Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Horse Racing (1999 video game) question

[edit]
Latest comment: 13 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi all. Does any see any more sources for Horse Racing? (1999 video game).

What I found (not sure if enough for a page)

I'm also not sure what to call it because Horse Racing (video game) alreday exists and the IGN review calls it Daily Racing Form Horse Racing. Timur9008 (talk) 12:48, 20 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Either title is fine but I think Daily Racing Form Horse Racing is preferable since it's natural disambiguation. --Mika1h (talk) 13:03, 23 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Went ahead and created it. Thanks! Timur9008 (talk) 04:27, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sourcing of game credits in the infobox

[edit]
Latest comment: 14 days ago8 comments3 people in discussion

I've been observing the small edit war in Nintendo Switch Sports Resort over the past few days about the addition removing the credits from the infobox, with one person saying it shouldn't be included b/c it fails WP:V and it isn't mentioned in the body. So far as a compromise, I put external links to the game's IMDB and MobyGames pages, as it's allowed under MOS:VG, but I would appreciate clarification on how to insert these credits the correct way, because after observing other good and featured video game articles for reference, I see that this claim doesn't really hold up. Take Mario Party: The Top 100, for example, which is a featured article. The names in the infobox are nowhere mentioned in the short development section. EvanTech10 (talk, contribs) ⚡ 16:08, 24 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

As I've mentioned at the talk page (where so far no one else has engaged in discussion) we need to follow WP:V and WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE. Dumping a bunch of unsourced and contextless names in the infobox satisfies neither. Sergecross73 msg me 16:18, 24 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
My thought process is that citing the game itself (because it would obviously have a credits section) would fulfill WP:V. I'm unsure if it's ok, so that's why I ask here. EvanTech10 (talk, contribs) ⚡ 16:34, 24 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Theres a few problems here though. First off, there are ways of citing games, though no one is actually doing this, they're either citing WP:RSPYT-failing sources or just saying things like "check the game" in edit summaries. Secondly, even if citing the game itself was acceptable, it still doesn't help with the INFOBOXPURPOSE problem. Infoboxes aren't meant to be data dumps for credits. They work like a WP:LEAD, where it's supposed to be summarizing content in the body of the article. And even if it was replicated in the article body, the game credits wouldn't be able source any sort of meaningful commentary on it own. It would only create prose like "The games director is John Smith. The games composer was Jacob Johnson. The the game was programmed by Shawn Jones, Cody Jackson, and Marcus Washington." Which doesn't convey much if it's a bunch of names with no context on who they are or what they specifically did. Which is kind of my entire point. Sergecross73 msg me 16:59, 24 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
As an aside, I'm really quite shocked that that Mario Party article above is an FA, between the unsourced infobox and virtually non-existent development information. I wonder if it would survive a FAR. Sergecross73 msg me 16:21, 24 October 2026 (UTC) Reply
I have a couple of issues with infobox credits in general, but sourcing isn't really one of them because I find that to be, in most cases, automatically citing the game. That's what I think most articles do at least. What's happening at Switch Sports Resort seems different. I do however agree with the part that names not mentioned in the article shouldn't be in the infobox.
"As an aside, I'm really quite shocked that that Mario Party article above is an FA, between the unsourced infobox and virtually non-existent development information. I wonder if it would survive a FAR." For what it's worth, the former can be fixed in one edit. The latter is not a fault of the article itself. If no development information exists then no development information exists. I wouldn't discount an articles quality because it does not have something that realistically does not not exist. λ NegativeMP1 17:00, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your input. To clarify a little, I suppose my surprise would probably be my skepticism of there being no dev info available for something as mainstream as a Mario game in the internet era. It was just a passing thought, not something I care about pursuing. Sergecross73 msg me 20:32, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Right. I do get where you're coming from with being skeptical. Although TBF, The Top 100 was a filler release made entirely out of repurposed content from previous games, on a platform that was already being phased out. I can see why development information is shallow despite being Mario... λ NegativeMP1 20:38, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

List of video games considered the best revisited, revisited

[edit]
Latest comment: 13 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion
The page creator has been blocked, so the discussion is now moot. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:12, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Following this discussion, consensus was reached to redirect List of video games listed among the best by platform and its sub-articles to List of video games listed among the best.

Days later a new user (@Artificial Scarcity) attempted to undo the redirects by improving the platform articles, and when reverted, worked on a combined page under a new title, List of best video games of individual console libraries. This comment explains their reasoning that the consensus to WP:TNT still left space to redevelop a new list that could address the issues in the discussion.

I appreciate the effort put into this, and it is correct this is a much cleaner attempt at the concept. Unfortunately, the context of the recent redirect made this risky to do independently without a discussion, and I think the new list still has systemic issues. I'd draw attention to:

  • The list is named in a way that implies it is listing "best games"
  • The inclusion threshold varies by three to five citations depending on platform
  • The list states the inclusion threshold varies based on source availability
  • The list "counts" multiple lists from the same publication
  • The list includes some lists with unclear scope (i.e. "best you can buy now")
  • The list includes unreliable sources (i.e. Fandom, Buzzfeed)

Putting aside for a moment whether this is all fixable, some editors were opposed altogether to the premise of a list like this, so this prompts a revisit on what to do. I’d propose restoring the redirect per the existing consensus. If there is a view this is workable, I'd prefer it be developed in draft and discussed here before moving to mainspace. VRXCES (talk) 00:01, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

  1. There was a clear consensus that these articles shouldn't exist, so there needs to be a clear consensus in favor of them existing to recreate again. They should not exist until that point.
  2. I dont have time to start another WP:SPI at the moment, but I can't help but think this is another instance of block evasion by their original writer HumanxAnthro. I've already caught them doing it once. Surprise surprise, this account was created just after the prior socks were blocked too. Sergecross73 msg me 00:12, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
I admit my post is a diplomatic way to draw attention to a new user creating an account, going straight to restoring six per-platform lists, and then creating a combined page after being advised to start a discussion. VRXCES (talk) 00:23, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Whether the person is a sock-puppet or not, if they really think the data can be cleaned up in a successful manner, it should be done in Draft space. The pages were near universally accepted as not acceptable without substantial rework, enough so that the pages should need to be evaluated before going into mainspace 13akoors (talk) 01:37, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Update: The article was deleted, and its creator was blocked as a sockpuppet. TarkusABtalk/contrib 02:20, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the update and to all that participated - good outcome. VRXCES (talk) 03:35, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion at Talk:List of highest-grossing media franchises

[edit]
Latest comment: 13 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Opinions requested at Talk:List_of_highest-grossing_media_franchises#Status_and_what_to_do. Timur9008 (talk) 09:55, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

How should we be handling hobbiest newsletters?

[edit]
Latest comment: 12 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Starting in the early 90s, collectors and hobbiest started putting together "classic gaming" newsletters on early video games such as Digital Press, 2600 Connection, Classic Systems & Gaming Monthly, Classic Gamer and more. These contain reviews, collectors information, retrospectives, and interviews. I understand the interviews can be broadly covered by WP:ABOUTSELF but otherwise I've been unsure about what to do with these. At WP:VG/RS we often say print sources are almost always fine, but I've been underwhelmed with the editorial practices in these. While it would be really useful to be able to pull from some of these for reviews, especially considering the awkward gap of time between 1984 and 1988 where US video game magazines practically didn't exist, the encyclopedic information found in these is often of the same quality as a fan blog or forum i.e. correct more often than not but more willing to reprint baseless rumors than I am comfortable with. Is it okay to use these as reliable sources with an understanding of their limitations or are these exceptions to the general "print sources are okay" guideline? Whipmywillows (talk) 20:44, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

When we say print is usually fine, it's usually implied to mean print material of a publisher with a identified editorial chain, such as a magazine or book. I agree hobbyist and enthusiast newsletters or periodicals tend to be local, subscription-based, and operated by a small team of enthusiasts. I think it would be fair to say these are presumptively not reliable, although could become reliable through evidence of reach, "reputation of fact checking and accuracy", use by others, clear information about their editorial chain and so on. I do not think the appearance of 2600 Connection in an article about a 2600 game warrants immediate removal, but it shouldn't be relied on for notability. VRXCES (talk) 23:53, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
To throw an example of one fanzine that could be considered "reliable" is PC Engine Fanatics (a.k.a. Console Ma'zine, a.k.a. Electric Brain, a.k.a. Games Amusement Pleasure), which feature an editor by the name of Onn Lee, who had a relative living in Japan or Hong Kong who translated video game news from publications such as Famitsu. He lended his help to magazines like Super Play and EGM IIRC. Magazines of that nature can be an godsend for those looking for info about the early days in the homebrew scene for each platform. Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:16, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
(P.S. - I noticed that Scott Stilphen used to work for Classic Systems & Games Monthly magazine. Stilphen runs the Atari Compendium website nowdays BTW). Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:18, 28 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Awards question

[edit]
Latest comment: 10 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

So I'm not sure what are stance/policy is on awards, but I've noticed there are a lot of them in the 1990's and 2000's.

Of the ones I've found (that have not been incorporated fully)

  • Canadian Toy Testing Council awards (from 2000 to 2004 ish). They have mini reviewed and given awards to many toys and video games. (example )
  • NewMedia Invision awards, examples 1996 , . 1995
  • CODiE Awards (this one is known), example

Does anyone see any more? If there are no objections, I'm going to try to incorporate them fully. Timur9008 (talk) 10:24, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think that would be great! --PresN 12:52, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'm actually not sure about the Toy Testing Council thing (how it works exactly).
I believe its an award if its a three star rating? (the max star rating, maybe somebody can explain it better to me) . Mentioned its an award for Tonka Raceway , score mentioned here (three stars) (page 5) Timur9008 (talk) 13:36, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Template:Home video game consoles

[edit]
Latest comment: 10 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Can someone explain to me why listing the Steam Machine, a literal Linux desktop PC here?--~2026-57776-92 (talk) 11:54, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia goes by what sources say, not what the "truth" is. Many sources do call Steam Machine a video game console. Also, looking at it from the opposite side, how are consoles also not computers? The difference is how they are meant to be used. Steam Machine is not supposed to be used as a standard desktop PC, though you could make it function like that. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:54, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
I agree with ZXC. In addition, we're forgetting about mobile gaming. Cell phones these days are used in their capacity as phones to make calls and send texts, but they can also run games. How are they not consoles or computers? Gommeh (talk 🎮 sign) 15:16, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
There's non-stop arguments and back and forth on how to handle classifications on these sorts of things in the video game world. While certain ones (like the generational ones) are maintained by experienced editors, others, like this one, may not be, which may lead to inconsistent content. Sergecross73 msg me 16:16, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Help with sourcing for important article

[edit]
Latest comment: 10 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

As some of you may know, the vital-listed and majorly influential visual novel writer Jun Maeda recently announced that he has cancer and is not pursuing treatment. I would appreciate it if everyone else here could work together and improve the quality of the article (particularly the sourcing) to prepare for the influx of pageviews and the ITN nomination when he passes. I'd do it myself, but I'm not competent enough in Japanese yet and am low on time at the moment. Thanks, QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 17:34, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

So sorry to hear of his cancer. I'll go inform several other related WikiProjects now in case they may want to contribute to this. Gommeh (talk 🎮 sign) 17:41, 30 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Densha de Go! 2 Kōsoku-hen

[edit]
Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I have expanded the article but several important things are missing:

  • sources for exact release dates for the arcade versions (default and 3000-bandai)
  • sources for Windows release dates
  • a source for GBC release date

My Japanese is poor and archive.org seems to not be working well with me so I was unable to find sources to back up those dates. Thanks for helping, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 2 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Famitsu search is helpful when looking for dates. I'm seeing December 8, 2000 for GBC. March 1998 in the Arcades, which Masumi Akagi seems to agree with (top of the right column, page 45). If you don't trust that you can browse scans of Game Machine, which is the trade mag Akagi was most likely getting his dates from. I don't see anything on Famitsu about a Windows version, so no help on that one. Whipmywillows (talk) 03:33, 3 November 2026 (UTC)Reply
thank you! Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:44, 3 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

New Articles (October 26 to November 1)

[edit]
Latest comment: 7 days ago2 comments1 person in discussion
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.24 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 18:48, 2 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

October 26

October 27

October 28

October 29

October 30

October 31

November 1

Yep, that's an article on a soundtrack album that hasn't been released, for a game that also hasn't been released. Correction: it's the second such article. --PresN 18:48, 2 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Stranger Than Heaven RFC

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a debate about whether to make several changes to the Stranger than Heaven page, largely additions/modifications over the game's use of Tupac's likeness posthumously. As of right now only the three editors involved in the corresponding DRN case have weighed in on this RFC: I would love to have any further feedback. TrainTrash (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction § Plot sections on character articles

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction § Plot sections on character articles, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. 🎮Gommeh (📖/💬) 15:07, 6 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Telltale community blog + Bluesky

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi all, two things:

Is the Telltale Blog a reliable enough source to use for a development/release section? I'm working on Sam & Max Beyond Time and Space's Development and release section, aiming for good article status on it and am currently at a dead end for trying to find reliable sources to support some information there. I'm considering using the Telltale Blog as that basically has all the golden valuable information about development information for that game, in fact the GA Sam & Max Save the World and FA Tales of Monkey Island use the blog a lot, but my main concern is that these are primary, self published sources. Would it be appropriate to use them there as per WP:ABOUTSELF or not?

On a similar note, Skunkape Games (the developers behind the Sam & Max remasters) recently posted daily threads about some inside scoop regarding the development of the series as part of the first game's 20 year anniversary, would it also only be appropriate as a source of information for the game too?


If neither is true, I'd like some help on gathering other sources for BTAS's development sources. Thanks in advance Soccer Tees - 🗯️·📝 00:07, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

WP:ABOUTSELF should cover this, so long as you're not making exceptional claims especially about WP:BLP matters. Whipmywillows (talk) 02:22, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply
Just make sure to try and find a way to archive the messages; a lot of social media platforms actively fight Internet Archive now.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:21, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

List of ZX Spectrum games

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago5 comments4 people in discussion

On the list, the whole list contained the developers but it was completely removed on this edit, was that even the right thing to do? Govvy (talk) 12:27, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

The specific names of the persons on development are usually not included if we have the studio name. I know the ZX is different in that a lot was home brewed, but we still have their "studio names" for them, so we should only include that. Masem (t) 13:57, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply
Seconded. Sergecross73 msg me 14:43, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thirded. Even when we include the individuals on lists like this, it's usually only the 1 or 2 head developers, and then we say something like "and others". But if we have a name for the team, we exclusively use that. 13akoors (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'd add that if the game was releasd in the name of the developer only (and lacked a studio name) that would be fine but that would be in the "Developer" column. Masem (t) 22:09, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Requested move at Talk:Kick (service)#Requested move 8 November 2026

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kick (service)#Requested move 8 November 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ~2026-59094-18 (talk) 00:40, 8 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Genshin Impact plot length

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 hours ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello all, recently I've been thinking about expanding the plot section in Genshin Impact to cover more details, but I'm afraid that doing so would massively exceed the general limit of 700 words set by MOS:VGPLOT. However, that guideline also mentions that [f]or episodic video games, plot summaries of no more than 300 words per episode should be presented either in the plot section as prose or in a table using {{Episode table}} and {{Episode list}}. The main plot of the game is divided into several chapters, so I am wondering how best to arrange it and how long it should be. The current plot section had to leave out tons of important characters and other plot elements due to MOS limits, and I'm honestly not quite sure how best to cover those without breaking MOS, since the game's plot is very long and convoluted. I would appreciate any thoughts or opinions you have about this. For comparison, Special:Permalink/1383903181 has a much longer but much more complete summary of the game's plot, but that would clearly be over 700 words, and I am trying to find a way to slim it down (especially since the plot is probably nowhere close to being resolved) without running afoul of guidelines. 🎮Gommeh (📖/💬) 16:38, 9 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

New Articles (November 2 to November 8)

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 hours ago2 comments1 person in discussion
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.24 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 19:47, 9 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

November 2

November 3

November 4

November 5

  • None

November 6

November 7

November 8

PresN 19:47, 9 November 2026 (UTC)Reply

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=1384718551"