Wikipedia:Game guide
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This proposal was rejected by the community. It has not gained consensus and seems unlikely to do so. Per Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines: "consensus support is not present...whether there is active discussion or not." |
- For our policy regarding this subject, please see What Wikipedia Is Not.
[edit] Archived text
Articles about games on Wikipedia can often be saturated with information that breaks the official policy of what Wikipedia is not. This proposed guideline will help set the standard for what can be considered information that explains how to play a game and not.
|
[edit] Reasoning behind this proposal
Many gaming related articles include a large amount of information that falls into one or more of the following
- Tutorials & walk-throughs
- Instruction manuals (especially worrying as these can lead to possible copyright violation)
- Play guides (such as details of weapons, maps, or detailed statistics on ingame items/units)
- Cheat codes
This information breaks the policy that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Most articles with this sort of extraneous information are seldom cleaned up for several reasons, and as a result are often listed AfD instead. This proposed guideline will help keep such information off Wikipedia by setting a consensus for what can be considered breaking policy, and thus, what information should not be included in such articles.
[edit] Problem with the current state of the policies in use
Many articles with the above problem tend to be long and contain information that is of little use in explaining the game and its notable mechanics to the average reader who does not already play said game. As a result, some editors often see all information explaining anything about a game as breaking the policy of WP:NOT. While this is both an exaggeration and oversimplification, the current vagueness of accepted policies and guidelines leaves many editors with no other criteria to judge an article on. In fact, some consider describing the gameplay and notable mechanics necessary to writing a decent article, much as a plot summary is needed to understand a work fiction. Examples of this include details of certain elements of a game that deal with mechanics that set the game apart from others (Die By the Sword's VSIM movement system, etc).
[edit] Points for Consideration
- Does the description of game play mechanics constitute a violation and to what extent?
- Does the wording of game play mechanics effect potential violation?
-
- "Counterattacks can be initiated by accurate actions."
- as opposed to
- "...certain attacks by the opponent will trigger a visual cue, a vibration of the controller, and a chime. Attacking at that point causes Link to dodge or parry then counter-attack from the rear." (from Wind Waker)
-
- Does the creation of detailed listings of in game effects or "in world" items and characters constitute a violation?
- What defines a notable mechanic? Or a notable component?
- What material in an article can be agreed on by all parties as clearly unsuitable?
