User talk:X201

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
1, 2



Contents

[edit] magazine request

hi there, i'm looking to get hold of reviews of 'g-police' for the purpose of rewriting its article, if it's not too much trouble. the playstation version is in E51 and pc version in E55. if there's no significant differences, the playstation version is fine (though i suspect there might be something to do with controls or graphics). anything you know of pertaining to the game's development (such as previews, bits of news) would also be appreciated. the sequel, 'g-police: weapons of justice' is reviewed in E75; it would be handy to know the general sentiments on how it compares to 'g-police', again if its not too much hassle. Bridies (talk) 13:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Thunderhawk video-game cover.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Thunderhawk video-game cover.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GTA games

I'm sure there were 11? or do the expansions for 1 and 2 not count? John Hayestalk 00:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Fine, I just remember it used to be 11, and I saw those edits between 6 and 9. John Hayestalk 09:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Just noting your edit summary on GTAIV we can't really go for GA until a while after it has come out as there will be lots of changes. John Hayestalk 16:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] revert for same reason given last time this edit was made

could you elucidate? I was unable to find the comment you were referring to. xenocidic (talk) 16:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for elaborating. I changed the lead sentence a bit as it didn't make sense that Microsoft would be announcing a game would be available for Xbox 360 "and" PlayStation 360. xenocidic (talk) 17:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm do think that it should be mentioned in the header, otherwise at a quick glance it will look like all platforms will have episodic content. xenocidic (talk) 17:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GTA

Quick comment. If it is eleven including mission packs and nine without, do we class mission packs as a game if they do change the game, i.e. GTA:London? Might be easier to say eleventh installment or something. Not major, just noticed the comment you made and the change. If you said it had 21 installments I'd be suspicious but not really know for sure, I never followed the earlier ones that well.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I wouldn't consider Fable: THe Lost Chapters to be a separate game either.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Magazine Request

Hello. I am looking for a review of the game Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge from the magazine Edge; the archive stated it was in issue E131, which would be the Christmas issue. It would be very helpful, thank you.Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Not that there is any pressing need, but it has been nearly three weeks, w/o comment, and I would like to know if you can't find the issue or when you could get back to me w/ the review. —Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 23:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It's totally all right, I'm not in any particular rush. (I did, however, ask someone else for the review, so I guess I'll apologize for not being too patient.) I will, however take you up on your offer to get the original review, if it's not too much trouble; the text is just a bit too positive to be a 7/10. --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Got it. Does the review come with a caption?--Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Wait, one more thing. The ref provided says "Page=1117." Is that a typo? --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 19:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I meant like a caption to a screen or photo, like I've seen in a few other magazine reviews. This review might not have one, but just wanted to make sure. --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 20:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much. --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Added translation of JUNKER acronym to Snatcher

The Japanese version is different from the American, so I added both. HalfShadow (talk) 23:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Please edit the TF2 page to indicate that the Demoman drinks scrumpy cider. After all, when you smash the bottle over someone's head he says "Aye, me bottle of scrumpy!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Purerizzo (talk • contribs) 22:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another magazine request

Hi -- hopefully you're not so sick of magazine requests that you've given up on them. :P There are a few Edge articles I'm looking for: first, their review of God Hand (December 2006, issue 169, with the Hylian Shield on the cover), and their preview of God Hand (August 2006, issue 165). Also -- and I believe this is in their December 2002 issue (issue 117) -- they handed out "retrospective" 10/10 scores for Super Mario Bros., Elite, and Exile. If they have a write-up for the Super Mario Bros. score, could you get that as well please? If it isn't in December 2002, it should be in Christmas 2002. I'll provide you with contact details upon reply. I appreciate your help and the work you've already done for wikiproject video games/magazines. Tristam (talk) 09:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

That's excellent, thanks! And really, actual scans are not necessary -- text transcriptions would perfectly suffice and are preferred if that is quicker. My first priority is the Super Mario Bros. retrospective review article (second is the God Hand review). Thanks again! You're doing game enthusiasts a great service -- many of these old Edge issues are hard to come by, even on eBay. --Tristam (talk) 23:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: I was able to track down the God Hand review in issue 169, so all I really need is the Super Mario Bros. retrospective review. Thanks! --Tristam (talk) 00:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
That's perfectly alright! I appreciate your help. At any rate, I wish I was surer which issue it was in -- when I said December 2002 issue, I was simply going by Wikipedia's own Edge (magazine) article. It may well be a special edition (by the way, what notation are you using with E1-100? What do those numbers stand for?). Perhaps it's either "Retro: The Guide to Classic Videogame Playing and Collection" or "Retro: The Making Of... Special." Now I did find the latter on eBay and saved a picture of the front cover; I didn't buy it because the front cover lists off a bunch of old, influential games (Spacewar!, Tetris, Asteroids, Street Fighter II, even Sonic the Hedgehog), but no mention of Super Mario Bros.! The kicker is that it even lists Elite and Exile among them, but I'd be amazed if they listed off all those games without making a mention of Super Mario Bros. if it was among 3 different games to get a retroactive 10/10 score. Anyway, thanks again for your help and if you ever stumble across this elusive issue I'd appreciate it if you could fire up the scanner. :) --Tristam (talk) 23:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Based in

Thanks for adding the based in category in the magazine template. Much appreciated :-) Timbouctou (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Magazine Request, EDGE May 2004?

Hi. I was wondering if you could verify whether the May 2004 issue had a Hideo Kojima interview that was transcribed here and if it is accurate. Hahnchen suggested that you may have this issue. Thanks! Strongsauce (talk) 22:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey thanks for that info. Do you happen to have the author of the article? Also is it the May 2004 issue? Strongsauce (talk) 02:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quantum of Solace

Thanks, I was never great at maths. Alientraveller (talk) 10:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RP is indeed a rating

Okay, I'm going to have to nip this one in the bud. RP is indeed an official, copyrighted rating of the ESRB. You cannot put an RP rating on anything without explicit permission from the ESRB. In other words, the company must take the trouble to ask permission from the board to put the RP there. This isn't like an X-Rating, which anyone can use because it's not copyrighted by the MPAA (in contrast, no one can use an NC-17 rating without permiission because it IS copyrighted by the MPAA.) If you need me to go directly to the ESRB to have them explain this to you, I can do so, especially since I'm a co-worker of Jerry Bonner.

From ESRB itself:

“ RATING PENDING Titles listed as RP (Rating Pending) have been submitted to the ESRB and are awaiting final rating. ”

Here's the thing though - you can only put RP on the product if the publisher lists the RP. If it doesn't, then it's not RP. (An example of this is Spore, which has the RP rating badge on the site.) JAF1970 (talk) 04:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

RP is not a rating. There's no actual way to prove whether or not a game has indeed been submitted to the ESRB for classification (as X201 has pointed out since RP is not included in the ESRB database). With WP:NOT in mind, RP is merely a symbol used by advertisers but it's not an actual rating. I see the RP symbol as more of a placeholder template for the convenience of gaming companies (so they'll have an idea of where to place the rating on websites/advertising/game covers once the actual rating is available). Sillygostly (talk) 06:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Note to Sillygostly: Companies actually have to PAY the ESRB to get the RP badge when they submit games as part of the fee. IT IS A RATING. I'm right, you're wrong. Period. End of story. JAF1970 (talk) 16:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Prove it. Why would a company pay to use a symbol that serves essentially no purpose? Just because you disagree with everything that I say, it doesn't make me wrong. Sillygostly (talk) 08:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there any reason you two are bickering on this talk page? --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 01:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Seeing as you found it...

Thank you very much for the barnstar. It's always nice receiving one. You're right, they should be given out more often. That's something that will hopefully start happening in the near future. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC))

[edit] MotorStorm Wikia needs your attention

[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.161.129 (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edge request

Hey fellow member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Magazines;-) Is there any chance of me getting the Super Smash Bros. Melee review from Issue 106? Cheers. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I've got it and there's been no problems. Thank you. Ashnard Talk Contribs 19:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry that I forgot to ask this, but could you please specify the page numbers? Also, is an individual reviewer specified here? Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 20:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Well? If you miraculously don't have the answers to them questions, then just state that please. Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
My abrupt manner was intentional. I guess I'm a bit stressed at the moment. Ashnard Talk Contribs 12:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Euphoria (software)

I left a comment on Talk:Euphoria (software) about a change you made, and would be interesed if you would look at it. ffm 15:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sega Mega Drive

Hey, X201. I've finished all the items on the checklist the GA reviewer set out on the talk page for the Sega Mega Drive article, but I'm not sure the article is ready for another look by the reviewer. Since you and I both fixed this article, can you look over it? I'm not going to tell the reviewer it's done until you approve, too. The talk page has the checklist and a little commentary by me on what I've done about some of the issues, so you may want to read over that first. Thanks. Red Phoenix (Talk) 19:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Mega Drive

Sorry I wasn't on the last couple of days, I just read my talk page messages since I was off for this weekend. Anyway, I'm a little disappointed Noj r didn't give us this list of reference issues and let us have the rest of the hold time to fix it. But I've got some direction to go in now, and I'll get working on it. I'm pretty busy with a lot of articles right now as part of my work with WikiProject Sega, including another good article nominee, but I'll put some work into the references (probably format the list as a checklist and mark them off one by one) and finish it. Then maybe we can put it up again a third time. I think if the references are cleaned up and more work goes into the sourcing, we could have an FA on our hands. Red Phoenix (Talk) 16:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VG NewsLetter

[edit] Sidebar

Hi, I was wondering why you removed the sidebar from the magazines talk page. Isn't it convenient to have all the WP:VG pages linked up together? JACOPLANE • 2008-04-11 08:02

[edit] Falling under a bus

It is not entirely unambiguous on which side of the Atlantic you find yourself, but here in the good old US of A, I've often heard—and said—things like, "If Bill gets hit by a bus, we're in dire straits." If I understood your posting in Reference desk/Language, your "fall under a bus" means the same thing as my "hit by a bus," namely, "Should Bill suddenly become unavailable for any reason, then..." Am I right that these two similar bus mishaps have the same semantic content?—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GTAIV - Exclusive Episodic Packs for Xbox 360

It is confirmed by both Rockstar and Microsoft that these expansion packs will be exclusive to the Xbox 360. Why do you keep deleting the line? A PS3 fanboy?

Fanboy?. Nope. Wikipedia is about fair and even handed coverage, it isn't on a crusade to support one console more than another. I've grown up enough to know that the only person who lost out by taking sides in previous console wars was myself. I totally missed out on some of the greatest games ever made. I take a wider view of things now, yes, I have a PS3, but as soon as the new 360 motherboards become available in the summer I'll be getting a 360 as well. I've also learnt that in the Video Games industry the one word that means nothing is exclusive, Street Fighter II being a SNES "exclusive" until it appeared on the Mege Drive, Viewtiful Joe was a Gamecube "exclusive" until it appeared on the PS2.
The section headings on the were set simply as Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 to be fair to both consoles. By just having the console names it shows that Wikipedia doesn't favour one console over another. Both have their names as the section heading and the very first thing mentioned in the Xbox section is the exclusive content.
I hope this has explained the reason for you, if not please contact me. - X201 (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Again, read what I said. The Episodic Packs are confirmed by BOTH Rockstar AND Microsoft to be exlcusive to the Xbox 360. You don't want the world to know that and you keep deleting it. There was a similar act committed by this other guy on Wiki who kept editing the Final Fantasy 13 page and said the game is a multi-platform game. Distort the truth again and I will have you reported and banned from editing wiki.

First, please don't threaten people, it's not nice. I know that they are exclusive, it's in the article both the leader and the 360 sub-section, it doesn't need to be in the sub-section title. Please raise this on the talk page. - X201 (talk) 15:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Just a quick follow-up. When you sent me the Edge review for the Crimson Skies PC game (Issue 91), you said the review was on page 1117. Is that a typo? --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 22:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Fair use

Oh, ok. Thanks for letting me know. I'll go and fix that now if it hasn't been done already. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removing Disputed Fair-Use tag

Please refrain from removing {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}} without resolving the issue, as you did on Image:GTAIV in-game screenshot.png. If you haven't yet read WP:NFURG, you should give it a read. In a nutshell, each use of an image must have a unique (to a degree) non-free use rationale. Having two {{Information}} tags followed by one rationale does not count. If templates are going to be used, it's best to use two {{Non-free use rationale}}. If you have any other questions, please contact me, on my user talk. Cavenbame parlez 15:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

It was the information template that threw me. Full reply on your page - X201 (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, they're pretty similar but have some important differences. Also, sorry if I appeared to harsh, I just can't stand policy vios. Cavenbame parlez 15:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sega Mega Drive GA

Thanks so much for the barnstar, X201. I really appreciate it. Anyway, about those references if we make an eventual push... if you read the peer review, Anomie mentions sources 9 and 11 (now 10 and 12 in the current form) as being questionable. I asked at WP:VG/S, the Video Games project talk page, and WP:RS/N, and I never got any response about it other than "I don't know". I think our GA reviewers thought it was ok (the first, who was the real stickler on references, just wanted some author and copyright info added), so we'll see. I've never pushed an article to FA status, having just completed my first GA—I got Crush 40 to GA a couple of days ago, this is my second GA. Anyway, this article is probably close, so what would we need for an FA push? You can reply here or on my talk page, I'll leave that up to you. Red Phoenix flame of life...protector of all... 03:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Grand Theft Auto IV.

Hello, this message is in response to your edit of removing Euphoria. Even though you may be a classic gamer, Euphoria is not only an Engine, it's in the video game! I am sorry if you may have made a mistake. Although you may not like it, the 3 revert rule, violations to this rule may result in a block :*(. Just let it go, it's not worth a block, dude. Ellomate (talk) 21:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

If you look through the history of the article you'll find that I was the first person to add Euphoria to the Engine section of the Infobox, it was removed by another editor, after that I pondered the situation "Should every piece of middleware be listed in the Engine box?" If yes it means that we have to add Image Metrics to GTA IV, we have to add Havok to almost all Valve software, where do we draw the line as to what is and isn't allowable in the engine box? How big a part does a pice of middleware have to play in a game to earn it a place in the Infobox?. It's a question I've been meaning to raise at the Wikiproject for a while. - X201 (talk) 09:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Just hoping...

The magazines page says you have a full set of Edge, I don't know if you have issues this far back, but worth a question: E4 of Edge c. 1993, the Myst for Mac review? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 17:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Sweet. Thanks a bunch, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 13:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and since I've decided to just run with the theme, do you have issue E52, the review for Riven? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (May 2008)

[edit] Blade Runner (video game)

Hi there. The Blade Runner (video game) article has just been nominated for a peer review. The article has gone through some major changes in the last month, and it would be appreciated if an editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the article. If you are interested in joining the peer review discussion, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help Wikipedia:Peer review/Blade Runner (video game)/archive1. - Nreive (talk) 11:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The WPVG Newsletter (June 2008)