Talk:StrategyWiki

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.
VG To-do: edit  Peer review: Video game, Crash of the Titans, Xbox Live Arcade, List of Final Fantasy compilation albums, Metal Gear Solid, Shigeru Miyamoto, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess‎, Myst III: Exile, Blade Runner Cleanup: List of characters from The King of Fighters, Hellgate: London, LeChuck Featured article candidates: List of songs in Guitar Hero Encore: Rocks the 80s (FLC), Crackdown, Halo (series), List of Sega 32X games (FLC), Alleyway Good article nominations: Ayu Tsukimiya, Music of the Final Fantasy Tactics series, Super Smash Bros., Music of Final Fantasy XI Article status review: GA Review – None; FA Review – The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, 3D Monster Maze; FT Review – None Articles for Deletion: Participate in video game related deletion discussions. Images: Add box-art and screenshots to articles. Make sure to include a valid non-free use rationale. Monitor the following related changes pages: changes to WP:VG and changes to this to-do list. Announce your new articles Sign up for the new VG Newsletter.

This page contains text from [1], released under the terms of the GFDL.

Tagged by shoy 20:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright status

This page was built at StrategyWiki:StrategyWiki:Wikipedia Article. -- Prod (Talk) 02:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Appears to be a pure advertisement, but not a copyright violation.KV(Talk) 02:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you please tell exactly what parts seem to be too advertisment-y? I can see the intro paragraphs may have a touch of POV in them, but I don't see any blatant advertisements in this article. Besides, it appears that most of their claims are cited with valid sources. Granted, there may be a slight conflict of interest as this article was written by StrategyWiki, but those POV statements could easily be changed into factual NPOV statements once they become identified. Again, I don't see anything in this article that makes it an advertisement, however. It appears very encyclopedic in nature. --Ryan Schmidt (talk) 02:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

While I don't believe that the article is pure advertisement, it does appear to have a pro-SW POV. If someone could revise it, that'd be great. --TatharNuar (talk) 03:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I am also a bit boggled about why this is thought of as an advertisement. I can see there being a very pro-SW POV here, but an advertisement? Maybe the Milestones section is a little advertise-y, since it's just a trivia section, but otherwise I don't know what is. agahnim 03:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Let's get it rolling

Can we start talking about ways to make this more NPOV so that the stupid header will go away? agahnim 20:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'm Confused

This article was deleted, so why was it re-created?

I Found a Cat in my Hat (talk) 01:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

A year has passed and it's now more notable. -- Prod (Talk) 02:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see much evidence of notability - which link asserts notability for the website? There's a lot of links to strategy wiki, a couple links to wikibooks and Jimbo's discussion of game guides, but where is the extensive independent coverage in reliable secondary sources? WLU (talk) 12:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)