Template talk:Future game

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Template:Future game page.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Banner

Do we really need a big fat ad-banner-like box for this? Can editors not simply communicate this information using writing? Or at least let's reduce this to a simple one-line text message. —Michael Z. 2005-07-29 04:13 Z

Well, I think the banner helps editors doing maintanance work, and it also helps readers by quickly and clearly informing about the nature of the tagged article. It is also in line with the general {{future product}} and {{future}} templates. I personally don't think the banner is excessively big, but of course tastes vary. --The Merciful 13:04, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Well, I do think it's excessively big. I shrank it a bit. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 18:41, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] To do

  • add an optional parameter function for the expected year: this will add the game automatically to Category:{{{1}}} computer and video games. √
  • change {{future game}} to {{future game|}}. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 12:27, 2005 August 9 (UTC)
    • Theres no reason to do this. You're just going to have to do it later anyway when the game is actually released. Additionally, for some games it's unclear when they might be released such as Duke Nukem Forever or games that come out later in a year and may be pushed back to the beginning ofthe next (example being Resident Evil 4). It's better to do this manually. K1Bond007 21:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Minor Alteration

I doubt anyone will protest this, but in the interest of documentation, I thought I'd disclose here; I made a slight alteration to the wording of that first phrase in order to make the sentence grammatical:

I'm not sure how this one's gone un-noticed for so long. I picked it up whilst skimming The Godfather (video game).

Let me know if anyone has any objections. Rob Church Talk | Desk 05:24, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New version

{{future game par}} takes a parameter for the sortkey for the category Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:06, 2005 August 29 (UTC)

This template now takes a parameter for the sortkey. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
The DEFAULTSORT variable now renders the parameter unnecessary. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.


Template:Future game → Template:Future video game — The template as it exists now is for video games only; however, other future games are notable as often as future CVGs and it would be good to have a generic template for them. To achieve this, the existing template would need to be moved and all references to it changed. Percy Snoodle 11:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
  1. Support I Think it is more apropiate to use this template space for a generic furture game template that takes a |input about games type, eg. computer game, console game, role-playing game, boardgame and another pipe for exspected release date. -Angelbo Talk / Contribs 11:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support move and leave a more generic template in its wake. Nifboy 21:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. Support to correct scope. –Pomte 01:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:

Future games as in what? A new version of Monopoly or something? hbdragon88 02:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Not a new version of monopoly, but notable upcoming board games would be one example of the sort of thing that might benefit from a generic "future game" template. Percy Snoodle 08:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

This is transcluded on a large number of articles, so if the intent is really to make a different template at this title, you'll need to get someone's bot to run through them and fix the links first. Dekimasuよ! 15:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes - that's why I've done this through requested moves instead of just moving the template by hand. Percy Snoodle 15:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I see that you noted it in the request. To the best of my knowledge, though, none of the RM regulars use bots. You might want to leave a message at Wikipedia:Bot requests. Dekimasuよ! 03:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Will do, thanks. Percy Snoodle 09:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

As suggested above, what if I edit this template to accept a parameter that specifies the type of game? If you put {{Future game|board}}, then it will say "...unreleased board game." The icon would be changed to reflect that as well. –Pomte 07:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Given that it would still need a bot to fix up the video game articles I don't think that is any easier. I don't think it would be appropriate to have it default to video game. Percy Snoodle 09:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Given that template names are only a convenience for editors and have no effect on the readership, there seems little point in requiring a bot to change links. Make a new template at {{future game2}} or something if a new template is needed, or follow Pomte's idea of adding a parameter so that the articles already using the template remain unchanged while adding new possibilities. It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. --Stemonitis 10:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Um, three people in favour and none against seems to me to be consensus for moving it - is there some sort of RM review I can flag this up on? Percy Snoodle 06:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Also, please note that the sortkey logic used by the template prevents the template from using Pomte's parameter idea. Percy Snoodle 09:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I came too late to this RM to participate, but for what it's worth, I agree with Stemonitis's closure. The moving would be just a pointless excercise, with no benefit whatsoever for the readers, and a little if any benefit for the editors. WP:NOT#BUREAUCRACY; there are much more useful things to do. Duja► 09:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The benefit to the readers may be small, but it's not nonexistent: Making it possible to inform the user that a non-video game is upcoming surely must be as good as making it possible to inform them that a video game is upcoming. Doing so in a generic way benefits the user by combatting the systemic bias towards electronic media. The benefit for the editors may be small, but the work involved in getting a bot to change it is also small. I'd say it's worth it. Percy Snoodle 09:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't disagree on the point of informing the readers; just on the point of the bot work. Whatever the case, the template needs further tweaking (we got an edit conflict): I tried it on Morningtide and it's screwed up. Duja► 09:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

ZOMG, yet another edit conflict. Pomte would you finish please? My idea was that using type also implies that one should put the categories manually -- now, Morningtide is placed on red-linked Category:Upcoming collectible card games. Duja► 09:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm done, go ahead and make your edit. Maybe make a list of possible types of games, so the link in the box won't be red. But the categories will be red until someone goes through and creates all of them. Wouldn't manual categories experience the same problem? –Pomte 09:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
But we don't want 2-article categories: Category:Upcoming games is just fine. By the nature, upcoming video games are a sheer majority of all upcoming games, so it makes sense to place them in a separate cat, while all others can go to the parent cat. OK, I'll give it a try. Duja► 09:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Um, it's better now, but I didn't quite get the original intent of the category sorting and overriding, so my new description doesn't match the usage anymore. I'll invite User:CyberSkull to take a look. Duja► 10:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll leave the category issue to the experts, but I have one request: If it is possible to make the template such that, in future, we could edit the VG articles to use the type parameter and then have the template default to "game" rather than "video game", please do so. If not, so be it. Percy Snoodle 10:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, see this diff—nothing has changed in the page layout. However, it's not a good idea to change the default template text to game right now (too much transclusions until sorted out by a bot or WP:AWB), and we'd better wait a bit until someone fixes the categorization issues. I can't figure out what was intended though... Duja► 11:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I think I've figured out what was intended with all that override stuff, but it seems convoluted and in turn I've written some convoluted code for achieving it. What is important is the distinction between Category:Upcoming games and Category:Upcoming video games. –Pomte 19:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit and revert

Sorry! Was working on my own wiki, and clicked "Save Changes" on the wrong tab. :( 59.154.26.124 22:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please revert

I do not like the appearance of the new template. If its not broken, don't fix it. In this case, since the original appearance was fine, please do not change it.--Edgesales1 23:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unfinished but released games

I would like some input on incorporating games that are unfinished, but have had preview releases, such as open source games that are still in development. The way the current template reads, I find it isn't appropriate for these types of games. Should this template be modified for these special cases? Should I create a new template? What form should the category structure take? Thanks! SharkD (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)