Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:13, 20 February 2008

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department) Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks: Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks view watch edit history shell vg talk alerts purge AfDs Tetr.io (5 participants) Benedikt Johannes Hofer (2 participants) Untitled Minecraft spiritual successor (20 participants) RealFlight (1 participant) Gameplay of Dragon Quest (7 participants) Rainbow Computing (2 participants) Nebulae (video game) (2 participants) Star Wars Republic Commando (series) (1 participant) Clare Siobhan (1 participant) Double Fine Comics (1 participant; relisted) Westballz (2 participants; relisted) List of Pokémon volumes (3 participants; relisted) Merge discussions Console game (discussion) Atari Interactive (discussion) Nintendo DS Lite (discussion) Pokémon Essentials (discussion) Input lag (discussion) Neo Geo Pocket (discussion) Minecraft – Volume Beta (discussion) Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates Bejeweled (video game) (nom) Chris Redfield (nom) List of generation II Pokémon (nom) Kim Kitsuragi (nom) Good article nominations River Raid (nom) Dendy (start) Dark Urge (start) Jeanette Voerman (start) Deathloop (start) Ridley (Metroid) (start) Blast Wind (start) Project Zero 2: Wii Edition (start) Barry Burton (start) Sea of Stars (start) Pokémon Stadium (nom) Otogirisō (start) Schim (nom) Bit Pilot (start) Tom Clancy's The Division 2 (start) Gardevoir (start) Cybermania '94 (start) Berzerk (video game) (start) Frostpunk (start) Shiny Pokémon (nom) Cry of Fear (nom) Moida Mansion (start) Aperture Desk Job (nom) A Space for the Unbound (start) The Sims: Livin' Large (start) DYK nominations Sun Haven Reviews and reassessments The Legend of Dragoon (rev) Appy Awards Anarchy Online (nom) Deus Ex (video game) (nom) List of major Super Smash Bros. Ultimate tournaments Articles that need... assessment (2) (0) reassessment (0) cleanup (4) infoboxes (8) cover art (249) screenshots (9,014) photos (72) translation from japan (187) creation merging

Please note that this Talk page is for discussion of changes to the WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008 article. Off-topic discussions, including (but not limited to) your thoughts of what any aspect of the game should contain (e.g., roster, arenas, weapons, etc.) are not appropriate for Misplaced Pages and will be REMOVED. If you wish to make a change to the article, cite it with a source. ONLY the following sources are acceptable: interviews with game developers, interviews with wrestlers, distinguishable screenshot(s)/video(s) and/or articles from established companies/websites/official wrestlers' websites (eg. IGN, GameDaily, GameSpot, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, G4, MTV and websites associated with published print magazines). Thank you for your help.

Archives

Archive 1 (April-June 2007) Archive 2 (July 2007) Archive 3 (July-August 2007) Archive 4(August-September 3 2007) Archive 5 (September 3 - September 23 2007) Archive 6 (September 23 2007 - November 17 2007) Archive 7 (December 2007-January 2008)

Roster - list or prose?

The following is a closed discussion of the Listing or prosing. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No Result, Although there is a majority of approval of listing, there is still many comments of opposition. There is no real consensus reached here.--TrUCo31 21:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright, time to throw this down again since Rob keeps insisting on keeping it prose, and is now on the verge of an edit war. By my count, it was 6-1 for a roster list back in December. Let's decide this ONCE AND FOR ALL!

This is the list we are proposing

• List - to have consistency with the other titles, it should be this way. ArcAngel (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• List - Misplaced Pages is to present articles neatly, and when a roster is listed in prose, that is messy and the way it reads is very confusing. In every paragraph there is mention that one or more superstars are not included in the DS version, now with the list yoou can note what brand each wrestler is in the game, you can tell whether they are on all the systems or if they are exceptions.TrUCo31 21:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Prose. Neater and there is no requirement wrestling games have to be a list. Just because they have been that way for a long time, doesn't mean things can't change. In my view, people are just refusing to accept change here. If you want to see your perfect list, go to a video game site. RobJ1981 (talk) 14:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
• List - I don't care either way since I got the game, but judging by the, ah, overall intelligence and patience level of most Misplaced Pages users, I should think a list would be better, compared to trying to decipher who's in the roster from a block of text. There are a few good points about this actually being an encyclopedia and as such, with there being no lists in an actual encyclopedia, but I think information should be more easily accessible. Some users have shown extremely stupid behaviour concerning this whole ordeal however. I'm not gonna drop any names, but sometimes you need to look above your own opinions, if you know what I mean. So list it is, my good men. --Kaizer13 (talk) 17:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I would like to point out that WP:CON states "Misplaced Pages decision making is not based on formal vote counting ('Misplaced Pages is not a majoritarian democracy'). This means that polling alone is not considered a means of decision-making, and it is certainly not a binding vote, and you do not need to abide by polls per se."

I would also like to poise the question, "why is a full roster of characters necessary?" An abridge listing of some of the more notable wrestler and newly added wrestlers would probably convey the same idea. Yes, some people may want to know every wrestler in the game, but that is not really the purpose of an encyclopedic article. Per WP:GAMEGUIDE and WP:DIRECTORY, detailed and excessive information regarding plot and gameplay info is not meant to be on Misplaced Pages. There are plenty of other games that do not include such lists and are Featured status; see WP:VG/FA for examples. (Guyinblack25 23:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC))

People assume that a full roster is needed, because that's how it's always been done. Guyinblack has a point, a full roster does lean towards guide content. A new prose should be written, highlighting just some of the roster. Perhaps a link in the external links for a full roster, so people can see the whole roster if they want to. RobJ1981 (talk) 20:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• List - Don't forget all of the people in the archive who have asked for it to be a list as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:WWE_SmackDown_vs._Raw_2008/Archive_6. This behavior is childish. Angrymansr (talk) 14:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Though there may be plenty of people here that feel a full roster is what's best the article, the consensus on Misplaced Pages and the parent WikiProject of this article trump that. The VG Project generally frowns upon long/large lists of playable characters and normally favors prose.

Regardless, vote counting does not equal a consensus. Most people that wanted a list format in the archive did not cite real reasons as to why the article should contain it. Lists within articles, though can be informative to players of the game, do not provide much, encyclopedic-wise, to the layman. (Guyinblack25 15:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

If Misplaced Pages and VG Project frowns on this and it is NOT the community consensus, then why is every video game with multiple playable characters in this genre except for the ones these 2 are messing with, using lists? Please point me to some articles where multiple playable characters are listed in prose instead of a list (that bullet and Rob haven't altered). I searched for many games with multiple playable characters and every single one of them are in list format, not to mention 99% of the WWE_video_games that were lists until these two users have gone back and re-written them into prose: Tekken_1, Tekken_2, Tekken_3, Street_Fighter_II, Street_Fighter_III, Twisted_Metal, Twisted_Metal_2, Super_Smash_Bros._(series), Tony_Hawk's_Pro_Skater, Mortal_Kombat, Mortal_Kombat_II, Mortal_Kombat_III, Rumble_Roses, WCW_video_games

As far as Misplaced Pages:VG/FA, most of those games do not have multiple selectable characters, so I don't see how that applies here. The only reason I can see a need for prose is in games where characters contribute to the storyline or have an in-game backstory that can contribute to the article such as in RPG's. Fighting games or games with rosters do not generally fit into that category. Unless we want to create a short blurb for every character in this game like here: Characters_of_Final_Fantasy_VIII. I don't see a point in writing a roster in prose just for the sake of writing it in prose. There is nothing of value to say about the roster in a game, which is why we use lists for these situations. If it added any value to the article at all, I wouldn't care. What do readers have to gain from reading a roster in prose except a headache from trying to figure out who is in it? Angrymansr (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Off the top of my mind, Victorious Boxers: Ippo's Road to Glory. During the initial assessments of it, Krator commented to me a couple times about removing the roster table and switching it out to prose. I'll have to do a bit more thinking for other examples.

I'd like to point out that the majority of the games you cited as examples are either Start or Stub class. The only one higher than start is the Smash Bros. series article, which honestly, I would not pass GA with the roster it currently has. Does that make them bad examples? Not really, but if you're comparing them to FA's and discounting the Featured VG articles I'd like to point out that maybe there is not a sports type game of Featured quality because it has not tried to emulate previous FA's.

The purpose of Misplaced Pages is to produce encyclopedic articles of high quality. Including a complete roster of playable characters does not add much more than stating some notable characters/wrestlers and the addition/subtractions of other notable characters/wrestlers to the game in a concise paragraph of prose.

Regardless of all that;

• Per WP:GAMEGUIDE - "While Misplaced Pages has descriptions of people, places, and things, a Misplaced Pages article should not read like a how-to style manual of instructions, advice (legal, medical, or otherwise) or suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes."
• Per WP:NOT#DIR - "Misplaced Pages is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed."

A full roster of playable characters falls under these definitions of what Misplaced Pages is not intended for. (Guyinblack25 18:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

There is not one bullet in WP:NOT#DIR or WP:GAMEGUIDE that strictly forbids roster lists.

The sentence you cited for WP:NOT#DIR does not apply here. It would apply to all radio stations currently on the FM Dial in the US, not whose likeness is included in a specific game. If that sentence alone deems this list against policy, then this wouldn't have been a featured article. To be very clear, this is a directory, and this is not.

To say this list resembles a game guide simply for listing who is in the game is stretching it. That is information you would expect to find in an in encyclopedia article about a video game, though I wouldn't expect to find an article about this video game in any encyclopedia except this one. Angrymansr (talk) 20:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Would you mind changing this article in which you are a major contributor to prose? Thanks! This clearly meets WP:NOT#DIR - "Misplaced Pages is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed." Seems a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. Angrymansr (talk) 20:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

(un-indent) While you are correct in that WP:NOT does not explicitly state roster lists should be excluded, the policy is meant to give a general outline of what not to include. It listed "radio stations" as an example. Listing every single excluded example is not the point of the policy, nor is it the duty of Misplaced Pages to anticipate every possible breach of guideline.

I don't see how adding such a list would be really improve the overall quality of the article. A full roster or list of characters is something I would expect to find in a print strategy guide/walkthrough or an online FAQ. Because of that, I believe this to fall under WP:NOT#DIR or WP:GAMEGUIDE.

That said, I would like to ask again, "why is a full roster of characters necessary?" Including a small amount of information on the roster would convey the idea that the game included real life and prominent wrestler stars. We had a similar problem with Kingdom Hearts (series)#Voice cast and the related game articles. We had to trim down the long list of voice actors into prose while still conveying the idea that the games had an all-star voice cast.

In regard to your last statement. This seems like an attempt to discredit my earlier comments by discrediting my previous work. The page fits Misplaced Pages's definition of a stand alone list per WP:LIST. If you have a problem with List of Castlevania titles, I suggest you take it up on the appropriate channels like its talk page or FLC, and not on this talk page. (Guyinblack25 21:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

I already answered your question. "That is information you would expect to find in an in encyclopedia article about a video game." Besides, who would the authority be in deciding who should be included and who should not? It's more thorough, and avoids conflict just including everyone. There are not so many people on the game roster that it detracts from the quality of the article. And if you want to talk about consistency of video game articles, I haven't come across one yet that selectively includes characters. Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel here? Angrymansr (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

So by your logic of "more thorough and avoids conflict", weapons lists, arena lists and so on... should be in the article as well? All of which fall under game guide content. Just because full rosters was what used to be in all articles, doesn't mean it should remain that way forever. This isn't "reinventing the wheel" as you state, this is making the article not violate policies and guidelines. We simply can't avoid conflict by violating policies, just because a select few are against change. An external link for a site that lists the full roster should be the solution here. Misplaced Pages isn't the place for everything, and that's a big reason why this site has policies and guidelines. If nothing was in place, every article would be flooded with clutter, trivial and just plain useless information. RobJ1981 (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no policy that anyone has shown me that the list violates. Plain and simple. Angrymansr (talk) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You have been presented with policy, however the only argument you've presented back is that it does not explicitly states "no rosters in video game articles." The policies are meant to be interpreted and applied across a variety of situations. (Guyinblack25 00:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC))
additional grammatical edit: (Guyinblack25 00:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

You claimed it to be a directory (which this isn't even close to), and a game guide. If by listing the characters who appear in a game is game guide material then pretty much all of the Featured Articles you cited are in violation. I'm fairly certain the spirit of that policy pertains to walkthroughs, faq's and cheats. Why do I feel like I am repeating myself? Angrymansr (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I cited WP:NOT#DIR to simply point out that not every detail of the game needs to be included.

With regard to the FAs, the various FAs I cited explained information about the characters in a concise manner using prose and citations/references. The were reviewed at WP:FAC as being of high quality and complying with the policies and guidelines of Misplaced Pages. So I unfortunately fail to understand what you mean by "If by listing the characters who appear in a game is game guide material then pretty much all of the Featured Articles you cited are in violation." (Guyinblack25 01:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

With regard to "That is information you would expect to find in an in encyclopedia article about a video game." I've also already stated that I, and I believe others as well, have a different opinion about that. We do not believe a full roster for this type of game is necessary or encyclopedic.

Who is we? 3 people? Give me a break. Angrymansr (talk) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as deciding who should be included, use your best judgement. That's what's been done in other articles.

Regarding consistency; Victorious Boxers: Ippo's Road to Glory is an article that does not list every playable character in the game. Kingdom Hearts II selectively includes Final Fantasy and Disney characters because including every single one cluttered the article. The same thing with the voice actors. Enough was mentioned to convey the idea without going into unnecessary details.

I agree with RobJ about the external link. That is what they are for, to "provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." (Guyinblack25 22:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

While I agree that the roster is sort of redundant to include in the article, because like many users said, Wiki is not a Game Guide, in this case the roster should be listed because their are many platform differences. Mayby for the previous SvR's they should be removed but for this one it should remain like this because of the platform differences, and the best way to present this information is in a formal/neat way, and a prose is not the answer. A list and/or table are made to present multiple information in a formal/neat organized way.TrUCo31 22:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Roster differences can be mentioned, but they don't need to be listed in complete detail to show the games are different. A sentence such as "each console has exclusive characters" or something similar should be all that's needed. Why do we need to show that "this console has these people, but this console doesn't", when a sentence (or sentences) can make it simplier and neater overall? If people want to see which people are in each version, they can go to the external link. There is a platform differences section, add some sentences there. There is no need for a table (or list) just to show every roster difference. RobJ1981 (talk) 22:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I do agree on that. Then we should just get rid of the roster section entierly, and just mentioned that what you said in a section and that's it. But as I see by this poll, we might have to list it. Unless we all agree to just get rid of it entirely and just add that one or two sentences.TrUCo31 22:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:CON, "Misplaced Pages decision making is not based on formal vote counting ('Misplaced Pages is not a majoritarian democracy'). This means that polling alone is not considered a means of decision-making, and it is certainly not a binding vote, and you do not need to abide by polls per se." (Guyinblack25 22:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

This guy and his policies. Do I need to debunk this one too? Angrymansr (talk) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

While I appreciate the claim of ownership, I must be honest and say that they are Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. (Guyinblack25 23:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

Yeah, let's keep trying to shoehorn them in whether they apply or not. I can cite all kinds of policy and gloss over the facts too, but that would be a waste of everyone's time. The real problem here is the disruptive editing. Two people who decided to hijack an article, at the ire of every other editor who has over and over again cried foul. Since we like guidelines and policies so much! Disruptive editing and Tendetious editing. If this wasn't going on, this article could actually move forward. Angrymansr (talk) 00:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, if you feel we fall under that category, the I suggest you go to WP:RFC or WP:RFM. You can also go to the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games since this being a video game article, falls under their umbrella. Their talk page can be found here.

Now, in regard to the problem you state. It seems to me that addressing the issue with the roster list will solve the edit warring. (Guyinblack25 01:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

Ok this is getting out of hand, if you continue to edit war like this, an admin may be notified and you may be warned and/or blocked. So as I see this issue we should just get rid of the roster section to avoid sounding like a game guide, and we should just mention that with each system comes a different set of superstars/or many superstars are not available on (blah blah) etc.--TrUCo31 01:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

By removing the entire deal, you sort of defeat the entire purpose of this article, or at least parts of it. Nothing else is stated in the article that cannot be found out by checking out the thing in question for yourself, which in my estimation is the biggest problem on Misplaced Pages - you remove all the parts (trivia, unsourced stuff and yes, rosters) that actually benefit a reader that has the object in question. I'd prefer we reach a consensus rather than removal. --Kaizer13 (talk) 01:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I think there may be a misunderstanding. We don't want to completely remove the roster, information about the characters of the game is necessary for the article to be comprehensive. What we hope to accomplish is to integrate it into prose to comply with the guidelines Misplaced Pages and the VG Project. (Guyinblack25 02:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC))

• List - it's the best way to present this information. --Maestro25 (talk) 20:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• List - it's easier to understand and it has always been this way because it is BETTER. The guy who said something like "We just don't want to change it because we don't like change" or whatever. What is the point of changing it anyway? Lists are easier then stupid ass prose. And it looks like more people want a list so why are people still changing it to prose, just leave it you tools. Welshy —Preceding comment was added at 07:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class video game articles
• Low-importance video game articles
• Video game articles requesting screenshots
• WikiProject Video games articles