Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Sega 32X games/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was removed by Giants2008 19:06, 4 December 2011 [1].
List of Sega 32X games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: Red Phoenix, WikiProject Video games
I am nominating this for featured list removal because of its failure of reliable sources. Four of the links are from Mobygames, which is considered unreliable on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. As well, six of the references are dead, though they may be unreliable as well. GamerPro64 23:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Should be relatively simple to update the references wouldn't you think?--SexyKick 23:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah but still, it could be hard to find replacements to the links. GamerPro64 00:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The article is probably beyond the pale when it comes to online sources, but surely there was a decent amount of print coverage at the time. ButOnMethItIs (talk) 01:26, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If we removed the entire Max. # of players column, would that be enough? I don't think the column is very useful anyways; genre would be more useful. Regarding Sega-16, the site is used by GameRankings, was referred to by The Guardian, GamaSutra, and ArsTechnica. It is possibly reliable. I don't really know what and how much information a featured list should have. I bet all the info in Ref 4 (Sega16.com list of games) can be gathered form Ref 5 (GameSpot list of games), and the later Sega-16 refs are used only to refer to box art pictures. --Odie5533 (talk) 04:07, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree on axing the # of players column.--Remurmur (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If the column isn't that helpful and can't be sourced reliably, I also think it should be removed. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 15:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I see no problem with removing it.--SexyKick 16:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If the column isn't that helpful and can't be sourced reliably, I also think it should be removed. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 15:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree on axing the # of players column.--Remurmur (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - As the max players removed and the sources are working properly. Even tho Man!iac Magazine ref should be fixed to include dates and more info as its just a plain jpg picture.
– HonorTheKing (talk) 22:34, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed.--SexyKick 11:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Remove -
- The citations are just plain sloppy - websites should be cited based on the work and/or publisher, not the URL.
- One citation (#12) is mislabeled as "ALL 32X GAMES" when the link takes me to a picture of a Surgical Strike box.
- One citation (#6) is an FAQ specifically stating, "No warranty is made with regards to the accuracy of some informations."
- One citation (#3) isn't really a citation at all, just a link.
- The release dates are all over the place; some are JP, some are... not JP. Also, they should use -es and not /es.
- Again with the dates, the lead specifically states, "All release dates are given for Japan, unless otherwise noted."
- If you wanted to add the number of players column back in, Sega-16's reviews have the number of players in an infobox above the review.
ClayClayClay 07:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Reference 5 is a list of 32X games on GameSpot, most (probably all) of it contributed by GameFAQs users. It's unreliable. Reach Out to the Truth 03:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove:
- Lack of release information. The prose says "release dates are JP unless noted", yet all of the dates noted are Japanese. In other words, we're missing entirely NA and EU release information.
- Why are the 'alternate' names centered instead of left-justified?
- Why do we need pricing and sales history for the system?
- Should mention the Genesis as well, especially considering (I believe) that's what the photo has.
- No indication is made that the names are NA unless noted, which is what I assume is the situation.
- Does not need 50 links to Japan, North America, and Europe. They don't need to be linked at all.
- BR should be its own separate column.
- The codes need a key; three are included in the prose but not BR.
- I'm thinking the region column shouldn't be sortable.
- The issue with Sangokushi IV is best dealt with in a footnote, since it's a rather minor issue.
- So, in summary: the main reason to remove is deficient release information, and the formatting issues are somewhat major too. --Golbez (talk) 22:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove I went ahead and made the region column unsortable. While I was doing that, I noticed another issue. The references in the title column. I wasn't sure what they were for. After viewing them it seems they are supposed to be citing the claim that it requires the Mega-CD. But the Mega-CD † symbol appears after the reference, and references 9 and 10 don't mention the Mega-CD at all. Reach Out to the Truth 18:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is any progress being made here? If not, I don't think this can be kept with all of the issues that have been brought up, particularly the source-related ones. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.