Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/PlayStation/Archive 1

Archive 1

reverts required - Template:playstationp

Hello. User:playstationdude recently went around adding Template:playstationp to many articles. As many of you will be aware, project templates should be added to talk pages rather than to articles themselves. I've notified Playstationdude of this, and I have reverted a few of the additions myself. I would revert more, but I don't have time currently, so if some of you could pick up where I left off, that would be great. I understand Playstationdude was probably adding the template in good faith, and is just a new user, so I apologise if I perhaps could have worded this a bit nicer. --Dreaded Walrus 21:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, it appears that during my typing of that last message, Playstationdude has taken note of the message I left on his talk page and has began moving the templates over to the talk pages rather than leaving them on the articles. :) --Dreaded Walrus 22:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I tried incorporating the {{check talk}} template so that a warning would display if the {{playstationp}} template was added in the main namespace, but I don't think it worked. Do you know what I may have done wrong? Dancter 23:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that earlier, myself. I think you probably know a bit more about templates and things than me, but having a look at another template, it appears that that template has a working "check talk" style check, as can be seen in this test "preview" screenshot I took. Perhaps it should be placed at the top of the template, before other things? I would experiment with this a bit more, but I am tired right now. Perhaps when I awake. --Dreaded Walrus 00:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure it matters much, anymore. It was intended primarily as a cautionary measure in anticipation of Playstationdude. Obviously it didn't accomplish that. I've attempted a workaround based on the template you showed, but it's not very robust, and will break in the event of a template rename. It's good practice for template writing, though. Dancter 01:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... Well, the important thing/s are that firstly, the template doesn't seem to be on any articles anymore. Secondly, if someone does put it on an article, they will notice, hopefully. Thirdly, and most importantly, playstationdude realised his mistake, and mostly reverted every change he made. It's an easy mistake to make, and he's new to Wikipedia it seems, so nothing is lost, really. :) --Dreaded Walrus 08:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry about my mistake of posting the templates. I put them on all of the game articles on the playstation 3 exlusive games list. I fixed over half of them, but then ran out of time. Please forgive me.Playstationdude 23:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Like I say, it's no problem. It's all fixed now, and everyone makes mistakes once in a while, especially when we're new. :) --Dreaded Walrus 08:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

need controller image change

Sorry that I'm not in the project yet but first I must create a name. Anyway, could some change the picture of the Playstation 3 controller. It never launched it silver. I would but i don't know how to change pictures. Thank you!

How to join?

Hi.

I am a staunch supporter of Sony/PlayStaion family. I own a PS2.

I was wondering how I can join this thing? Thanks

Dnlkk94 01:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Just add your name to the member list on the edit page section. If you would like someone to put you on it for you please just say so.

Well could someone put it on for me? Cupy 52040 18:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I will put you up Cupy. Tell me if you want anything by your name on the project page.--Playstationdude 03:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Help

I need some help and I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post on the project page for help, only recently becoming a member of the project. Recently, I've been editing the Crash Bandicoot article, and have noticed something; that the article shares its talk page with the Crash Bandicoot (disambiguation) page, and I wondering if anyone here nows how to fix that, seeing how this is within the scope of the Playstation Project. Help could possibly lead to the Crash Bandicoot becoming a B-Class article like Crash Twinsanity one day in the forseeable future.Michael Mad 20:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I checked the problem and believe that someone has created a redirect, but I can't find the redirect on the edit page. If anyone knows how to fix this please tell us. Playstationdude 01:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have fixed it, or at least, I think I have. I just simply deleted all text on the redirect page, which seemed to do the trick. I then just put up cvgproj and playstationp. As of now, I have put Crash Bandicoot up for assessment, the result of which I am waiting for.Michael Mad 16:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know there was a whole different page for redirects, but thank you. Playstationdude 02:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot has finally been assessed as Start-Class. Let us see if I can get it up to B-Class by Summer's end. Michael Mad 17:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:playstationp

I've been adding it to PS2 only games latly and I'm surprised to see that almost no talk pages have the template on them I've gotten up to "B" games and hope that maybe fellow members can help out. I was also surpised and shocked to see that the PlayStation 2 article itself had no template until I added it. Sam ov the blue sand 20:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

This is because this is a fairly new wikiproject. We need all the help we can get. --Effer^AKS 20:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh well that explains it.Sam ov the blue sand 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I tried adding the template to the ps2 page a long time ago, but it thought that the template was spam.Playstationdude 01:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Project Playstation Logo

This is a copyrite free logo I made for use in the Playstation Project.Shadowfyre 21:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a typo in the logo. It says "Plyatation Project". --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 21:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me, I completely missed that, I'll Fix it.Shadowfyre 23:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sometimes even the simplest of mistakes slip through the net on these things. A proofreader of some type can be indispensable at times. :) --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 23:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I got it fixed, is it good enough? Could it be improved on? Thanks for the feedback if there is any. Shadowfyre 00:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I just added the logo to the project and just wanted to say that it looks great. If anyone is interested, I think it would be great for this project to have a Barnstar, if anyone wants to make one. Playstationdude 19:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Good work, Shadowfyre. As for a Barnstar, that would be quite a nice addition. I couldn't make it though. Could you Shadowfyre, if you wish to that is? Michael Mad 20:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I've got it done! Effer^AKS 19:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Very nice, Effer. Michael Mad 20:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about missing that barnstar offer, but if anyone else needs something done along the lines of designing something or something like that, ask me and I'll see what I can do! Shadowfyre 00:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Warhawk

If anyone is in Warhawk Beta, please email me! Mawfive 22:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sony stub category

I have proposed a new stub category for Sony Computer Entertainment (and others). See the proposals here.

I have also proposed several game stub category name changes (see the proposals here). These aren't related. ~ JohnnyMrNinja _{talk} 07:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

project image

the image on the project page states "PLAY B3YOND" but this is the american advertising campaign, not worldwide. Since I'M from the UK, I think it would be better if with this image, you also include a "this is living" image, so that it builds respect from non-americans who use wikipedia, such as me. Jagzthebest 20:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you contact shadowfyre if you would like a new logo. He was the one who made the original. I understand your want for "this is living" in the logo. By the way which console do you think is getting the most attention in the UK?--Playstationdude 03:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Change your focus.

Please change your focus to "articles which have direct involvement from Sony - ie, development, publishing, funding, advertising, etc.". - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not even sure that the change will work. Greg Jones II 22:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Just commenting, but perhaps you meant Sony Computer Entertainment? That would make more sense. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 22:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

It could be, but as I had said before, I am still not even sure if the change will work. Greg Jones II 23:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Not that I'm a member of this Project, but I think the members would like to know what's wrong with the current focus and the reason behind your request. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 02:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC))

I'm thinking that the project is just TOO wide, you know? I think that more can get done if the focus is on SCE games rather than games on SCE consoles. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not even sure that if the change will work. I don't believe it. Greg Jones II 19:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean? - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

The change from the focus on the SCE games rather than games on the SCE consoles themselves. I am not sure about this. Greg Jones II 21:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a question, does the current focus include any game that was on a PlayStation system, or only games that were/are primarily exclusive to PlayStation systems? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC))

From looking at the project page, I'm not sure. Twice in the article is the text The project covers all articles about PlayStation and their games and use, while in the Template section, it says Please place this template on the talk page of all articles relating to PlayStation products or PlayStation exclusive games. But regardless, I feel A Link to the Past may have a point. There have been probably around 10,000 PlayStation games in total, and about half of those will be exclusives. That is a very, very broad "focus".— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreaded Walrus (talk • contribs) 02:01, July 31, 2007

Perhaps we should seek some input from the editors that started this project. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 05:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC))

I don't see any need to change the focus. Yes it may be a large focus but the PlayStation project should focus on everything in the PlayStation world not just Sony products and Sony itself. Otherwise many important PlayStation articles would be left out such as successful games for PlayStation not made by Sony. Xtreme racer 05:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Other projects will cover those. If you stretch the "focus" thin, then all articles suffer. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I've left a message on the project's co-founders' talk pages. Let's see what thoughts they have regarding this. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC))

The The project covers all articles about PlayStation and their games and use part was put up by a unknown person. I beleive that we should heavily cover the exclusive SCE products and third party exlusives, but also at least lightly cover third party and other sony branches products that relate to the playstation.--Playstationdude 17:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

This project covers EVERYTHING relating to PlayStation and SCE products, games, and consoles, I agree that it may be a bit broad, but at the same time it should remain that way because there aren't enough members to break the project up into different-focused sections(or different related projects) at this time.--Effer^AKS 20:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The lack of members more shows that the project needs to narrow its focus. If the project focuses on thousands upon thousands of articles and there's hardly enough people to work on hundreds of them, that's a problem. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Considering that this project is only about 4 months old, it might be a little early to judge the effectiveness of their scope and work thus far. Given the age, it's no wonder that there are fewer participants than other groups, but there also seems to be a steady increase in the number of participants (5 on 2007-04-18 and 37 as of today). Other groups have similar scope and seem to have done just fine. The Nintendo Project is only about a year older and has a similar Nintendo-based scope. The Sega Taskforce is even older and has a similar Sega-based scope as well. In my opinion, several of the articles they have worked on have shown great signs of improvement. Perhaps this topic should be revisited after more time has passed and there are more of their efforts to examine, because right now it seems too early to really gauge any of this. Just my thoughts. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC))

I'm going to agree to Guyinblack's statements for the time being. --Effer^AKS 21:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I also would like to mention that I've always thought that when are member list has grown over a hundred we could make task forces for sce regions and a playstation third party task force. I know it sounds odd, but we can just talk more about it when we have a big member list. I would also like to ask the members to introduce friends into the wikipedia world and show them the playstation project.--Playstationdude 22:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

We don't need projects based on region. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree as well there is no need for task forces for the separate SCE regions but a third party task force might be a good idea. Xtreme racer 00:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Terracotta Warrior Iki: Mechanized Typhoon Knight

Terracotta Warrior Iki: Mechanized Typhoon Knight - this is a game that is set to be released with the PS3. Anything sound odd about that? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It says it has been postponed. --Playstationdude 16:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Membership

I've been wondering; should users who have no accounts(i.e., users who are just IP addresses) be allowed to join this project? Also, should users who have been permanently blocked have their username taken off the list of members? Michael Mad 20:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally don't think IP users should be allowed to join the project, but Wikipedia may also have a consensus about this issue. --Effer^AKS 22:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Ad

I've asked User:Miranda to make a ad for us. She said that she may do it later this week. If she does do it I think we should give her our barnstar. --Playstationdude 19:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

What kind of an ad are you talking about? Cause Wikipedia doesn't allow advertising, I think it's considered spamming,etc. --Effer^AKS 19:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

A banner. like this-

They go on userpages. User talk:Playstationdude 20:47, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

Since it's on userpages, it's alright. Can't wait to see the banner! --Effer^AKS 21:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record, the template in question is {{Wikipedia ads}}, formerly known as {{Qxz-ads}}. --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 21:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

 Done Miranda 01:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It looks good, but there are some spelling changes to be made. I will tell her on her page.--Playstationdude 19:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

She made the changes. I am giving her the star now.--Playstationdude 21:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Great job! --Effer^AKS 23:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! Miranda 17:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Dead links

At least 66 links of a suspected 211 were detected as dead, found on pages under the umbrella of this project. External links are primarily used in references and should be treated as though the references were missing. See parent message at WP:CVG. —Dispenser 02:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like we have some work to do. Any help is good. --Playstationdude 02:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Playstation 3 Vandalism Semi Protection

Semi Protection was lifted from the PlayStation 3 article and some vandalisers, primarily xbox fans, attacked the page. There may be some vandalising edits in the article, but the good news is its back to Semi-Protected status so no more angry fans vandalising. I'm looking into any bad edits and may require some help, if anyone cares please QUICK READ through the article to see if there are any problemes and correct them. THANKS!JTBX 16:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Blu-ray

Just would like to mention that I have created the Blu-ray Project, a related project of the PlayStation Project. --Playstationdude 01:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

A funny thing you guys forgot

You left out PSP in the categories section. Don't worry I added it. JTBX 15:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Effer^AKS 20:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Need your wisdom, Help guys!

Okay some user known as Silver Edge deleted some of the following text from the article introduction of PlayStation 2:

Before edit: "Released little more than a year after the Sega Dreamcast and a year before its main competitors Microsoft Xbox and Nintendo GameCube, the PS2 is part of the sixth generation of video game consoles. It is the most dominant and commercially successful, best selling home console in video game history, with over 120 million units shipped worldwide by May 2007".

Okay? Now after Silver Knight edited it: "Released little more than a year after the Sega Dreamcast and a year before its main competitors Microsoft Xbox and Nintendo GameCube, the PS2 is part of the sixth generation of video game consoles. As of March 2007, 117.89 million PS2 units has been shipped worldwide".

The problem is that the source is a little old (March 2007) so he has changed it according to that. But the thing I find wrong is getting rid of the whole "It is the most dominant and commercially successful, best selling home console in video game history" sentence. We all know it is, he has stated that the source does not cite this. So I moved it to the paragraph above but again he got rid of it for a reason I am not sure of and in his edit summary has written "PS2 has only shipped 117 units not sold 100 million" or something like that which I was also confused about. Most introductory paragraphs in articles say, for example, for James Brown have this:

commonly referred to as "The Godfather of Soul" and "The Hardest Working Man in Show Business," was an American entertainer recognized as one of the most influential figures in 20th century popular music. He was renowned for his shouting vocals, feverish dancing and unique rhythmic style,

Brown began his professional music career in 1953 and rose to fame during the late 1950s and early 1960s on the strength of his thrilling live performances and string of smash hits. In spite of various personal problems and setbacks, he continued to score hits in every decade through to the 1980s. In addition to his acclaim in music, Brown was a presence in American political affairs during the 1960s and 1970s, noted especially for his activism on behalf of fellow African Americans and the poor. During the early 1980s, Brown's music helped to shape the rhythms of early hip hop music, with many groups looping or sampling his funk grooves and turning them into what became hip hop classics and the foundations of this music genre.

etc, etc you get the idea, and no citations for any of that. So why should he get rid of that sentence from PlayStation 2's article. We all know it is the most successful console in history, so what's up?

Please reply and discuss on this page. After numerous undos to his edit and his to mine, I have given up and need help guys. Discuss here and take it from there. Thanks. I hope this gets cleared up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JTBX (talk • contribs) 17:18, 13 September 2007

The difference between shipped and sold can be massive and is used by companies to sort of bend the truth. Explanation: Sold is simple it means consoles purchased by the likes of you and me. Shipped on the other hand means consoles that have left the factory and are currently somewhere in the supply chain between the factory door and you putting your money on the counter to buy one.they could be anywhere, in a warehouse, in the storeroom at your local shop, in a truck or even on a ship in the middle of the Pacific. So Sony, Microsoft et al get to boast about something they have, and at the same time haven't really, achieved. - X201 08:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

As for Silver edge's edits I think he/she was correct. Take the sales figures out of the sentence in question and you're left with "It is the most dominant and commercially successful, ... in video game history" and that is a statement that needs a citation, the list of shipping figures doesn't support that claim. The NES could be called the most dominant when it shut out all competition in the US or Atari 2600 when it had virtually zero competition. Phrases like that can't just be added to Wikipedia they would fall squarely under the requirements of WP:OR and WP:CITE - X201 08:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I already know the difference between shipped and sold, but the PS2 has sold over one million units, but what I am trying to say is why that sentence of it being the most dominant and successful console (which it is) has been removed. JTBX 20:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Because it can easily be construed as Original Research or failing NPOV. It needs a citation to back it up. - X201 08:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Sources added, Case closed! JTBX 19:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

BD or Blu-Ray?

In wikipedia Playstation 3 games are either BD-Rom or Blu-Ray Disc, i think one of them shouldbe decided upon so that they can all be the same. Not sure which would be the most popular, id say Blu-Ray since its the clearest description. Any ideas? John.n-irl 09:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest using BD-ROM, so as to avoid confusion with the video disc format commonly referred to as Blu-ray Disc (just like DVD is usually used for referring to DVD-Video, as opposed to DVD-ROM).The Seventh Taylor 15:03, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Portal

A couple of weeks ago I created the Blu-ray Project and now I am proud to announce the Blu-ray Portal! --Playstationdude 01:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Button images

To prevent confusion about button names for the international market, I have created four images:

• - X or Cross
• - Circle or Ring
• - Square
• - Triangle

--ÆAUSSIEevilÆ 14:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Warhawk ranking issues

Okay does anyone here know if Incognito are fixing the problems that some players (including me) are facing with ranks that are too high? It is very annoying. Bought the game last week yet I'm a 2nd Lieutenant >:(. JTBX 19:11, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

They claim they are working on it and on the official forums they have announced test games like ranked non-sony servers. Personally I enjoy having the customizations that come with being 2nd Lieutenant while really being 500 points short. I also keep getting nominated for airman in a bunch of games. --Playstationdude 21:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

PSU3 Magazine

Does anyone here have access to issue 13 of the UK edition of PSU3 magazine? Because I need some info from of it for a citation. - X201 13:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard of PSU3 magazine. Can you make a article for it and put it in the media section of the PlayStation template. I just made the PlayStation: The Official Magazine article yesterday.--Playstationdude 22:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't make an article for it because I've only just heard of it. All I know is that someone claims that it's the source for some info they added to the GTA IV article. Which is why I'm trying to track it down, with very little luck. - X201 08:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I found the website.http://www.psu3.co.uk/index.html. I saw the cover of the issue, but couldn't see the article. They are selling the magazine online for €3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playstationdude (talk • contribs) 21:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

It appears to have been known as "Next3" at one point, see [1] and [2]. Coincidentally, it also appears to have been shut down after the last issue (14), merged with Play. See [3] at MCV for the press release. --Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 11:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

PS3's Processor

How many bits can it handle? I've been looking everywhere for this spec and I can't find it anywhere, I know that the PS2 had a 128 Bit Processor. -- Vdub49 01:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know much about the technical stuff, but I know the CPU is a secret.--Playstationdude 02:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Its not a very big secret, we had a talk on it last year in collage, ill try find out for you. John.n-irl 09:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Task

I am just brainstorming, but would anyone want to join a Ratchet and Clank Task Force if there was one?--Playstationdude 01:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I would join, the demo was great. -- Vdub49 01:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

While I do enjoy playing the Ratchet and Clank games, there is one problem. Like the recently deleted Zoo Tycoon Task Force, Ratchet and Clank is a bit too small of a topic for a task force to cover. But something like a Need For Speed Task Force could be useful. Xtreme racer 04:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Like I said, I am just brainstorming. I am really leaning into a Insomniac task force. BTW, I loved the demo too.--Playstationdude 22:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Finished. Check it out here.--Playstationdude 12:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Logo

Someone has deleted our logo. His name can be seen on the images page. I already asked him why and am waiting for a respond.--Playstationdude 17:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

the page really needs a logo, i cant find a decent PS logo but you can use this if you like(its not great, stop-gap maybe :)) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Playstation-temp.jpg John.n-irl 07:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't need a logo. Just edits to PS articles. - X201 09:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I would use that logo that John.n-irl has, but it breaks copyrights. I'm trying to question why that guy deleted the first one.--Playstationdude 12:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I have restored it, but can someone please clean up the situation? It is tagged as {{logo}}, which is reserved for non free content. I was told the image is genuinely free, made from scratch without use of copyrighted content. If so, please choose an appropriate free license ({{GFDL}} or {{cc-by-sa}} for example) and update the image page accordingly. Миша13 13:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Parental Control

I watch DVDs in my PS2, and it has this message on some DVDs (e.g. Madagascar) asking if I would like to temporarily switch to 'Parental Control 8'. Is there any way to turn this feature off?

Abluescarab 05:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

"When it asks for a password, press select, then enter 7444 as a password. that will reset the password. Then, enter a new passcode. To can also, using the parental level menu, Change the level to anything you want, or turn it off." [4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrKIA11 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried it out, and it worked! I was surprised at that! But I am finally able to watch movies over a G rating without getting that annoying message!

Abluescarab 05:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

thePCR

K so ive gone through some major updates, including ressurecting the radio.

The new name for the radio is thePCR (looks cool). new url is at [5]

Please listen

Thanks, Nugz1212 (talk) 14:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:PS3.jpg pending deletion

Hi, I'm a sysop from Commons. The PS3 picture used in your userbox is pending deletion as a copyvio. Can you please replace it quickly? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 10:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Can someone with experience make a photo themselves if this doesn't get resolved?--Playstationdude (talk) 00:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could use Image:Playstation3vector.svg (a SVG rendition) instead of Image:PS3.jpg? Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

We'll give it a try.--Playstationdude (talk) 00:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Shortcut?

Greetings, fellow Wikipedians. I have noticed that there is an entry for this WikiProject in the Project shortcuts directory, labelled "none". If there is no shortcut for the project, the entry ought to be deleted, so I should like to ask you whether you intend to create a shortcut for WikiProject PlayStation. If not, then the entry can be safely removed. Regards, Waltham, The Duke of 15:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

wp:tpsp is it.--Playstationdude (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Splendid. And I see that it has been fixed already, so... I shall leave you in peace.

After a last suggestion, that is: you could add a shortcut box in your main page, which would be helpful to people coming here often. Unless, of course, it doesn't match with the page. Waltham, The Duke of 14:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I added {{project|WP:TPSP}} to the main page, per your suggestion, though I am not a member of this project. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 15:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, if they like it, they will keep it. If not, they will remove it. In any case, my work here is done. Thank you all for your feedback. Waltham, The Duke of 16:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Playstation Home Page

Can someone request semi-protection for this page? I'd do it but I don#t know how and the frequency of vandalism and misinformation is staggering. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

New logo?

File:Wikiproject PlayStation logo.png

I made this logo and I was wondering what you all thought about it. Do you want to use it as our logo? Thingg^⊕⊗ 18:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I was think of something more of a icon that would work as reconizable when small.--Playstationdude (talk) 20:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

How about this:--Playstationdude (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I like it. Thingg^⊕⊗ 22:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article

I added a nomination for the PS3 article to be the featured article of the day on March 23 (European release). To comment, look here.--Playstationdude (talk) 00:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Where is it. I can't see it on the page you mentioned. It mentioned Chrono Trigger, but that is not on 23 March--w_tanoto (talk) 02:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

From the top of the page, in bold: "There may be no more than five requests on this page at any time". By adding the PlayStation 3 suggestion, the number of requests increased to six. Hence, it was removed again (twice). See the history. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 02:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll wait until the list cuts down and place it back on there.--Playstationdude (talk) 22:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Dylan Jobe/projects

Could someone try to make a Dylan Jobe page, because he is highly respected by all warhawkers and i tried to make one a while back but it got deleted because it didn't have enough info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonapello22 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Who? How is a person playing Warhawk notable enough? Also please stop trying to remove CSD tags from that article. Strongsauce (talk) 03:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently Dylan Jobe is the producer of the game. While game producers can be notable, Dylan Jobe does not seem to fit the bill and will be deleted if no reason can be given.Strongsauce (talk) 03:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Did you even read the article??? He is the LEAD DESIGNER!!!! Not some warhawk player. Jonapello22 (talk) 03:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Still not notable. Also stop recreating the article. You are probably going to get blocked soon if you continue to recreate deleted articles. Strongsauce (talk) 03:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course, you're right, the lead designer on the biggest multiplayer game of 2007 isn't important at all, ok i apologize, jeez, when did wikipedia turn into noob zone. Not notable, sheesh. Jonapello22 (talk) 03:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think he is notable then reply with an article about why he is notable instead of constantly trying to readd a deleted article. Feel free to continue what you are doing but it will just end up in another block for you. Please read the rules of Wikipedia instead of trying to whine your way into getting this article added. Strongsauce (talk) 03:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Also I really doubt the game was the biggest multiplayer game last year. Even if that were true that does not make the lead designer notable. Maybe the reason you cannot find enough content for the article is that, for better or worse, he just isn't notable outside the Warhawk community? Strongsauce (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Since when did you get to say which articles don't exist?--Playstationdude (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, since when? I'm not even sure what you're trying to imply. Strongsauce (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You just seem very extreme against this article considering...who cares if exists or not? If someone wants to learn about Dylan Jobe they can visit the article. If they don't, they can just not visit it. I checked out why it was deleted and I think Jonapello22 just needs to do some research and the article will be fine. Dylan didn't only do Warhawk. He has had a hand in War of the Monsters and some stuff with Insomniac Games.--Playstationdude (talk) 00:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea who Dylan Jobe is and whether or not he deserves an article. I couldn't care less either way. What I had objections was the editor, Jonapello22, trying to stop people from following Wikipedia's policy then getting mad when I don't know who this guy is.

Since the history page for Dylan Jobe has been deleted and no evidence remains of Jonapello22's edits: He creates the Dylan Jobe article with a very basic sentence, someone put up an request for a speedy deletion on it. Jonapello22 promptly blanked the page and got into a revert war to remove the db template. Eventually the article was deleted but not before he came here asking for help on the article. I went to check on it only to see that Jonapello had been reverting people's edits on the page. After the article was deleted (by an admin citing notability issues), he promptly tried to recreate it with the same exact sentence. Never during this time did I try to get the article deleted. I had made one edit to that article which was to revert the removal of the db template. If you look at his block page[6] you will see this editor has been blocked before for edit warring which leads me to believe that he hasn't bothered reading up on any kind of policies regarding what should be placed into as an article. His lack of maturity in his posts seem to bolster my belief about this. [7][8]

If you read the rest of my replies to him, you can see that I am not against the article but mainly this editor's poor attitude and lack of civility. If he wants this article to exist then he should add more than "Dylan Jobe made Warhawk" to the article.

Also note when he came in here asking for help the Dylan Jobe article was actually still up. Apparently he figured that the db template meant that the article was already deleted. Strongsauce (talk) 16:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

To Strongsauce: Ok. I never knew he just put up one sentence. When I checked out the arcticle, it was already deleted.

To Jonapello22: Wait until you have a strong paragraph in a word document before you make the article.--Playstationdude (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Umm, thanks for calling me immature i guess??? I just need help with Dylan Jobe's page, i don't need a whole discussion

about this, please help me either that or someone else make it.

Jonapello22 (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

PlayTv

Hey, i need someone to make a page with the details on playtv, it's like dvr for ps3.

Sony Online Entertainment

If anyone would be interested in a Sony Online Entertainment task force please add your name below this comment.--Playstationdude (talk) 19:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess nobody.--Playstationdude (talk) 02:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, what did you have in mind exactly? john.n-irl (talk) 03:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Just a task force for the games and studios under sony online entertainment. It seemed like a broad topic that could use the extra attention, but I guess nobody is really interested.--Playstationdude (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Project page

At first, I was eager to join as I own a PS2 and a PS3 (80 Gb) consoles, but I found quite difficult to find things in the project page and confusing the displacement of the page. So, I would like to suggest a new page layout to the project. Also, I think this project is big enough so that we can make use of this. --Kalel (talk) 14:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I would be inclined to agree, the new layout seems more accessible. john.n-irl (talk) 19:15, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I like it, but keep the scroll boxes for the good and featured articles at the bottom.--Playstationdude (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Also add a task force headline on the sidebar.--Playstationdude (talk) 21:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I worked on the project's layout to make it easier to find something without scrolling.--Playstationdude (talk) 01:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Statistics

I've added some useful tools in our project scope. --Kalel (talk) 12:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

PlayStation pages by quality
Quality
	Total
Assessed	0
Total	0

This should be updated every other day. Next week should reflect our reality. --Kalel (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I just want to comment that Category:Unassessed PlayStation articles and Category:FA-Class PlayStation articles also exist and there probably also parallel ones for the others. Get a bot to fix all this. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

6 articles in Category:GA-Class PlayStation articles which aren't listed here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that was fun. All fixed now, I think. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Lost Planet

I've replaced the old Xbox cover with a PS3 cover.Seanor3 (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Why?--Playstationdude (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It dosen't really matter anyway, its been taken off I have another Xbox 360 box cover without the only on Xbox 360 logo I will upload that, it may help show that it is no longer 360 exclusive.Seanor3 (talk) 15:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

PlayStation Portable unprotected

This is just a heads up. I asked for PlayStation Portable to be unprotected for anonymous users, so you'll want to keep a closer eye on it. Enjoystory (talk) 22:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Capitalization for article by importance

Can someone decide on which capitalization to use for articles by importance? Here is what we have:

• Category:Top-importance playstation articles v. Category:Top-importance PlayStation articles (empty)
• Category:Mid-importance playstation articles v. Category:Mid-importance PlayStation articles (22)
• Category:Low-importance playstation articles v. Category:Low-importance PlayStation articles (11)
• Category:High-importance playstation articles (empty) v. Category:High-importance PlayStation articles (4)

Thanks. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The incorrect capitalization also extends to the quality scale categories as well. Pagrashtak 20:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Is this project still active? The above problems have existed for over a month, which I would think would be noticed by an active project. Other than these warnings, this discussion page has not been edited for nearly a month. Pagrashtak 20:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

This project is pretty active. People just seem to respond to things they find more interest in, and capitalization doesn't seem that fun, but your right, it should be handled. I think the categories to the right are correct.--Playstationdude (talk) 21:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Just pick a capitalization (make sure the article qualities follow those as well) and have a bot fix the entire mess. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Playstationdude (talk) 01:55, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Calling all cars!

I've added some information to the page if anyone wants to have a look.

Nebuchandezzar (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, just add some refs in the gameplay section.--Playstationdude (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Category:WikiProject PlayStation articles

I proposed to rename this category to Category:WikiProject PlayStation here. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Unassessed articles

I have assessed all of the unassessed articles; there should not be a problem keeping that category empty. MrKIA11 (talk) 20:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

[[Infamous (video game)

It needs major work considering all of it is from a magazine article.--24.155.13.216 (talk) 01:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 500 articles are assigned to this project, of which 205, or 41.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Xam'd: Lost Memories

I'm wondering if Xam'd: Lost Memories would fall under the scope of this project, as it seems the anime series is exclusive to the PlayStation Network. -- クラウド６６８ 08:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I would say it falls under the scope of this project. The series is only on the playstation network. However I would wait to see if anyone else agrees or disagrees. DJS --DJS24 18:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Standardisation of 'Media' for PS Store downloads

I was thinking about going through all of the articles on the List of PlayStation Network games and standardising all of the 'Media' entries in the info boxes. Currently, there's not really a standard and they include 'Download', 'Digital download', 'PlayStation Store download', 'PlayStation Store', etc. I wanted to try and form a consensus here before I went ahead and did it to avoid having loads of edits reverted by people who don't agree! I think 'PlayStation Store download' would be best as it is most descriptive and provides a link to the PlayStation Store article for readers who are unfamiliar with it. I know it's not really a big deal but does anyone have any opinions on this? Cheers. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 08:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Be careful, because you'd be conflicting with the consensus that was already reached at WP:VG. The MoS there WP:VG/GL states that all download services should be listed as Download. Seeing as any changes will affect/conflict with WP:VGs MoS you should really ask members of WP:VG for their opinions as well. - X201 (talk) 09:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, thanks. Didn't know about that. I'll probably just change them all to 'Download' then. No point starting up a new discussion if a consensus has already been reached. Thanks. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 11:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 13:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Adding some stuff for Wikipedia:WikiProject PlayStation/Assessement Scale

Wondering if there should be a Request for Assessment there? Meanwhile, I've got my Surveillance Kanshisha article in need of assessment under the WikiProject Playstation section. Ominae (talk) 06:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for PlayStation

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

GA/FA articles

Should GA and FA articles that are on PlayStation consoles, but not PS exclusive be included on the main page? MrKIA11 (talk) 18:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Another idea could be to list all pages that are on PS, but have something to distinguish the PS exclusive ones; possible the controller: File:Pscontroller.JPG? MrKIA11 (talk) 21:18, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the File:Pscontroller.JPG icon should be used next to the ps exclusive games. Hda3ku (talk) 04:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Psproject2.PNG

Is the image really free? I mean, the PlayStation logo is in there, and that I am certain that is copyrighted. -- クラウド６６８ 01:24, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I have edited it slightly and now it features no copyrighted material. I hope it is OK. --SaintDaveUK (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

wow you've done a good job there...

SaiyanEmperor2008 (talk) 13:43, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

PS Exclusive Developers

Should developers who are owned by Sony or work exclusively for Sony be part of the PlayStation project? I noticed that Insomniac Games has a tag in the talk-page and was wondering if the others should (e.g. Media Molecule, Guerilla Games, Naughty Dog etc.) --SaintDaveUK (talk) 12:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

As for the Insomniac tag, that's because they are a task force of the project. And yes, PS exclusive anything, including developers, should be tagged. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

New Banner

Added a new banner to the main project page to keep a consistent image within the project. What do you all think? --SaintDaveUK (talk) 16:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I've stayed out of the project's way for a while, just checking in to see how it is going. I have to say that that logo is amazing! Good job!--Playstationdude (talk) 01:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Milestone Announcements

All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page. Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project. No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work. Click here for more information or to sign your project up.

I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 22:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Is this project active?

I've been wondering this for a while, as the project and talk pages have very few edits. I had to go back quite a while to actually see major activity. There isn't a need for a project, if members don't even talk to each other and/or there is little or no activity at all. I've started a discussion here about it: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Inactive_project_cleanup#Wikipedia:WikiProject_PlayStation_is_still_not_very_active. My suggestions: either turn this into a taskforce, or outright deletion. PlayStation is important, but that doesn't justify an inactive project for it. RobJ1981 (talk) 20:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I edit PlayStation (specifically PSP) articles almost exclusively, but I hang around WP:VG because they're more active. I think the PlayStation project would serve better as a Video games taskforce. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 07:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a PS member, but I think the active editors here could get more work done as a VG task force rather than a full project. Both projects would benefit from this as it would bring more activity and view points to a centralized location.

As far as deletion is concerned, redirecting would be the course to take for this as the edit history would need to be preserved. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC))

I joined this solely cos I own all three home consoles. If i target specifically, PlayStation, then that makes me part of the project, no? Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 10:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely. So, do you think this project should be merged into WP:VG? — Levi van Tine (t – c) 05:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

It deserves its own. Xbox and Nintendo gets its own. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 08:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Its own what? Project? Xbox does have a project, but Nintendo is a taskforce of WP:VG. Xbox doesn't seem particularly active. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 10:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

While I agree the PS line of consoles is deserving of praise, I think the question here is not if the product deserves a WikiProject, but whether or not a dedicated project can be effective in improving the quality of the related articles. Projects can be a lot of work to maintain and are more than just talking about improving quality, and limited activity/membership can make the even more difficult.

If this project can sustain itself, then there's no reason to do anything. But if the project workload is too much, merging with the VG Project can help alleviate that with its own departments (peer review, image, and assessment), letting members focus solely on article improvement. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC))

So you're saying make the project into a sub-project of Video game project? That's fine then. As long as it is still recognisable as a project. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 00:28, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the discussion is to make this project a task force of the Video game project, which would not make it a project anymore. Again, I'd like to reiterate that the question here is not if the PlayStation line deserves a WikiProject, but whether or not a dedicated project can be effective in improving the quality of the related articles. Projects are less about recognition and more about collaboration.

If the project pages aren't being used and/or there aren't enough active members to sustain a collaborative effort, then minimizing the amount of responsibilities could be helpful. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 01:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC))

I don't have a clue. I just do what is needed to be done in PlayStation-related articles. I have no idea what a taskforce is. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 09:51, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

A task force is a smaller subsection of a project where editors can collaborate on articles related to that project's scope. They're generally appropriate for when their scope is much smaller than the project's scope. It gives the task force a place to centralize discussion without having to deal with all of the bureaucracy associated with a project, like assessment. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 06:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind if it becomes a task force. As long as it is still recognised as something. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 12:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, it has been over a year now and nobody has changed it to a task force so I think that there should be an update on this.Bozo33 (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

It was put forward for alteration to a task force. It was put forward at the same time as other projects but a user objected to the fact that multiple projects were nominated at the same time (even though each was a separate nomination) and closed all of the discussions. I haven't see anything happen since then.Edit: See the Requested move section below and then follow the "Koei_Warriors_Games#Requested_move" link - X201 (talk) 08:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

There still was more people voting to support it than to oppose. Bozo33 (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:33, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

KISS Pinball

Hello! I have just created KISS Pinball could someone please evaluate it with the appropriate project templates? Thanks! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 03:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Space Yamato games not be merged

Space Battleship Yamato (video game) ,Space Battleship Yamato: Iscandar e no Tsuioku and Space Battleship Yamato: Nijū Ginga no Hōkai have third person and first articles to justify not being merged and the official website always has updates relating to star blazers.

Dwanyewest (talk) 14:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ongoing discussion on where in the infobox to note "PlayStation Network"/"PSN"

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Online services as "platform"s?. Chimpanzee - User | Talk | Contribs 18:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

psp 2000 and 3000 merger proposal

Main article: PlayStation Portable Slim & Lite series

I feel that there is not enough information to warrant 2 seperate articles and have made (a while back now) a combined page at user:chocobogamer/pspsl. i feel that the information thats padding out the articles (bundles) is unneccessary - only limited edition bundles are included otherwise you're getting into the whole shop-made bundles area. they are both essentially the same console - areas where theyre marketted as slim and lite, the 3000 is sold as with improved screen and a microphone. there is certainly no need to have 4 articles for one console (psp, 2k, 3k, go) and its hardly a massive article once you remove the unneccessary bundles. there is definitely not enough hardware change to warrant it, unlike psp 1k>2k/3k and 2k/3k>go chocobogamer mine 23:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

also it would help us to improve the quality and substance of the article and make it a GA chocobogamer mine 23:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

That is a good idea which I agree upon. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 12:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

have just moved it, seems to be very little editing on these pages, need help with improving. chocobogamer mine 16:14, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Will do. Not a PSP owner myself, but will give it a shot to help. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 07:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The Getaway

I've re-done the whole The Getaway (series) page, hope you like it. feel free to edit if you find any updates or mistakes.Caprinoe (talk) 23:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Discussion regarding the "Exclusive" column on List of PlayStation 3 games

There is an ongoing discussion as to the utility of the "Exclusive" column on List of PlayStation 3 games. Your input is requested here. –xeno^talk 18:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

.hack

i believe .hack articles need a considerable amount of fixing. Especially the GU article. the gameplay is far too long, and the character article has far too many characters that don't fall in the same series of .hack; Anyone would like to help on those articles?Bread Ninja (talk) 17:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Nathan Drake

Just a heads up; I've made an article on Nathan Drake: Nathan Drake (character) and nominated it for both DYK and GA. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 09:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Article has passed GA already and now has an open peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Nathan Drake (character)/archive1. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 19:46, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Article is now being nominated for FA, contribute to the process. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Rename of PlayStation page

Recently the PlayStation article was renamed to PlayStation (console) and PlayStation (brand) was renamed to PlayStation. I personally think this should not have been done, and was carried out after two editors agreed it should be done on the PlayStation (brand) (now PlayStation) talk page. I feel it should be changed back, and thought this would be a better place to get input than the talk page of brand article (I will mention it in the talk pages of both PlayStation and PlayStation (console).

The reasons given by the proposer:

Since the launch of the first PlayStation console has developed into a wide brand consisting of numerous consoles, handhelds, controllers, an online service as well as magazines. Thus PlayStation is now more commonly referred to as a brand rather than as simply the first console. In addition the public usually calls the original PlayStation, "PS1" or "PSX" while Sony usually refers to it as the "PSone", this can be seen from their naming of PSone Classics instead of PlayStation Classics and uses the name PlayStation when referring to the brand. Hence the first console should be moved to PlayStation (console) and the brand page should be moved to PlayStation. KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 15:16, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The editor who agreed simply stated:

Support per the nominator's argument that "Playstation" is now more likely to refer to the brand than the console. Propaniac (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I submit that this is not enough of a reason to change the titles. Here are my arguments:

• The change is confusing at best. While in general conversation most people who say PlayStation are more likely to be referring to the brand, this is entirely contextual. They are also more likely to be referring to a PlayStation 2 or PlayStation 3 than the original console, as they are still produced and are more likely to be topics of conversation. This does not mean that in an encyclopedia PlayStation should refer to the brand or either or the other two consoles.
• There is no longer a simple, unambiguous article link to the PlayStation console. PS1 is used commonly as an abbreviation for many things, and so rightly is a disambiguation page. PSX is also a PS2 based DVR system, and so that too refers to a disambiguation page, listing both. PSOne and PSone, while often used to refer to PlayStations in general is actually the official name of the smaller redesign, so having them redirect to PlayStation is not the best idea (although not terrible either, as the PSOne is listed as part of the PlayStation (console) article anyway). PlayStation 1 could also just as easily be referring to the PSOne.
• I personally would expect PlayStation to refer to the console and PlayStation (brand) (or similar) to refer to the brand. People putting in PlayStation into the search box would (I would think) expect to get an article about the PlayStation console more often than the brand, and those looking for the brand are more likely to add the disambiguating (brand) suffix (assuming they know of the Original consoles existence, which is implied by the names of the other consoles anyway.
• On a related note, I would also imagine that the console would be a more frequently searched article than a broad, general article on the brand, especially as the brand is simply a descriptive grouping of individual items.
• This change will likely wreak havoc on inexperienced editors trying to link to the consoles article, and is likely to cause confusion at best (for the same reasons as the two above)

Comments/opinions welcome.

Alphathon^TM (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

A bit of clarification on the move discussion process (to dispel any impression that the move was intentionally covert or something like that): the move was carried out because nobody objected to the idea during the 7 days that the discussion was open and listed at WP:Requested moves. It doesn't really matter that only two people (myself and the person who suggested it) were in favor of the move; what mattered was that nobody was apparently against it. It probably would have been a good idea for someone to point it out here, but nobody's obligated to do that, and anyone who had the article Watchlisted would presumably have seen the move discussion.

As far as I know, if you object to the move, the best way to try to reverse it is to propose a move for the two articles back to their original titles, by following the directions at WP:RM for "Requesting multiple page moves." I don't think there's any restriction preventing you from opening a new discussion right now. That being said, I don't personally find most of your arguments very convincing. I think the current titling scheme is clearer and I don't see that it's likely to cause any significant trouble. Propaniac (talk) 19:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I apologise if my post, for whatever reason (tone, specific words used etc), implied that I thought it was intentionally covert, or that the change shouldn't have taken place under Wikipedias rules etc - that was not my intention, nor my belief. It seemed to me that the reason why only two people had voiced an opinion was because only two people saw it, so I felt that such a change should be brought to the attention of the project. I myself am a member of WikiProject PlayStation, but do not watch either the console or the brand page, so it only caught my attention when someone changed all the links on the PS2 and PS3 pages (KiasuKiasiMan I think it was, but I may be wrong). Also, while I take an active interest in these articles, I do not spend my time looking through "WP:Requested moves" to see if anything I care about is listed, and I'm sure a lot of the community is the same.

Thinking about it, I think a more concise way of putting some of my arguments would be to use a set of hypotheticals:

• If someone types in PlayStation, what would they expect to find?
  1. PlayStation (console) - This is what I would expect
  2. PlayStation (brand)
• If someone is looking for information on the console, what are they likely to type?
  • PlayStation - This is probably what I'd type
  • PlayStation 1
  • PSOne - Ambiguous, could refer to the console, or specifically the redesign, but is possible.
  • PSX (assuming they have no knowledge of the PSX DVR) - Ambiguous, leads to disambiguation
  • PS1 - Ambiguous, leads to disambiguation
• If someone is looking for information on the brand, what are they likely to type?
  • PlayStation (brand) - This is what I would type, and I can't really think of anything else I would consider unless it didn't give the desired page. See below.
• How likely is it that someone is looking for information on the console?*
  • I would wager more likely than the brand
• How likely is it that someone is looking for information on the brand?*
  • I would wager unlikely, possibly if they were researching the history, or were interested in more obscure things (like the PSX or PocketStation). Honestly I don't understand why it has such a high profile.

* Is there any way to get statistics on how often the pages are viewed etc?

Also, I don't really buy the original arguments set out by KiasuKiasiMan:

• "Thus PlayStation is now more commonly referred to as a brand rather than as simply the first console." I think what is actually meant here is "Thus PlayStation is more commonly used to refer to the brand than the first console.". I don't want to get into a battle about grammar, but it is an important distinction - the way it was originally written hides (probably not intentionally) the difference in frequency of topic and context. The word PlayStation is certainly used more often now to refer to the brand than the console, but that is at least partly because the PS2, PSP and PS3 exist - if the topic of conversation is any of them it is likely to be mean the brand, as the original console is not relevant to the conversation. However, if the topic is the brand itself, or the original console, the brand is more likely to be referred to as "the PlayStation brand" or similar, in order to prevent confusion. For example, "The PlayStation(/original PlayStation/PS1/PSX...) started the PlayStation brand" is more likely than "The original PlayStation/PS1/PSX...) started PlayStation". I am aware it is a poor analogy, but I hope you get the picture. Think of it like this: PS1/PSX is to PlayStation as PlayStation is to PlayStation brand - when appropriate, PlayStation brand is shortened to PlayStation, but is still an abbreviation.
• "...public usually calls the original PlayStation, "PS1" or "PSX" while Sony usually refers to it as the "PSone", this can be seen from their naming of PSone Classics instead of PlayStation Classics and uses the name PlayStation when referring to the brand. Hence the first console should be moved to PlayStation (console)...". That doesn't seem to make much sense to me - the public usually uses the terms PSX or PS1 (which are both ambiguous terms and therefore link to disambiguation pages), therefore call it PlayStation (console). I don't see the logic there (although it may be saying people don't call it a PlayStation, so don't call the article that). Regardless, people use abbreviations all the time (especially on the internet). That does not mean that people don't understand or know the full terms. Abbreviations are faster to say (not so much in this case, but a little) and much faster to type, so they are used in place of the full term, to represent it, as shorthand if you will. For example, the Xbox 360 is often simply called the 360, as it is faster to say and type, and in most circumstances where it would be used 360 is unambiguous. Where is is ambiguous its full name is used.

P.S. If we do end up keeping the name could someone please go through and find all the redirect links and fix them. I've done some of them, but there are doubtless more.

P.P.S. I switched your ":*" for ":" to aide readability Propaniac. I hope you don't mind.

Alphathon^TM (talk) 20:58, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

It was a bad move, I agree. There are hundreds of PS1 games that still link to Playstation, no one has started fixing them. Often the benefits are smaller than the negative aspects, especially in a pretty much useless case like this.--Pudeo' 12:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

What an ambiguous notion the (console) is when talking about PlayStations. It could fit both of the articles.. :)--Pudeo' 12:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with the change. This has only been evident with Xbox and not PlayStation. PlayStation is still the PS1. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 11:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I'm going to put another formal name change on one of the articles (probably playstation (console) as it likelly has more watchers) to change it back. I shall include all the comments already made both for the original change and from ★Ffgamera★ and Pudeo unless it is against some rule or the authors object. (I shall also state that they originally came from a discussion here, and signatures will be retained to reflect the fact). Alphathon^TM (talk) 17:11, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

PlayStation - Good Article Nominee

I have nominated the PlayStation article as a Good Article. Please help in allowing the PlayStation article to become a good article by writing a review. I have expanded the article in many aspects as well as started numerous new sections over the last few months to cover most of the PlayStation brand, in addition most if not all of the sections have been sourced in an attempt to promote the article to good article status.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Koei Warriors Games#Requested move for reasons (this was one of eight related requests). - GTBacchus^(talk) 00:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

---

Wikipedia:WikiProject PlayStation → Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/PlayStation — Most game-, franchise-, genre- and platform-specific video game projects have already merged into WP:WikiProject Video games as task forces/working groups, and there's no reason for this one not to do likewise. It's inconsistent to have it separate, and few editors are only interested in focusing entirely on one game or set of games, so forking this out into its own project actually impedes and splinters collaboration. (See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#More proposed moves of insular mini-projects into task forces for centralized tracking of remaining VG task force move/merge proposals.) After the move, various cleanup will need to be done, including adding this task force to the main project's page, banner and other resources; changing calls to the former project's banner to task-force-specific calls to the main project banner, updating WP:WikiProject Games/related projects, merging categories, etc. PS: The existence of any spin-off, non-videogame merchandise relating to various games on this platform isn't of any concern (this happens with almost all popular video games, even going back to the "Mario Bros." franchise which spawned a live-action movie; they are still best shepherded by the VG project).

Alternatively, consensus could conclude that having projects based on VG platforms isn't useful to begin with, and that effort should be shunted toward specific genres, publishers and/or and games/franchises; that would probably entail an eventual miscellany for deletion discussion. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 07:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Do it. That makes much more sense. Merge this project into WPVG and make this former (and currently inactive, I should add) project a task force. elektrikSHOOS 06:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Support - This project did a lot of work in its time, though it seems that the principals have lost interest. To be honest, it would have made more sense as a task force in the first place. It's not like video games and PlayStations are unrelated. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 09:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Support - Since I assume that for the most part the change will be I name alone, I don't see any reason not to. The fact that it will be brought into the scope of the VG project is also a plus. Alphathon^TM (talk) 16:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Similar to the dispute over Square Enix Project's move, the justification of moving the project based on consistency does not justify moving the project. Although the project has recently has its activity slowed down and been classified as inactive. I believe that the project can be revived, with many GAs and FAs being created in the past and most recently having the PlayStation article promoted to Good Article status.KiasuKiasiMan 13:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

What is the difference between it being its own project and it being a task force of the VG project (other than the name of course)? I don't see there being anything that would damage the project in any way and it would effectively bring more people into the fold. Am I missing something? Would certain useful or productive things be removed if it became a task force? Most of this is a "why not" argument, which isn't a good position to be taking really but, as I said, it would effectively bring more people into the fold. Basically I can't see any harm it can do and I can also see potential good. Alphathon^TM (talk) 14:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

PlayStation 3 at WP:FAR

I have nominated PlayStation 3 for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 00:42, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

PlayStation articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the PlayStation articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that's awesome! ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 07:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Missing Model number on PlayStation 2 page

I noticed my model number is not listed on the PlayStation 2 pay the model number is SCPH-39003 any one have any idea why this is?

Sfxprefects (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

There are a huge number of individual models numbers, which vary by region - yours would be referred to by the general number SCPH-39000 or SCPH-3900x, because the final digit is simply the region code (i.e. where the console was bought - the only differences between different regions are generally the DVD region code, game region code, selectable languages etc). 3 is the UK region code, so plays region 2 PAL DVDs, PAL games and has various European languages selectable.

Now, as far as I can tell SCPH-39000/SCPH-3900x isn't listed either; this is because not all model numbers represent major changes, and simply had a redesigned motherboard or a new bios version, which did not change the feature set. Generally, these features are referred to by the range of model numbers that have them; as far as I can tell, of the fat models, only SCPH-10000, -15000, -18000 had different features from other "fats" (see PlayStation 2#Original case design. From a user standpoint the only real difference (AFAIK) between other fats is modchip compatibility, which isn't within the scope of the article. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ ^(talk) 16:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories

I noticed that the category Category:PlayStation was being used for PS1, and PlayStation generally. As a result I created Category:PlayStation (brand) to contain (generally subcategories) relating to all PlayStation products. I am still in the process of tidying categories.

I think it may be a good idea to rename the category about PS1 to "Category:PlayStation 1", and use the old category, as the main Playstation category. Or there may be other better ways to name the categories. If anyone feels this is needed please discuss and then action this yourself. Thanks.Imgaril (talk) 18:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

"Things to do"

It seems a vandal has "edited" the page. It may be the computer I am using, though. 203.11.71.124 (talk) 05:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment requested

Please see WT:VG#Just Dance 4 as it affects more than that article. --Izno (talk) 00:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

List of PlayStation 3 Video Games.

There has been some errors in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games.

Such as the release dates of 2013 video games like "DmC: Devil May Cry", "Aliens Colonial Marines" and others. Pls correct these. Thanks task force

You'd need to present reliable sources for the release dates, and since the target article is not protected, you can make the necessary changes yourself. See WP:Referencing for beginners on how to easily cite sources. Huon (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

request for comment, Last of Us - plot, can I add it to "to do list"?

Discuss it here Sorry for my plain English in advance. It's about the PS3 game - The Last of Us, I will cut through it. So as I was reading plot, I noticed that some of the key locations' names are missing or put off deliberately. So I added the name of the rendezvous point of Joel, Tess and Ellen with a group of fireflies, to whom they need to deliver Ellen, as cargo. But that edit was reverted with a reason: that it's irrelevant. I think it's pretty relevant to the story, and it will help easier to understand what part of the game you're reading as you recall moments from the game. Without these key names - like US capitol, bridge - you will just have to read from the beginning of the plot in order not to lose track, though there are still some heads ups in the current plot wording - but still, it certainly wouldn't hurt to have at least some key names mentioned, considering they were excited to get to US Capitol and a bit of drama happened there - Tess died while buying up some time for Joel and Ellen. Pessimist2006 (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Sonyvhotz.djvu

file:Sonyvhotz.djvu has been nominated fo rdeletion -- 70.24.249.39 (talk) 06:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Featured/Good Articles

You know these lists are quite out-of-date, right? Tezero (talk) 19:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Redirect this talk page as part of task force cleanup

I've proposed a comprehensive cleanup of WP:VG's inactive task forces (which would include redirecting all task force talk pages, including this one), if you'll take a look czar ♔ 01:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)