Talk:Tomorrow's Joe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
[edit] NPOV
This statement goes against NPOV: "It is commonly considred as one of the worst games for this console." I am going to remove it for now. If anyone wants to fix it later, please feel free to do so.
- readded it. In fact, I added it before seeing this discussion page. My edit had the comment: "My comment on the Neo Geo video game may sound POV, but run a search on "Legend of Success Joe" on Google and you'll see it's dead accurate". Truly, please look it up and you'll see that it's considered as vile a game as there ever was on the high-priced system. [In the interest of transparency, I am the author of the Neo-Geo.com review which appears at the top of most searches on the game "Legend of Success Joe". I will also say that I have played over 120 different Neo Geo games (and own most of them, including LOSJ) and can state "LOSJ is the worst game on the system" without any hesitation.] -- Bobak 20:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- A Google search is not good enough, nor is saying that "it's true" because you are a review. It has to be cited and verified. In fact, a reviewer should be the last person to add in opinion reviews into an article. --TheFarix (Talk) 22:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- I am not "a review", I am an admin on the website that is cited in magazines as a source for Neo-Geo information though. However, I am not going to pull that sort of BS, instead I have cited several sources to reintroduce the statement. Unless you somehow know more than I do on this subject, the case is closed. Bobak 17:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- Other then GameFAQs, I don't think any of the other references will be considered reputable by Wikipedia standards. The forum references definitely won't meet the reputable source standard. Anyways, I've rewritten it to not use the weasel words and to reflect an actual reviewer. --TheFarix (Talk) 20:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- I am not "a review", I am an admin on the website that is cited in magazines as a source for Neo-Geo information though. However, I am not going to pull that sort of BS, instead I have cited several sources to reintroduce the statement. Unless you somehow know more than I do on this subject, the case is closed. Bobak 17:49, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- A Google search is not good enough, nor is saying that "it's true" because you are a review. It has to be cited and verified. In fact, a reviewer should be the last person to add in opinion reviews into an article. --TheFarix (Talk) 22:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- TheFarix, I am not claiming to be knowledgeable in manga or anime. I am claiming to be knowledgeable about the Neo Geo and its library. You continue to challange me on this, so I think in the interest of settling this I will offer further proof that Neo-Geo.com is known as a reputable source in the Neo Geo community --after all, in your logic it must be non-notable because you've never heard from it (a common action among editors on Wikipedia). Fine. Then let me prove my case:
- I first want to make clear that the large website Gamespot owns the fan-run gamefaqs. This is going to come up a few times and I want to get it out of the way.
- Neo-Geo.com is the sister website of NeoStore.com. The latter is the official distributor for NeoGeo AES cartridges in North America (Sourced from Gamespot), thus the website has an official relationship with SNK. Those actively involved in the Neo Geo scene are familiar with the site.
- In Gamespot's extensive History of SNK article, Neo-Geo.com/NeoStore are cited as the major sources for the Neo Geo scene. It is a very long article, so I'll just skip you to the relevant cites on pages 27, 28 and the already cited appendix above.
- Retro Gamer, a UK mag which focuses on the old systems, cited Neo-Geo.com as a source for their work on the Neo Geo in Issue 18 (Vol. 2 No. 6) last year.
- Finally, your new text talking about GameFAQ reviewers is incorrect as there was only one; more importantly, the reviews on GameFAQs are notoriously poor (as opposed to their FAQs, which are rightfully notable), the reviewers are almost entirely emulation users who's reviews reflect the limit of the medium. To choose it as a notable thing of mention demonstrates a questionable knowledge of video games online.
- For above reasons I am removing the GameFAQs comment as both inaccurate and unnecessary. If you feel otherwise, please refute. Thank you. A little later I will probably create an entirely separate Wikipedia article on the game, since the manga/anime fans seem have problems with it here. Bobak 16:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- I think you misinterpreted TheFarix's actions. From Cite sources: The need for citations is especially important when writing about opinions held on a particular issue. Avoid weasel words such as, "Some people say…" Instead, make your writing verifiable: find a specific person or group who holds that opinion, mention them by name, and give a citation to a reputable publication in which they express that opinion. Remember that Wikipedia is not a place for expressing your own opinions or for original research. TheFarix merely associated an opinion with a source. - mako 00:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- With respect, Mako, I gave him credit on the first pass (since there was no source), but then after I added 8 notes (overkill, I know) he still accused me of weasel words in his edit. I would be naive to think otherwise. -- Bobak 14:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- I think you misinterpreted TheFarix's actions. From Cite sources: The need for citations is especially important when writing about opinions held on a particular issue. Avoid weasel words such as, "Some people say…" Instead, make your writing verifiable: find a specific person or group who holds that opinion, mention them by name, and give a citation to a reputable publication in which they express that opinion. Remember that Wikipedia is not a place for expressing your own opinions or for original research. TheFarix merely associated an opinion with a source. - mako 00:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
I started cleaning up the article a bit, bit I don't have time to finish it up. There are many, many grammar mistakes spread liberally throughout the article, and these need to be corrected. Thank you to anyone who takes this on. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
