Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Role-playing games/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

DC Heroes entry

EDIT : Nevermind, I just found a way to provide the missing cites -- a peer-reviewed version of the online community's FAQ will be online in the first half of 2007. I'll link to that.

Ghostwise 22:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Ghostwise

Question on content concerning campaign settings

Hey all - I'm recently new to the Wikiproject:Role-playing games group, and had a question I wanted to pose to the community at large. Recently, I've been working on a series of pages for the Shadow World campaign setting for Rolemaster (ICE) and had a recent edit of mine reverted with the following tag: {{subst:prod NN in-game continent. Wikipedia is not a game guide}}. The page that this tag was put on is Emer (Shadow World). The content removed was a list of sub-headings that I was going to use as a guide for the article (it, and all of the other SW articles I have going, are still very much "works-in-progress").

Now, I'm not trying to call into question the editor's intentions (his were legit) or his motives (keeping wikipedia in good shape), but instead am more concerned with what we are allowed and what we are not allowed to put up concnering campaign settings (more or less to guide me in the future). I was intentionally (and explicitly) following the organization model established for other extensive campaign settings - specifically Forgotten Realms, but also the various other D&D settings, Freedom City, etc. (i.e., all of those under the "campaign setting" category). While the rule states that wikipedia is not a game guide, there are a multitude of setting descriptions, including the ones mentioned above, that would fall under this restriction. Is there some fine line that I'm missing? The editor, in his kind response to my question, mentioned that it may be an issue of notability (i.e., FR is much more popular than SW) - but if that's the case, then its neither consistent nor fair (i.e., the rules apply to some, but not all, campaign settings). While SW is clearly less popular than things related to WoTC products (and others), it still maintains a fairly substantial group of very devoted fans.

My question, then, is "are encyclopedic descriptions of campaign settings allowed?" According to the rules, I don't know. Settings are clearly guides in a way because they tell you about people, places, and things... Are we turning our heads because the established campaigns are more popular and applying the rules to those that aren't? If notability is an issue, then what are the said guidelines for notability within the RPG project? A general consensus? I've read over the wiki-rules, and felt that SW was at least notable for many RP Gamers. If this isn't an issue, can I proceed with working on this project? I would hate to abandon it now, as I feel its worthwhile expenditure of energy.

I very much appreciate any comments, suggestions, etc. Oaxaca dan 03:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Generally speaking, I'm an inclusionist. The way I see it, if someone feels passsionately enough about a certain subject to write on it, then it's worth keeping--so long as the article isn't vanity, blatent advertising, libelous, non-NPOV, etc. That said, every article should strive for excellence: well-written, informative, and accessible. My advice would be to recruit your fellow fans of the setting--if multiple hands are working on & supporting those articles, it will be harder to object to them.--Robbstrd 16:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use template

Back in December I proposed a merger for three fair use templates, Template:Game-cover, Template:Boardgamecover, and Template:RPG-artwork. I made an effort to publicise the merge on the villiage pump and various places that deal with fair use templates. After a lot of support on tfd and a lack of opposition elsewhere I attempted the merge on January 15. Post-merge I've had two objections, one of which said that I "should have brought up the merge with the various projects that manage those covers" (which I thought I was doing when I informed WikiProject Fair use). The merge has been reverted by the person who said I should have brought up the merge in more places. So here we go... IF ANYONE FROM THIS PROJECT CARES ABOUT THIS MERGE PLEASE VISIT Template_talk:Game-cover#Merge AND JOIN IN DISCUSSION THERE. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Adding RPG terms to OmegaWiki

I'm not sure whether users here are familiar with OmegaWiki, the former WiktionaryZ. This project has grown out of the attempt to create a multilingual wiktionary that uses a database (Wikidata) as foundation.

The project's goal is to include all words of all languages, and this includes roleplaying game terminology. Everybody who has ever used both English and localized sourcebooks of any RPG will know how useful a dictionary of these terms would be, say when you just don't remember what the "Power Attack" feat was called in German and you don't have your German D&D PHB at hand.

To see what entries may look like check the entries for roleplaying game and elf. I've started to add terms, but I'm looking for people who want to help, especially with other native languages (I'm German).

If you have questions you can also contact me at my OmegaWiki Userpage. --Mkill 18:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Article on InSpectres proposed for deletion

Hello,

The article on the independent role-playing game InSpectres has been proposed for deletion, I was notified today. I would appreciate any help in improving the article to remove the reasons for deletion.

I'm the first person to admit that a small-press role-playing game isn't notable compared to game like chess, but InSpectres is still known and discussed at sites as The Forge and RPGnet. I'll see if I can find some reviews and articles to link to, and will try to motivate why it's notable in the article itself.

We have until March 25, and as I said I would appreciate any help. Jonas Karlsson 08:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Dungeons & Dragons nominated as a Featured Article.

Dungeons & Dragons has now been nominated as a Featured Article. Please come and support the nomination. Check it is up to scratch, look at other critism, and either help address the concerns of those that oppose it or support the article if you believe those concerns are not legitimate. While D&D has it's own project people here should take note of the nomination even if not interested in the topic itself as it is a RPG and the issues raised about this article will also be applied to other RPG articles nominated in the future. - Waza 02:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Moving Template:Future game

I've started a discussion about moving Template:Future game to Template:Future video game. If you're interested, please have your say at Template talk:Future game#Requested move. Percy Snoodle 11:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Request aid/comment in Game article section about RPG, 3RR

I have run into a problem with a new user account in the game article, he keeps deleting the reference to Role-playing games, and i might hit a three revert rule, so cooler heads are request to look into this.
Best regards Mads Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 13:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Does look to me like a textbook case of a computer-user assuming video games are the only important sort of game - a set of good-faith edits, no doubt, but biased. I've added the page to my watchlist, so if you do come up to your limit, I can step in. Percy Snoodle 13:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Reached my limit -Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 13:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about that last one - I'd already undone his changes - though I'm not an admin, so don't take my word for it. In fact, your revert only undid some changes I'd made to the RPG section to bring it in line with the descriptions from role-playing game, computer role-playing game and console role-playing game. Percy Snoodle 13:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Percy, you have a sharp eye. You are invaluable to the games projects. Mads Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 14:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

A hand with Changeling: The Lost

User:Awakeandalive1 & I have been working on the Changeling: The Lost article in preparation for the game's release this August; unfortunately, much of what we're working with is just, well to be frank, a mess. I've been taking the old wood-chopping axe to it & carving out the game rule info, but we suspect there are WP:COPYVIO relics in there as well as in-universe sections & every other big bad you can think of. If any of you ladies & gentlemen would like to take a crack at it, we'd be much obliged. --mordicai. 15:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

All GURPS articles are up for deletion

An AfD was just put up listing all of the GURPS-related articles. Figured this would be of interest to this wikiproject. See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GURPS 4e Basic Set. I expect the AfD will fail, but individual articles may subsequently be relisted so some preemptive attention to sources and such may be a good idea. Bryan Derksen 00:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I think, given the additional nomination for GURPS Middle Ages I (see the section below on Graeme Davis), people who are more in the know than me about GURPS should now take time to locate references for reviews, etc, for these supplements and add them to the articles now. I think that there's going to be a more systematic effort to bring many of the GURPS articles up for deletion in the near future, so finding notability references/sources can help stave off these deletions. --Craw-daddy | T | 10:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

There are more GURPS articles up for deletion, and I think this will continue as the same editor seems intent on deleting them. My advice is that those people who know more about GURPS than I do (which should be a lot of people in this project) either locate additional reviews, etc on the GURPS books and add them to the articles, or, barring that, redirect them to the List of GURPS books. Otherwise (as I mentioned above and below) these AfD nominations will continue with the same arguments being given on all of them. Ultimately that will just end up wasting a lot of time and effort from a lot of people, so those in the know should act now to preempt such occurrences.

I'll try to help out, but as I said I'm not all that familiar with GURPs products myself. --Craw-daddy | T | 12:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Graeme Davis (game author)

This article has just been recently given a {{notability}} tag. Obviously as one of the authors of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, as well as the other contributions to the gaming (and computer gaming) world, there should be extensive references to account for notability. I, however, am not as familiar with them as I thought others would be, so wanted to mention this here.

I also believe that this is going to be the start of a concentrated effort of one or two editors to eliminate most of the GURPS articles. For example, GURPS Middle Ages I has just been nominated for deletion, and Graeme is listed as the developer of this GURPS supplement. --Craw-daddy | T | 10:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

GURPS Afd

GURPS Alternate Earths and GURPS Alternate Earths II have been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GURPS Alternate Earths II (2nd nomination)KTo288 01:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Roleplaying games by country

Hi. I contribute more often to the French wikipedia than to the English one, and when I created categories to sort roleplaying games by their countries of origin on the French wikipedia, I was glad to see it had already been done on the English one (and on the Swedish one too, actually).

What troubled me was... Ok, look at the category itself and look for missing countries. See something strange ? Yeah, it looks like some categories are missing : Category:American role-playing games, Category:Canadian role-playing games, Category:British role-playing games (and possibly others, but I don't know any games from Australia or New Zealand personally). Would it be possible to create these categories and sort existing articles into them ? Thanks. Rell Canis 10:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Personally I don't see why not, but others may have a different view. If you want, be bold!  :) --Craw-daddy | T | 19:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I might think about it when I'm finished with the ones on the French wikipedia. There already are many articles to sort there, and there seems to be way more on the English one. Bye ! Rell Canis 16:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)