are using parenthesis, it should be the other way 'round. Virtual Console (3DS), not 3DS (Virtual Console). We are disambiguating between two Virtual Consoles. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:48, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:NIN Welcome Template

About we make ourselves one? We could use the parent project one ({{Vgproj welcome}}) as a base. :) Salvidrim! 03:23, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Something like this? (In the finished one we get rid of the <nowiki> tags)

Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}} and welcome! You are receiving this message because we noticed your excellent work on Nintendo-related articles. We need your help at the Nintendo Task Force! There is still much work to be done, so feel free to head over and help us enhance the quality of Nintendo related pages on Wikipedia!

Kinda took the idea from the default Nintendo barnstar. ^^' CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 23:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Yea, that could be an invite template; then a reworded one to welcome. :) Salvidrim! 01:57, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done Can be found at {{Nintendo welcome}} :) CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 00:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, looking awesome! I was thinking more of a welcome template for people who've just joined than an invite template, but another one can easily be made from this one. :) Salvidrim! 02:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Cool, I like the idea of an invite template! --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 17:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Mario characters Size Chart

That was a highly informative image and I have reason to believe it may be public domain. I'd like some folks more experienced with images to assist. I would really like to be able to use the image on-wiki as I believe it is very useful to readers.

According to TMK (a reliable source per WP:VG/S), the original image was from a Japanese Wii developers' book, at least at some point before 2006. The two-rows version was modified and enhanced by a DeviantArtist, Ruinc. Salvidrim! 01:50, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, as the uploader I also believed that it was informative. The source specified was from MarioWiki here, who in turn claimed that the image was from here, but the duplicate was never found thus leading the image to be deleted per NFCC. But this does seem very interesting! Hmmmm, after reading out DeviantArt's privacy policy it seems that DeviantArt submissions are indeed copyrighted, which further complicates things. As for in the public domain...I'm a complete newbie to copyright, but it does seem intriguing to note what the book actually is; as it may impact on the actual copyright status of the content of the book. That would also mean characters like Mario and Luigi have been released into the public domain if that is true...which also means that it is possible to find free images of Mario and Luigi. I'm still not sure. Anyway, that is an interesting find, thanks! CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 10:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Mario and Luigi being in the public domain is like saying the WMF is going to close Wikipedia because there are "too many articles". But I do think this deserves a better look by someone in the copyright field. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 16:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

On the subject of dA copyrights: by default, anything uploaded to dA is under a creative commons license, however authors can choose to not apply this license to their works or uploaded content. This image's license allows for it to be uploaded and distributed freely, so long as the author is credited, most likely because it contains characters copyrighted by Nintendo. If someone wants to upload it again, feel free to do so, just make sure to list the source as the dA page. If you still feel that it might not be a good idea, send an email or some other message to the author- this one is fairly active, so they should reply to you pretty quickly, so long as it doesn't look like spam. Second: for anything on dA, if it is available to purchase as a print and/or does not have a button/link to download it on the right side of the page, ALWAYS ask the author before using it. Kaitoyuuki (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Game Article Sources

I am planning on attempting to update, add to, expand, and do whatever I can for the articles on games that I have/have played. My current list includes:

• Custom Robo (N64)
• Poképark
• Quest for Camelot (video game)

any information, sources, etc. on these would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions or just would like to say hey, you can drop me a message here or on my talk page and I'll get back to you Kaitoyuuki (talk) 13:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC) Oh, also,if anyone else needs help finding sources for information about a game, put your list here, too, that way we can all help each other out. Kaitoyuuki (talk) 13:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

HALS Labs alignment

Hi. It says on the Nintendo development teams article that HAL Laboratory is a first party Nintendo developer, but Template:Nintendo developers says that HAL labs is second-party. I personally couldn't find any confirmation on the HAL website. Chevsapher (talk) 22:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Ping

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Yolofamicom22.E2.80.8E.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29. --Izno (talk) 01:14, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Mario Party 9 minigames

I had a look on the Super Mario Wiki, there are 82 minigames in Mario Party 9, divided into five categories: Free-for-All (44 minigames), 1-vs-Rivals (10 minigames), Bowser Jr. (10 minigames), Boss Battle (14 minigames), and Extra (4 minigames). I want this information to be included in the Mario Party 9 Wikipedia article, do you have any advice?

Message to User:Cyan Gardevoir, did you do that tip that I told you on your talk page?

Thanks, :) CURTAINTOAD! 07:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

This might be a bit late, but I'll answer it anyway - Adding that might be a bit difficult to do, because the official site states it has 80 (Quote: Discover 80 minigames with Mario™ and his Mushroom Kingdom friends). I'm a Super Mario Wiki editor and I think that Wikipedia is oftentimes more trustworthy than SMW ;) Cyan Gardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 05:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your message, ;) CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 05:39, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Just going to chime in and say that if the game itself makes it evident how many mini-games there are - ie, if there is a list of them - that can be used as a source. However, I would advise against saying anything more than how many mini-games there are in the game. No naming any specific ones unless a reliable source discusses that specific mini-game, no discussing how many mini-games are in certain categories. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 04:51, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for reply ;) CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 05:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Keep an eye on this one...

24.45.24.72 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is causing a lot of trouble and modifying many Nintendo articles to use fake game titles. If he continues this, I think it needs to be taken to ANI and a topic ban requested. To give an idea, he has been renaming Super Mario Sunshine to Super Mario Bros. 6 and and Super Mario All Stars/Super Mario World (apparently a little known bundle) and renaming it to Super Mario Bros. 16. He's made about a hundred edits like this which I have to weed through now and cleanup. Please keep an eye on him and go to ANI if it persists. Thanks, Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 17:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I've taken him to AIV twice. After a few blocks he'll tire and stop coming back, ANI is a bit of a heavy process for something so simple. If he keeps it up after the next (hopefully longer) block, he might be indef'ed anyhow. Salvidrim! 19:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Someone hit him with a one month. IPs aren't indef'd except in extreme cases, but if he continues it could qualify as long-term abuse and earn him a one year block and a report sent to his ISP. Either way, I ended up deleting about six junk pages due to his actions. What I really wonder is why he wants to spam these fake names... --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 22:34, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Help: Super Mario Curling (SNES, 1994)

This is either a widespread hoax reported across the Internet or a Europe-only 1994 SNES title. I can find strictly nothing in reliable source but numerous mentions in less reliable sources. The information seems consistent across the web which seems to lend some credibility to the game's existence but I just can't seem to find any proof for Wikipedia. :/ Salvidrim! 01:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Not sure :| CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 09:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

No, it's definitely a hoax. Cyan Gardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 20:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Mourning Nintendo Power

I just received the last issue ever, #285, and it is with a heavy heart that I reminisce about the years I have been able to use this extremely reliable and pertinent source (if a bit self-indulging at times) about everything Nintendo. We've lost a great, ancient and long-running source that helped our articles, and it is a sad day. Sorry for the off-topicness, but I think NP deserves it. Salvidrim! 03:51, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello!

Hi, I'm JackWilfred and I'm a 14 year old gamer from the UK. I'm a massive Nintendo fan and will impart the knowledge I do have. Will look forward to meeting you! JackWilfred (talk) 13:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Comment requested

Please see WT:VG#Just Dance 4 as it affects more than that article. --Izno (talk) 00:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Help With Nintendo Tech Support Forums

Hello, I recently created a Wikipedia page for Nintendo's Tech Support Forums, and it has been nominated for deletion. I am relatively new to Wikipedia, and thought that I could request your help and input in keeping the page from being deleted. Please view the page for Nintendo's Tech Support Forums to learn more, and please pass the word on to save the page! Thanks! ````

As a subnote, I have included your add and badge on my user page! Thanks! Carwile2 (talk) 17:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Adios

Just so everyone knows, I will be taking a temporary Wikibreak for at least 5-7 days to let off some steam and get myself reenergized. Some of the stress has got to me, so I think it's best if I should take a couple of days off. I also have final exams coming up as well. Till then, adios. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer review

Just so you know, there's a peer review going on at Super Mario (series), but no one commented in three weeks. Could anyone please comment on the peer review? I want to get the article up to GA, so I can make a Mario series topic. Darrman (talk) 06:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure where to help.

Hi, I would like to edit/write parts for game storyline, but I am not sure which games need help. I would like do these:

Legend of Zelda Series

Mario and Luigi Series

Paper Mario Series

Pokemon(main)

Pokemon Ranger Series

Pokemon Mystery Dungeon Series

TheUnknownNinjaNN2(Talk,Always willing to discuss this subject) 22:59, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Nintendo task force logo

You may be able to use the Nintendo logo to identify your task force. Please see the related conversation at WT:VG#Taskforce logos. czar · · 09:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

• Just updated it! :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 12:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Is it okay for that image to also be used on the {{Nintendo-stub}} template? Satellizer el Bridget ^ツ 09:02, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Wii Party U.jpg

File:Wii Party U.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

What? I see no FfD (or the picture version of AfD) on the page. Darrman (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

[1] at 05:54, 14 June 2013 , user:Satellizer removed the deletion nomination. Check the edit history, you'll see when things change. I assume, since Satellizer posted on this talk page before, that Satellizer was informed of deletion through this notice, but didn't reply to it, to indicate the change in status. -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 06:53, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

The original image was missing information on its copyright and licensing. I only added the missing information to the file page, and removed the speedy tag. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 08:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Boldly changing the color scheme of our userbox

Face it -- Purple, Cyan... it was horrible. I think it looks much better now. If there's disagreement I have no problem with reverting and discussing, but I doubt there will be much opposition, as I think it is a great improvement. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 03:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Download vs Nintendo eShop

So, in the Template:Infobox video game, for Wii U games, the field 'distribution' usually contains Wii U Optical Disc, as well as Download for titles released on the eShop. However, some games have Nintendo eShop listed instead. There should probably be some consistency applied across articles, as I'm unaware if there's a guideline that describes the exact use appropriate here. I'd personally lean towards using Nintendo eShop. Does anyone have anything to say about this? Thanks, DarkToonLink^Heyaah! 11:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC)