Template:Did you know nominations/Namcot Collection
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by Flibirigit (talk) 05:43, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Namcot Collection
- ... that the Japanese digital version of Namcot Collection was temporarily pulled from sale the same day it was released? "Namcot Collection: Series 1 Pulled From Japanese eShop After Customers Receive Wrong Games".
- ALT1:... that the developers acquired the rights and used a Japanese ROM hack of Pac-Man Championship Edition from 2008 for the Namcot Collection? "We traced Namco's "new" Pac-Man demake to its source: A 2008 fan ROMhack".
- ALT2:... that the main menu of the Namcot Collection is designed to look like a collector's shelf? "Namco Museum Archives Vol 1 Review (Switch eShop)". June 24, 2020.
Improved to Good Article status by Namcokid47 (talk). Nominated by Le Panini (talk) at 03:09, 29 November 2020 (UTC).
The first sentence of the Games section is improperly referenced because the source doesn't mention "the Japanese consumer game division of Namco, for the Family Computer (Famicom) and Nintendo Entertainment System (NES)." The second sentence of that section is also improperly referenced because while the article says that some of the games were developed by Game Freak and Atlus, one of the sources only mentions one game by Game Freak and Atlus isn't in either source. As for the third sentence of that section, the years 1980 and 1981 are not in the source. As for the fourth sentence in that section, the year 1989 isn't mentioned in either source and the first source specifically states that Splatterhouse was only released for the Famicom with no mention of NES. As for the next sentence, the source mentions none of those genres. As for the next sentence, "homebrew" and the year 2007 aren't mentioned anywhere. I'm failing this as the GA review was clearly flawed and I see no reason to look through the rest of the article until a proper one by someone else is completed. SL93 (talk) 19:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sentence 1: It's rather taken using other context; it says how Namco split into Namcot to publish games for consoles from 1984 to 1985, coincidentally during the existence of the NES and Famicom. Other things unmentioned (such as "the company split into Namcot"), are common sense.
- Another common sense example; Game Freak developed Mendal Palace.
- Common sense, if the source doesn't say that "by the way, Pac-man came out in 1980", this is just for reference; it's just to show the viewer when the original game came out. They can click the link and find the date in the first sentence, with citation there.
- This can be fixed by replacing "and" with "or", to distinguish. This game is just an example how some games were exclusive.
- I don't know what you're talking about.
"Perhaps unsurprisingly, both volumes lean into the shmup genre the most, and include the likes of Gaplus, Super Xevious and the excellent Dragon Spirit. Otherwise, there’s a good selection of platformers, one or two RPG titles, arcade essentials like Dig Dug, and Japanese exclusives like the adorably horrifying Splatterhouse: Wanpaku Graffiti."
This section describes the games include the different genres (shmup is an abbreviation of shoot em' up) - Once again, 2007 doesn't need to be cited, and homebrew (im pretty sure) means a modern game recreated on previous consoles, usually with hardware restrictions. As it says in the second source, "
"it also includes a brilliant NES demake of 2007’s Pac-Man Championship Edition that actually turns out to be the best game in the entire compilation"
.
Le Panini [🥪] 14:25, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Le Panini You are wrong about multiple things as well as how DYK has always worked. Please stop pointing to an essay and no, this stuff isn't common sense for non-gamers. Years, at least for the main page, always need to be cited. For DYK, readers are not expected to click on other articles for more information. It isn't common sense for Mendal Palace that Game Freak developed it if someone isn't a gamer (it still doesn't mention Atlus). Demake on Wikipedia redirects to Video game remake and Homebrew (video games) is a completely different article. SL93 (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- If you really don't believe me, you can ask at Wikipedia talk:Did you know for another opinion. SL93 (talk) 17:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
SL93 Nah, you have more experience than me; instead of pulling a Twitter and going back and forth with this, I'll just accept the failure and move on. Looks like I gotta look more into sources in the future! However, this may just be unintentional, but there was a bit of snarky remark in your responses (and I'm rather insecure). Before doing changes with the good article stance, however, I'm gonna wait on Namco's opinions. They general respond to comments every other day. Le Panini [🥪] 17:52, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Le Panini It was unintentional, but I'm sure that me trying to find a job after workplace bullying didn't help. It could be that years and some other things don't need to be cited for a Good Article, but I'm mostly basing it off how articles that appear on the main page run. SL93 (talk) 17:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm willing to continue the DYK review if the issues I mentioned above are fixed by anyone who is interested. Is Namcokid47 not interested? SL93 (talk) 02:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)- Le Panini SL93 (talk) 02:32, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- It has been a week (and more) without response or work on the article. Marking for closure as unsuccessful. Yoninah (talk) 00:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
