Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sega/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Sonic characters

Can we please just get these character articles organized and done with? No matter how much false optimism you put up, they do not meet our community standards and they are not going to improve any time soon. Seven character articles and seven lists should be the goal. It's going to be done at some point, so you may as well do it now. TTN (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't you ever learn TTN, no one wants the articles deleted and merged, (well some do, but the people who want keep them out number them a million to one).Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

None of you want them merged. If it were actually possible to set up a situation where only people that don't regularly edit fiction could comment, it would be pretty much unanimous to make these actually encyclopedic. TTN (talk) 17:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Percisely, friend. None of THEM want the articles merged, but on this site, merge is about consensus. It should be everyone's decision to suggest a merge or not, not the decision of one person forcing the guidelines on other people. That right there does encourage good faith. ZeroGiga (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Consensus is global, not local. Just because a small group wants something does not mean that they have an actual consensus. Unfortunately, the whole dispute resolution system is junk and there is no place with enough people to actually comment at once to help solve this problem. TTN (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If a world without fiction existed then the world would be a pretty dull place.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

That has nothing to do with my statement. Anyways, these are fan articles as they stand, and they need to be fixed. If you could let go of your fan instincts for a little bit, you'll see that nothing would even change anyways. The one shots will still be covered (just not in a list format). The merged characters will have the same level of information and they will not be any less notable. I've never understood they idea that just because something doesn't have an article that it is somehow isn't important. They only thing that it will do is actually help make this a legitimate project rather than one of the many fan gatherings around here. TTN (talk) 18:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

These articles have just as much notability as any other article. It shows what SEGA has made. It is real world information about the games from an in-game point of view.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:04, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Notability is shown through the inclusion of reliable sources in order to provide a real world view of the topic. Notability is not shown through your personal opinions or your misinterpretation of what is required. To be considered notable, they need information like development and reception information. Only the main seven have any chance of that at this point in time (and maybe only three of them are definite). TTN (talk) 19:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You'll never learn will you, no matter what you throw at people, no matter what hidden corner of Wikipedia you find, people will stand up to you and fight you, and then you go in all guns blazing when things don't go your way, (which is what got you suspended in the first place). And this discussion has been had about 4 times already and it's always lead to the same thing; people want the articles to stay the way they are, so face fact. Now could you end your monologue please, I have plans for the rest of the weekend.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

You're taking this a bit too seriously. You also seem to forget that they only reason why the articles have stuck is because people would rather pretend that they're actually getting something done (the FICT discussions) rather than trying to actually apply that to something worthwhile (Wikipedia:Fiction/Noticeboard). I really suggest that if you like your plot summaries, original research, trivia, and fancruft that much, you should really take up editing at Wikia. If they don't have a decent Sonic or Sega wiki at the moment, you can easily get one created. That way, you can have an article on every single minor thing down to a pallet swapped enemy. TTN (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I already know a Sonic wiki. But that's not the point. We've had this discussion again and again and again. And the articles have always been chosen to stay the way they are. The only thing that's changed is more games have been released featuring the characters and new info has come to light.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, the only reason that they have stayed is because of certain circumstance making it impossible to actually get a real discussion going, not because of any a consensus or because the articles are good. You seem to think that because this is a project (with only five active members, its more like a dead taskforce) it has some sort of authority. TTN (talk) 19:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Let's see, you've held this discussion at Talk:List of Sonic characters, WP:Video games and WP:Sega all with the same result. What does that tell you? It tells me that no matter where you host it people will think it's a bad idea.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

As I said, it's impossible to get a discussion going. Not one regular member commented on the actual discussion that I opened. It's hit or miss over there. I mean, right now, a handful of people are discussing the inclusion of two sentences in an article. After that, there is nowhere else with enough people to make any difference. TTN (talk) 19:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the consensus on the VGproject page was merge.Bridies (talk) 20:26, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm no good with matters like these. Wait till the head of the project is back, you both live in America so you should be awake at the same time.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I will look at them again in about a week, too busy to do anything major at the moment.Bridies (talk) 20:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Do whatever the consensus is. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 04:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

And that would be to merge them into a state where they would be considered encyclopedic. Or do you, against everything you know, believe that four people can override the community? TTN (talk) 11:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

There never is consenus with you TTN. You will not accept the fact that people want the articles to stay the way they are.Fairfieldfencer FFF 11:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Please read over some of our policies and guidelines relating to content. Those are consensus, not you. TTN (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

TTN you won't listen. We've had this discussion. The articles are staying the way they are.Fairfieldfencer FFF 12:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

TTN, the guidelines are not written in stone. They are to be interpreted in various ways; that's why we have people who are inclusionists such as Fairfieldfencer and deletionists like yourself. If this were not the case, then everyone would be forced to edit in one particular manner and there would be no room for multiple philosophies. While the guidelines are consensus, your view on how they should be interpreted is not consensus. I would have thought that the blocks against you and the ArbCom sanctions against you would have taught you that. My belief is that these articles that you talk about are worthy of note and worthy of their own articles because they are notable enough, and don't use the "it's not established" argument with me. I've turned articles that were at AFD for deletion due to notability issues into worthy articles, one even making it to GA status. If it can be established, then articles should stay the way they are until it is established. Plus, I would say we have a reasonable consensus here to make a strong argument against your opinion in this case. \

By the way, the Sega Project has a new task force for dealing with these articles and the rest of the Sonic series. Fairfieldfencer has been working very hard to clean these articles up. So there is a cleanup effort in progress, if that's your beef.

I also want to apologize to Fairfieldfencer, ZeroGiga, and everyone else because I was unable to be on here over the last couple of days, but I am back now. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 16:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of Afds, there's one going on right now and TTN's involved. Here's the article. Julie-Su I put it in the scope of the Sonic Task force to help it before something like this happened.Fairfieldfencer FFF 16:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

There is a difference between two people interpreting guidelines in different ways and one person following them, while the other ignores them. The notability guideline is very clear in what these need. There is no way to interpret it in a way that allows these to stay in their current condition. If they can be improved, it needs to be shown (i.e. "Put up or shut up"). It is beyond the point where your opinion has any impact on the claim. Also, the two people who have actually stated an opinion in this discussion and the one other in another discussion is hardly an overwhelming consensus capable of overriding a guideline. I really doubt that a taskforce of a project that has like four active members is going to have much of an impact either, especially when FFF has very little grasp of what is required. TTN (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

We can dispute the guidelines all we want, but that won't improve the situation. And while FFF may struggle with putting out good arguments for what he desires, he does everything in good faith and does improve articles (I've seen it myself in articles I've had no hand in) and I'd like to commend him for that. He does have problems with sourcing, but what he does improves articles, so I'm not going to argue with how he goes about his work here on Wikipedia. Anyway, TTN, it does take time to find reliable sources, especially for what we're looking for here, considering a lot of internet sites are unreliable fan sites filled with made-up fancruft and the reliable sources about real world information are usually buried under the cruft. Personally, although I am a big fan of the series and I'm also a moderate inclusionist myself, I do have a distaste for fancruft. I've already just about taken care of one of your problem articles (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flicky (bird) (2nd nomination)), so you won't need to worry about that one if consensus directs otherwise. Unfortunately, I'm somewhat busy this summer and don't have very much time to edit. Before we discuss this any more, TTN, can you please inform me what your merger plans are? I have read your last plans, which are still in our archive, but it has been a couple of months and I want to be informed of any changes. By the way, this project may only have a couple of active members, but that is more than several other projects. It doesn't take many editors to change a lot of articles, it takes just one. I am a little disappointed that many of our editors are fairly inactive around the project, but many of them do good faith work around Wikipedia (not all, I do acknowledge that there are some who do none at all). There's more to the history of this project that could probably explain a lot of that, but I'm not going to go into it, since it's irrelevant to the current discussion. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 17:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hey just popped by to say hello, 1 up to the new logo! - Gaogier

Hey Gaogier. Yep, the logo's an SVG version of the logo you made, redesigned with the outline by Cradel. You should pop by more often, you're still a respected figure here around the project. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 04:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The Sonic Task Force invitation

		The Sonic Task Force Invitation
		Dear WikiProject Video games/Sega, We think you would make a great member of The Sonic Task Force!!!!Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you think?Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Uh, drop the exclamation points. They're a bit tacky, in my opinion, but it looks good. Go ahead and put it on the awards page (WP:SEGA/W) under the project invitation. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 13:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Gaogier, please read this!

I've been helping to appeal your case to VirtualSteve's talk page, but he would really like your input before he does anything. This could be your chance to have the block on you removed if you're willing to apologize and you are legitimately sorry. Read the thread and make some comments there, and I recommend you use your TemporaryGaogier account so you can identify yourself. Good luck and best wishes, and I'm glad I could help you. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 02:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

RP, I don't think Gaogier's coming back. He originally said when he was trying to contact you (Dear Red Phoenix) that he was going to leave Wikipedia.Fairfieldfencer FFF 07:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Notice that he keeps popping up occasionally, though? Perhaps this might change his opinion. We'll just have to see. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 15:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I noticed a message Red left me while looking up the company panasonic so i checked here HI GUYS, yep i'm here - Gaogier

I've already responded on my talk page. We'll keep that thread going there if you want to talk further before talking to VirtualSteve. And welcome back, Gaogier. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 21:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sega Barnstar

Everyone, listen up! I just spoke with Cradel about something weird I saw with the Barnstar, and everyone needs to subsitute the template. So, instead of typing {{Sega Barnstar|~~~~}}, you need to type {{subst:Sega Barnstar|~~~~}}. I'll put up a notice on WP:SEGA/W about it too. Thanks guys. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 00:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Second Newsletter

I'm currently developing the second issue of the newsletter. Anyone want to contribute/help distribute the newsletter? Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 03:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

C-Class in the Sega Project

C class articles have been ratified and will now be used in the Sega project. Thanks. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 14:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Anyone want to help write a featured list?

Hey, everyone. I'm sure many of you have read the newsletter and found out that the Sega Project has promoted List of Sega 32X games to featured list status. Anyway, I was wondering if any of you would be willing to work with me on another list (which I already have the sources for, so there's no concern of that) and co-nominate it with me. This would give you a featured contribution, which is something to be proud of on Wikipedia. The planned list is List of Sega Mega-CD games. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 14:39, 4 July 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) 20:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Uh, we're already set, but thanks for the reminder. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 02:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Anything need doing?

I think I need to start contributing again, is there anything that needs doing? (Anything that's not going to lead up to a confrontation with the anti-fiction brigade)  Doktor  Wilhelm  15:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, as you can see above RP's looking for someone to help him write a featured article.Fairfieldfencer FFF 15:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can find, though I'll probably find it easier to add and refine the small details (as a lot of the time I'm using a Nintendo Wii and it's Opera browser to edit minor parts of articles).  Doktor  Wilhelm  13:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Anti-fiction brigade? Please don't make up names for groups of editors. Assume good faith next time. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

it is not an offencive term (and less offencive that the terms that they use to reference myself and other editors on here), and on wikipedia I do nothing but "Assume good faith" (something, which by nit picking at my post you seem to lack!), they don't like fiction on wikipedia, and they remove it! Would you prefer the term 'Super Power Team Anti-Fiction Force', or that I list every single person that I have locked horns with over these subjects? there is nothing in the rules about saying "don't make up names for groups of editors", in fact many editors make up terms for themselfs! And to end this, you yourself state that: "Everything shouldn't have to be completely nice here, just so we apparently "don't offend anyone""...  Doktor  Wilhelm  13:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 796 articles are assigned to this project, of which 346, or 43.5%, 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. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Guys

Hi there, any work i can do ? Gaogier ^Chat! 02:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Good to see your back Gaogier. RP will be pleased. He's currently working on writing a featured article. Doktor Wilhelm's going to help out with it, so you've got a pretty good team to work with.Fairfieldfencer FFF 07:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Good to hear :D, But what is the most important think i can do right now?, i wanna help out in every ay i can?, also do we have a sonic task team or not? i thought i heard somthing about that when i was reading but i am unsure Gaogier ^Chat! 16:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

We have one, it's just not operational yet.Fairfieldfencer FFF 05:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Fiction = Nintendo

This is from the "Writing Articles" Guide...

"When dealing with fiction (such as Nintendo characters)"

Class. Absolute class. Malpass93 (talk) 21:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hajime Satomi

Why is Hajime Satomi under Permanent protection?, also he is high priority, why s he still a stub. Gaogier ^Chat! 17:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes they forget to remove the lock symbol or something. As for the High priority and a stub, well, I guess no one has worked on it. By the way, welcome back Gaogier. I've been on wikibreak the last few days, but hopefully I'll be back soon. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 22:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I think i'm going to get on the case for Hajime, i don't think its possible to get it to FA class but hopefully i can get it to B-Class Gaogier ^Chat! 01:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The below is for you to upload this image for me, cutting the bottom off would be useful, the image is in the link of the text below, also here is another image but this one is not as good http://www.segasammy.co.jp/english/ir/message/img/satomi.jpg Gaogier ^Chat! 01:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

One problem with that... if he's still alive, then a fair use image is automatically disqualified since a free version might possibly be created. It's kind of a stupid rule, I know, but it's how it works. I know because I had that problem when uploading an image for Crush 40. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

You actually made Crush 40 readable, how did you get it that good GA! :O Gaogier ^Chat! 00:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

PS: Does this mean we have to kill Hajime Satomi?

Yep, Crush 40's actually a decent article now, though every so often we get the changes that are unconstructive (not vandalism, just unreferenced or against policy) and I have to revert it. As for Satomi, don't worry about the photo. Write the article and deal with the pic later. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Red I don't really know how to write an article anymore I forgot, where do i start? Gaogier ^Chat! 01:57, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Start with reliable sources and work your way up from there. Take a look at some good or featured articles, that will give you a great idea of what the finished product will look like and how things will shape. Some articles, though, just will never reach FA. For example, I need a free photo for Crush 40's infobox (check WP:RB, I'm offering an article copyedit/barnstar for whoever will do it) and to find other sources that are more reliable, since a lot of the history comes from Jun Senoue's fansite, at almost a dangerous level (though it doesn't indicate the notability of them, the other sources do, so it fits WP:SELFPUB) and I just don't think such sources exist. Sources are usually the limiter of an article. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 05:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Sonic And Black Knight

May i assess it to a high class? Gaogier ^Chat! 23:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Use the standards that I set out on the assessment page and assess it with that. And welcome back, Gaogier, I see you have your old account back. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 23:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Project Logo

I may not be a part of the project, but I was bored and was looking at your logo / symbol and noticed the "SP" in the Sonic head seems to say "Sonic Project" more than "Sega Project" and the Sonic head may violate copyright. I don't know how attached you are to the current design, but I whipped up rough drafts of two possible new designs anyway. They may still be a little derivative and probably need more work. Tell me what you think.

• http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/8050/wpsegafo5.gif

The one on the right keeps the elements in the current logo: the letters SP in the shape of Sonic's head

The one on the left is inspired by other video game Wikiprojects (Nintendo and Sims) CIGraphix (talk) 05:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably just as bad either way. We'll let consensus decide, though, not one person. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 23:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Our current logo is to simple to be under copyright, like the sonic ball, if we made it blue it would be different, i'm sure we are okay for now, thought i will make a few designs myself if change is really necessary. Gaogier ^Chat! 03:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Non=Free Content

Both the user's who uploaded

&

Are both in trouble for multiple copyright image issues and I think these images are copyright and i think they should go for speedy deletion, anybody agree, I know they are nice but nice is not always best, sometimes you have to lose what you like and this is one of those times.Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 03:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Though i would like someone to look further into the matter first Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 03:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Though they may look like copyright violations, there's a good chance they may be free. You see, anyone with a camera can take a picture, but if you're skilled with Photoshop, you can cut out the background like they have. Now, it would be a good idea to bring this up at WP:MCQ, though, Gaogier, so if you want to take care of that, our problems can be solved there. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 11:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Id rather not bring it up then, lets keep them :) instead of putting them at risk Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 10:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

"Logo"

Your logo (an alteration of the Sonic Team's logo) is a derivative work and cannot be released into the public domain and has since been deleted. Please find a new logo that can be released into the public domain.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

It was checked and passed as okay previously. While we decide on a new logo, I've snapped together a temporary one.

Hope this works for a little while at least. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 21:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Here is another version of one I had listed above, I'm still not happy with the W's font since it is just Times but its better than using Sega's font like the placeholder in the previous version: http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/4131/wpsega2ka0.gif

The design is sort of like what the Sonic series often uses but since the iris thing and banner are items often used in many things and it lacks details like the wings the Sonic design uses, so I don't think it is derivative (although it might need some color changes to become totally non-derivative). Does it say Sega enough though? CIGraphix (talk) 23:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The previous logo was a recolored silouhette of Sonic's head that's used in the Sonic Team logo. That's why I deleted it. The temp is sufficient.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The previous logo was created by User:Gaogier and approved by User:ReyBrujo, who said he believed it was different enough and simple enough to not be under copyright, though he was not 100%. I think it's a little subjective on the derivation, but then again most derivative work that has been changed substantially from its original is pretty subjective as to whether it is derivative or not. Oh well, ours not to reason why, and in my opinion ours not to argue with copyrights. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the Barnstar

I got a temporary barnstar fixed up too

Thoughts? Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 04:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I like the barnstar but, I saw the barnstar's template and I think you should make the barnstar in the template bigger (the usual size is 100px). Unknown the Hedgehog 17:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Members List

We need to split the list to active and inactive members as it is not working out looking for members to talk to, it should be easy just click a member and they are ready to go, anyone with the same idea ?? Gaogier ^{How can I help?}

I agree completely if you're willing to implement it, Gaogier. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 23:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

You run this wikiproject now not me, you know who is and who is not active, i'm useless. Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 21:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Anymore I barely run this myself, Fairfieldfencer and his friends have more power here than I do, it seems. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 16:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Prototype Of A Plan

Like this anyone, it takes the good points from our old logo and modernizes and "uniqueifies" it. That word does not exist but it sounds good.

Could this but maybe designed better make a good logo for us? Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 21:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

File:Pictureseventimesonic.png

Thats the old logo for comparing Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 21:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

new one looks cool, though you might want to ask the WP:Graphics Lab to make it a .svg before we use it. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 16:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This Svg? Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 23:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks excellent. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

What We Gotta Do

Talk force is going down a devision we cant take that, i believe that there's too many Sega articles and other companies in gaming consoles like Xbox & Playstation are all WIkiprojects this one should be too, we need to find new members we need to do as such:

• We need to get the new logo up and running SVG Style! [TICK]
• We need a new layout and a new Style! [SEMI-TICK]
• We need to invite anyone with any contributions to Sega related articles or with the sonic UserBox on their page! CMon GUYS!
• We need to try and get our old members more active! C'mon GUYS!

I will work till the full to get this done and I wont let us go down a devision!

Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 14:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Fight for it, man. I've been so far out of it lately with school, but I'll see if I can catch up. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 14:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I can't be more help. With most of the Sonic character articles gone all I can do to help is find more info for upcoming Sonic games.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I just added our current situation to the third newsletter, but it was posted a while ago and it's likely our members have already read it, and chances are they're not going to read it again. But we could always post it again in the next one. We have at the very least a few active members. Me, Gaogier and the Dok, along with a few members working on upcoming Sonic games. One member recently helped improve the Rouge the Bat article, and another did Shadow's.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm really sorry I can't help out more, but life has changed for me and I just can't keep up. I may be semi-retired, but you know I do still work with The Sega Project and I'd hate to see it fall. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 02:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

We are already falling and I am in a pool of trouble and I don't know how to fix it, too many articles for just me and FFF and Dok and we are not all fully active, I'm unsure what to do. Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 16:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Sega

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 22:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I Think our last chance of survival is to change to wikiproject Sega & Nintendo and split them into two different assessment charts Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 16:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipeoject Sega is now Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo

After a long time of thinking we have decided to bring up a Nintendo area to stop our project for dieing out, this should help us get enough members to keep going, if we get enough members of each side of the divided project the project will split into two separate projects how it should be.

The project is divided into two sections Sega Section & Nintendo Section, the duel section idea should make it easier for Nintendo Lovers and Sega Fans to stay to their side while still keeping the project active.

The Nintendo Scope and the Sega Scope will be Assessed separately and will not be placed together, everything will be kept as separate at possible making it almost like two different Wikiprojects operating under one name.

I hope everyone understands and our members and new members will Keep Contributing or Join the project so we can stay active.

Thank you.

This Has Been An Official S&N Project Notice By Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 21:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Sega & Nintendo Logo

Currently, the main page of the project features only WP Sega. A logo representing the both of them are needed as icons as well as the main image. Any ideas? --haha169 (talk) 03:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Someone want to finish something for me?

Before I semi-retired, I was working on List of Sega Mega-CD games. It's about half done, now, and I've got the basic framework set up if someone wants to finish it. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 23:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

This Wikiproject Is Dying

It's dieing the project is dieing, it must be this ugly layout Doktor Wilhelm made, we need a new one, like the Playstation projects one, i bet if Sega made a new console we would get active again Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 07:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

There's some discussion about making this a task force at WT:VG. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 04:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree and i'm the founder, there's to much sega for that. Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 14:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree vehemently. If Nintendo is willing to do so, there should be no reason for the world that is Sega to not come peaceably. The only significant difference between a task force and a WikiProject is that the WikiProject has a set of guidelines of its own — the task force simply uses the guidelines of its parent. Further, the other bureaucracy-increasing items, such as informing of MfDs and AfDs are reduced, as there is a central place at WP:VG for that.

Further, just because you are the founder does not make you supreme overlord in this case. Consensus takes authority here. This is not meant to sound hostile — just, consider your options and past precedent more when responding to a friendly message that it is being talked in other places, and your own state of activity. You said it yourself — this project is dying. Moving it to a task force of Video games will bring new blood, among the other benefits I previously mentioned. --Izno (talk) 01:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Gaogier- You might be right that there's too much Sega for the scope to be just a task force, but without the members to back the effort the scope is too large. What Izno says is right: the only thing that would change would be that all administrative activities would shift to the Video games Porject, which it does the bulk of already. The task force page would still function to assist with collaboration. If anything, membership will probably increase as a task force because there are hundreds of VG members to draw from. Task force membership drives are also planned for the future after the inactive clean up has been completed.

As Izno stated, none of this is meant to be hostile. But we think the Sega group—and in turn all Sega related articles—can benefit from the change. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC))

I have some personal problems in my life to fix right now, but i'll make this project work soon enough, members are easy to find its just the people we need to get them recruited. Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 19:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Gaogier's right. We have over fifty members, they're all just too lazy to do anything.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Besides, there isn't that much left to do because of the Sonic character merge. If they'd been kept the Sega Project would have cleaned them up, and we would be more active. And what makes you think you have the authority to take such actions on other projects? Nobody owns them, and there is no superiority in any user, IP and admin alike.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

To all Sega members- This is not a hostile takeover. If the project can get back on its feet, then there's no need to merge it with WP:VG. For example, the Final Fantasy project has remained untouched because it has active members working on improving articles. If time is needed to accomplish this, then take the time. We gave the Castlevania Project three months to get things in order. Unfortunately, we did not hear anything from the creator and only member, so we switched it to a task force.

Despite the number of members listed for this project, the thing to take into account is the number of active members. The VG project has over a thousand members, but the number of active members working on articles is much much lower; the talk page sees maybe 70-100 members posting at any given time. This is something all WikiProjects suffer from, and something the members here should take into account as well.

As explained above, this is only a suggestion that we believe can be beneficial to the related articles and the work load of the members. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC))

Read my comment on the dying WikiProjects thing.Fairfieldfencer FFF 21:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Besides, there isn't that much left to do because of the Sonic character merge. If they'd been kept the Sega Project would have cleaned them up, and we would be more active.

Um, I have issue with this statement. There are many other articles which fall under Sega's scope, Sonic not-withstanding.

And what makes you think you have the authority to take such actions on other projects? Nobody owns them, and there is no superiority in any user, IP and admin alike.

Please apply those to your own words. We are not trying to take you over. We're coming here and saying, "hey, this project looks like it needs some help. It doesn't have the smallest of scopes, but it could definitely improve its state by becoming a task force of WP:VG. Here are some reasons why it would be a good idea, and we can't think of any reasons why it might be a bad one". If you want to keep on trucking just the way you are, that's just peachy. We'll leave you alone for 3 or 6 months or however long, until this project really is inactive. But as Gaogier said, and I quote, "It's dieing the project is dieing", and we don't want that to happen. Come with us to WP:VG and help fix the problem that is apparent to the "outsiders". Really, you've got nothing to lose. --Izno (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Apart from our status as a WikiProject. I'm not saying your trying to take us over, I'm saying you're sticking your nose in were it isn't your responsability to do so. Which policy states that it's up to you guys to turn other video game related projects into task forces? Come on I wanna see it! WP:Video games was made to help with video game articles, not WikiProjects.Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Anyhow, a few months will be good. That will allow us to send out a few newsletters to urge our members to get up off their backsides and do something.Fairfieldfencer FFF 10:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying you're sticking your nose in were it isn't your responsability to do so. Which policy states that it's up to you guys to turn other video game related projects into task forces? Come on I wanna see it! WP:Video games was made to help with video game articles, not WikiProjects.

No, we're not sticking our noses in where it isn't our responsibility. We're sticking our noses in as good faith Wikipedians. There's no policy. We don't need one, as we're doing this in an attempt to show good faith that there are people still working on these articles, who would rather not deal with the extra crap tha comes with running a WikiProject. We've done it for a lot of WikiProjects already. Again, if you don't want to come, that's fine. It's just silly, imho, to be fighting what is obviously a good idea. --Izno (talk) 14:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Izno, let's let it rest for now. We've said what needs to be said and it's in their hands now. We'll check back in a month to see how the project has progressed. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC))

I'm happy for it to be merged, or whatever.bridies (talk) 15:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Bridies, I mean no offense by this, but I think your opinion is on a bias here. I know you haven't been the most positive with any of us, especially when it came to the merge debates with TTN. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 02:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyone is entitled to their opinion: Bridies, TTN, everyone. Perhaps it is best that everyone disengage from this topic for a while. I'm sure the members here have other matters they want to focus on, such as the threads below. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 04:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC))

Your good-faith is appreciated, but it's not your responsability to decide what to do with other WikiProjects. Let us take care of matters on our own, and appreciate that you've got a WikiProject like this to help you. I imagine that SEGA related topics take up a considerable amount of your scope.Fairfieldfencer FFF 14:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps in a month, your attitude will be improved FFF. You are acting very rudely towards people trying to help. I want to point out something (perhaps I said this before, I don't remember for sure, but I don't have the time to search through discussions): a project isn't a place for only a few people. I also want to point out: it was several members of this project that edit warred at a few Sonic articles in the past with a decent Wikipedia editor. They refused to understand policies, so they just edit warred. They finally stopped when others stepped into the situation. I think the same thing is going on now: they are assuming bad faith, so they refuse to let the project be turned into a taskforce. Did you know, this project is NOT the only people that work on Sega articles? So don't act like your members own and control the Sega articles. Perhaps you've done some good work, but there is a lot more editors that have been working on those articles that are NOT a member of this small project. The project's scope being big means nothing, when there isn't many active members. Being a taskforce shouldn't be such an issue. Wikipedia should be about editing and not making drama about petty things like this. If this project were a taskforce, I'm sure no one would even notice: considering people from this project rarely discuss things anyway (this talk page is a great example of that). Until this discussion, there was only posts by two editors: Gaogier and Red Phoenix, plus a few random people, and some automated bots. You have to go back several months to find actually activity that involved more people. RobJ1981 (talk) 20:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow- this whole thing is starting to get out of hand. It seems that editors on both sides of the discussion are rather emotionally invested in the discussion, and that appears to have become a hindrance. I strongly recommend all involved parties DISENGAGE for the time being. Both projects have other matters to attend to (Wikipedia 0.7 for example). This discussion does not have to be resolved today, tomorrow, or even next week. This can—and should—be discussed sometime down the road. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC))

Sorry. I mean no rudeness to anyone. I've just grown attached to this project. It's done real good, and I feel that this being turned into a task force would be a disgrace. I would personally want this down the line to be about six months for things to perk up. Then we can send newsletters and other things to get these guys off their butts and edit. Nobody has the editing spirit as we do. Perhaps we should try and invite a few active members from WP Video games.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Being a task force isn't a disgrace. Now you might resort to getting active people from the video game project? That's not needed. It shouldn't be up to the video game project to help populate a dying project. The video game project is more than willing to help with Sega article discussions. A Sega project isn't helpful when it's basically dead. FFF is overreacting about the matter. He could easily post Sega questions and ask for help at the video game project, but doesn't. I don't think the project has ever asked for help (perhaps I'm wrong), which leads me to believe the project thinks they own the Sega articles. Once again I will state: Wikipedia is about EDITING. People can discuss things just fine in a task force. Being a project doesn't give you more powers or anything, compared to a taskforce. As for Guyinblack's disengage comment: perhaps that should happen, but I've been dealing with FFF for a while now, he doesn't want to understand things, and makes big deals about many things. Even if we wait a month (or more): I somehow bet FFF will post the same comments then. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Rob, let it rest for now. There's really nothing let to say. We said we'd give them time and we will. We'll check back in periodically to check for progress. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 21:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC))

I am a bit stubborn I admit, but that's what makes me such a good inclusionist.Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

What makes a good inclusionist is one that can provide the references and rationale for keeping the information. Stubbornness doesn't make you a good inclusionist. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 22:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Recent move to Sega and Nintendo

At the risk of inciting another argument, I feel I must comment on the recent move. The Nintendo Project was recently merged with the VG Project as a task force. The reason I'm mentioning this is because it was merged because of lack of interest/participation from the Wikipedia community. The few active members are already using the task force to coordinate article improve meant. As such, I do not think this move will have the desired result you are seeking; to gain more members. I do not think increasing the scope will attract as many members you are seeking, it will only increase the workload on existing members.

A common phrase seems to keep popping up on this talk page, "the project is dying." Frankly I do not see this a major concern and feel neither should the members. A project cannot die because it is only a page to facilitate collaboration. The fact there are members still editing Sega related articles shows there is still life to the project's effort and goal. I doubt that will ever go away

When we first posted on your talk page, we were not trying to steal away the project. We were not trying to help it fail. We weren't even trying to save the project. All we're offering is a new page location and administrative processes to assist with the effort. It doesn't matter where a page is. It doesn't matter if it's a project, task force, a user talk page, or even an article talk page. What matters is that there's a group of editors wanting to improve articles.

If you would like to better focus on your editing efforts, we can help as the offer still stands—and always will stand. I hate to sound like a broken record, but it wouldn't really change anything for your efforts. Right after a switch to a task force page, it would be business as usual for members. The only difference is members could get some of the help they desire.

Once again, I hope this does not cause another argument. Think it over. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC))

I guess for me, it's just a case of tampering with the status quo, and that I can see a move to a task force as neither beneficial nor harmful, so why mess with it? I don't see the benefits of making this a task force since it's just a matter of organization, and this project already links to the VG project anyway. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 17:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyone just trust me, I have made the right choice, when I made the project I knew I had made the right choice, when I chose the logo I Knew I had made the right choice, even when I set out to start inviting people I knew I had made the right choice and this is no different, We are now Wikiproject Sega & Nintendo and thats how we shall stay as long as I am in this project, anything else and it may as well be a task force because this project cannot last otherwise. - Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 22:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

And who elected you king, exactly? Or to be more direct is there a link to an actual discussion showing consensus for such a move? Because it'd take that, and you saying "I have made the right choice" matters a hill of beans in the long run to those of us that are affiliated with the nintendo wikiproject.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

This is starting to look like a very big case of ownership. <runs back to the shadows> --Izno (talk) 00:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Well I'd like to know who elected you guys to be the high authority of all video game WikiProjects, exactly? You go around to different WikiProjects saying "this WikiProject is failing, our WikiProject is supreme, so you can be a task force for us," (in essence). Your offer and help for this WikiProject is appreciated, but we're staying a WikiProject. You have no more authority over this project than we do, and the only policy I've seen is WP:OWN. You show no policy stating that it's your duty to turn this into a task force. Your help is appreciated, but we're staying as a WikiProject and their is nothing you can do about it. And Gaogier, I gotta say this is definitely more than we can chew. One category is bad enough, but two! We might not have very active members, but I'll see to it that they're up and running, I've even prepared a speech.Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Editors, no poor sap ever won an edit war by getting blocked for his wiki. He won it by being all that he can be. Damn the administrators, or give me active users! Eternal vigilance is the price of duty. And, to the victors go the spoils. So remember: you are the best of the best of the few and the proud. So ask not what your Wikipedia can do for you, only regret that you have but one user account to use! The war against the vandals will be won! Sega Project, let the first edit be done! Search out the vandals and frag 'em all! To do that you need to be active, alert and be the best you can be!

What do you think?Fairfieldfencer FFF 10:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to lay off the caffeine to be completely honest. But beyond that insight the Sega project, we're discussing whether one of your fellows overstepped the bounds you just shouted about and acted without consensus, not what happens to the Sega proj. Also did you just butcher a Small Soldiers quote?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well don't go shouting it about, but yes I did. And in my defence that speech came from various people and films before it was used in SS.Fairfieldfencer FFF 06:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Nobody owns nothing this is all to do with wikipedia and my goal is to get articles to FA status, people wanted to merge the two before but I disagreed but then when I saw Nintendo disappeared I decided to bring it back within this project so we can get more people to contribute, I just dont want this project to die I am a fighter and i make things work!, also who ever thinks they own the Nintendo Wikiproject needs to look at the rules... Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 00:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Nintendo didn't disappear. It just became a task force, meaning less maintenance and clutter in the end. And really it wasn't your place to decide something this rash without some major discussion. There are still plenty of Sega articles that need fixing.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Fairfield (as well as Gaogier) have ownership issues over not just the Sega project, but several Sega related articles as well. This is an issue that certainly needs to be dealt with. A project becoming a taskforce is NOT a big deal. People other than the ones in projects edit the Sega articles. The project might have done some good to the articles, but the project certainly doesn't have to exist for the articles to be edited. Plus I want to point out: editors such as Fairfield have a tendency to edit war on Sega related articles because they don't understand policies. Other people have tried to explain things to them, but they refuse to listen most of the time. Also, the project doesn't own the articles (even though Fairfield somehow thinks they do). I think in a few months (if this project doesn't pick up on activity): it should be turned into Sega and Nintendo taskforces. I also think Fairfield needs to calm down, instead of acting rudely to people trying to help. Comments such as, this one: Your help is appreciated, but we're staying as a WikiProject and their is nothing you can do about it. are not only rude, but simply not needed. I think if this project would be put in miscellany for deletion, most people would say task force it, or just merge with the video game project altogether. Perhaps that's a route to go, since just a few people are clinging to a nearly inactive project, and just whining about how it shouldn't be a taskforce. I will assume good faith though, and give it a few months time. After that: something needs to be done: a merge, taskforces or put in miscellany for deletion. RobJ1981 (talk) 16:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Editors will be editors, after all. The more I think about it, was I all that understanding in policy when I started? Nope, certainly wasn't, and I think that for some people, it just takes more time than others. For example, after I really got started here, I went and read over all the policies and got the basic gist of them, and sometimes I still go back and reread them for my own knowledge. It's a shame I can't be here more often to help (which is why I'm semi-retired), but I want to wish the best to those guys. As for the merge, I stand by saying, what's the point? Look, I do disagree with the Sega and Nintendo thing, but what more benefit is there from being a task force than a separate project? It's all just a dumb matter of organization in my opinion, and since I think it will neither benefit nor harm, my opinion is to keep the status quo in this case. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 16:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

A lot of it might be about organization, however I find it very stupid that this was done with no consensus. Gaogier just decided it on his own, but is claiming it was a group decision on the matter. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Wikipeoject_Sega_is_now_Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sega_.26_Nintendo for more about this matter. RobJ1981 (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

That wasn't the matter I was talking about, Rob. My apologies for the misunderstanding, but if you read my argument, it's more or less about the task force thing, not the merge. Personally, I am against the merge, since it's really not the intended project scope. The task force thing, though, I still don't see any reason to change, which I think is relevant since it appears this decision to merge was made in respect to preventing the merge. I may not agree with the implementation so far, but that's something to be ironed out right now, and since I don't come on here as often as I used to, I guess I'm not really relevant to the project anymore, either. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 12:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Sigh... Every time I post here now I worry it's going to drum up another needless argument.

Red Phoenix- In regard to the switch to a task force, you are quite right that it is merely an organizational change. In all honesty, the Sega project could remain as is and still be able to access the VG project's resources.

As many members have pointed out, we have no real authority and we cannot force the project to switch. The intent was never to force anything, simply consolidate resources for current video game related editors and help new editors find those resources. Which is why I've been surprised by the how so many have reacted badly to this whole situation. No malice was intended, and yet here we are in a tense situation.

To answer your question about what would be gained, easier access to the VG project's resources. I'm certain you already know how helpful they can be; would Crush 40 be in the state it's in now without WP:VG/A and WP:VG/PR? What we're offering is a place to get help from editors with a cumulative wealth of knowledge and experience. Got a question about copy righted images? Ask at WT:VG. Need an extra pair of eyes? Get the article peer reviewed or assessed. Need some printed sources? Check out WP:VG/M. Need help getting an article to GA, FA, or FL? etc, etc.

And while the Sega project is already welcome to said resources, becoming a task force simply strengths the bond between the collaborative efforts and the editors, both current and new. That was the intent. Consolidate the Sega project's resources with the VG project's to strengthen the editing power of both. If you and other members do not think that is a benefit, then I have little else to say without repeating myself. So once again, please think things over. Take the time to work on the Sega Project, just keep our offer in mind. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC))

Why is it more difficult with us being a different project? Is their some sort of rivalry? Are we enemies? Is there a hostility? Or is it WP:Vg members don't like outsiders? I'm not being offensive, but that's what you imply. You make it seem as if we can't be nice and help people outside our project as much as in. WP:Vg is already our parentage, surely that's enough.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, "Vg members don't like outsiders" is not what I implied. If that is what you inferred, then I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. To be quite frank, however, I honestly don't even see what in my last post could have been construed as such. The only thing that comes to mind is maybe "tense situation". To clarify, when I referred to a "tense situation", I meant a couple different things:

1. A week long discussion over a suggestion that has lasted a few days max with previous projects; the process may have lasted much longer, but the initial discussions were very quick.
2. The numerous posts in response to the suggestion that I've personally interpreted as "leave us alone, you have no business here." I'm willing to bet others have see it as this as well. If I interpreted any of this incorrectly, I apologize for that as well.
3. The unilateral switch from the Sega Project to the Sega and Nintendo project with no input from or mention to the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Nintendo—most of which, if not all, were members when it was its own project. If you wanted to attract members interested in Nintendo, it would have been good form to consult them first.

As stated before, we hope you consider the suggestion. There does not need to be a response right away. Take some time to think things over, and just keep it in the back of your minds while you focus on strengthening you project. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC))

Ouch, pulling the Crush 40 card on me... just kidding, I'm not really going to blow it up that big. That may be the one article I feel incredibly tied to, since I'm sure no one in their right mind would have thought it would have become a GA before I started working on it. And it's because of WP:VG/A and WP:VG/PR that I was able to do it, and for that I am incredibly grateful. In fact, I do talk on the WT:VG board (or at least I did before I semi-retired, since I'm too busy anymore to edit like I used to). I've helped in consensus decisions, coordinated efforts (and I'm sure several editors will attest to my aid in the Sonic cruft control we did a while ago), and I've asked for help there, too.

Now, about the Sega and Nintendo thing... I don't support that. To me, it doesn't make sense, and it doesn't work. I liked this workspace when it was the Sega Project, and that meant something. The people I met here really helped get me started into editing, since I originally just came on here to work on Crush 40 and save it from deletion, which at the time would have been like preventing such-and-such unnotable MySpace band from deletion, but you've seen what I've done with it. These people include User:Gaogier, User:Fairfieldfencer, and User:Doktor Wilhelm, and while they may not have as clean of an editing record as I do, it's because of these people that I was able to become an excellent editor in my own right.

Of course, working with WP:VG, on the other hand, has helped define myself as an editor after I got started. For example, I couldn't always agree with User:TTN (and I'm sure none of us agree with him all of the time), but I started to see how he saw things as a potentially logical way of doing things.

Would a Sega task force have changed anything versus a Wikiproject? Probably not, would have been just about the same. I guess to me this seems like a proposal where either way you come out with exactly what you came in with (though I'm bound to lose a lot of edits as the {{segaproject}} tags are removed). Of course, I can't answer for the "leave us alone" stuff, because I didn't say that and I'm not defending that point of view. I guess the way I see it is, with all of it being a matter of organization (and that's the way I see it), why tamper with the status quo? Yes, there's all the helpful WP:VG tools and departments, but that can be fixed just by linking them from the project page. If you can find me an argument that can convince me to change from the status quo, I'll gladly support it, even if I lose about 400 contributions from it.

I'm not here to fight you, Guyinblack25. In fact, I respect your views on the matter and do consider them when I'm on. But I'm just giving you mine and the way I see things. I'm always happy to allow consensus to take its course, and don't let other users like the other project members get you down... some just don't want it to change and can't really express it any better than they do. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 23:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Well said, and fair enough. I can certainly see your point of view and respect it. My main concern through all of this was the suggestion was going to be completely ignored in a shouting match. We're in no rush, and just want to be heard. If it doesn't happen, it does happen. Either way, the VG project's resources are available. However, I do think this recent switch to Sega and Nintendo will have to be addressed in the future.

Sorry to hear about the semi-retirement. We've all had the lack of free time before, and I hope yours isn't permanent. Also as a side note, a move would not delete the edit history and your contributions. Only when a page is deleted are contributions lost. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 00:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC))

Well, it happens sometimes. There were several reasons for my semi-retirement: I kept beating myself up after my failed RFA not because it failed but because I made a serious mistake that compromised it, I ran out of things that I wanted to edit (and List of Sega Mega-CD games just got too repetitive), I'm much more seriously restricted by time than I was, and probably the biggest reason, Wikipedia just stopped being fun. I had a lot of fun editing the articles and making them good, and it just dropped off. If I can find more free time and find something that catches my interest again, I'll try to make a comeback. Oh, but I'm drifting off topic again.

As for the Sega/Nintendo thing, I agree this has to be addressed. Gaogier asked for my opinion on it, and I told him I didn't approve of it. But I guess this is going to take something to resolve, maybe a request for comment or something. If it happens, let me know so I can voice my opinion. Thanks for your time. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It's clear that there is not consensus for this project to cover Nintendo articles, especially since a Nintendo task force already exists. I've reverted this back to a pure Sega project. There are probably a few loose ends and some pages that need to be deleted, but I think I got the bulk of it. Pagrashtak 16:08, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that reflects consensus, and I support it. Thanks for doing it. It looked pretty confusing to undo the merge. Randomran (talk) 20:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

No Arcade Ports?

Hello, I'm not a part of your task force but since you guys handle Sega pages, I'd like to inform you on two Sega arcade platforms that I just discovered. They are the Sega Mega Tech and Sega Mega Play. I believe they are important to take note of because certain Sega game pages state that there is no arcade port of certain games. The first I noticed was Golden Axe II. It does say MegaPlay on the far right of the page, but the main part of the article acts like that port does not exist. There are probably quite a few more pages with incorrect or missing information. I even saw Sonic the Hedgehog 1 & 2 on a list of Mega Play games. I haven't checked the pages for STH 1 & 2 lately, but this is the first time I've heard of arcade ports for them. I hope my post leads to some research on these arcade systems. Here are some links to get you started: http://edoscuro.home.comcast.net/~edoscuro/sega_mega_tech.htm http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?game_id=9469 http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=707 Thanks for maintaining the Sega pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.8.56.51 (talk) 01:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the merge with WP:VG

blanked metadiscussion/arguing/shouting

This is unproductive. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 09:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow- again, the discussion is degrading into a shouting match. And as Man in Black has stated, this is unproductive. Let's all step back from the topic and revisit it a month down the road. Because right now, everyone is simply repeating everything that has already been said. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC))

This is unproductive

This useless metadiscussion is generating all heat and no light. Let's have a one-month moratorium on discussing whether this should be a task force or whether it should be moved or whether it was disrespectful or yadda yadda yadda. This moratorium includes tagging new articles with this project's tag, discussing the addition of Nintendo articles to this project on this talk page or on the Nintendo task force's talk page or on WT:VG, and any merge/demerge discussions about same.

On November 5, we'll come back and decide if this project is a good idea. Until then, the Nintendo task force can do whatever and this project can do whatever. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 19:45, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

That includes metametadiscussion. Let's let it sit for a month and focus on articles.

Feel free to revert to replace the discussion I just removed, but consider first how it helps make this a better encyclopedia (instead of a useless flamepit of Usenet-esque proportions). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 06:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

This makes sense. Despite the fact that there is no functional difference between a WikiProject and a task force (assuming that task force doesn't put forward their own guidelines), give the new Wikiproject a chance to play itself out. Not sure how merging a "dying Wikiproject" with a dead Wikiproject gives new life. But let's see. Randomran (talk) 19:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Personally think that a moratorium on discussing this issue is just delaying the issue, I think that we should have a MFD to get some outside viewpoints. JACOPLANE • 2008-10-6 22:12

It is, indeed, delaying the issue. The issue is whether this can be made to be productive; anyone interested in doing so has a one-month shield from this useless metadiscussion to focus on being productive. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 00:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Not to be task forced, this is a great little group and ill try and make it work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.232.12 (talk) 21:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's been almost a month...

...And there's been hardly any activity here. I call for a decision whether it remains a project or not. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:09, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

The lack of activity pretty much answers that question. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 00:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The idea is that this would be given a month. There's no need to rush. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 12:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It's been a month now. Any more opinions? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Lack of activity or willingness to work on poor articles suggests it would be more appropriate as a task force. SynergyBlades (talk) 19:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

There's no loss leaving it as a WikiProject, I will work on it but I need to wait till Red Phonix is back. Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 00:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC).

There's no gain, either, and two people aren't enough to constitute a full WikiProject. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 00:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Gaogier, you said you would work on it a month ago. Please explain why you think you need more time, so that we may understand why you think this needs to be maintained as a project and not as a task force. As explained before, you'll have more time to do the stuff that has nothing to do with making the project run. I.e., you can work on all the articles to your delight, rather than making sure that people are involved with your project. You can edit Sonic the Hedgehog, Dreamcast, and Super Monkey Ball rather than worry about how many members of your project are actually participating. We really are struggling to understand the resistance you have toward this becoming a task force. --Izno (talk) 03:07, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Why do we need to become a task force? You have stated no policy that forces a WikiProject to become a task force so all this is is an offer, and we've declined.Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Why, with a month's worth of inactivity, does it need to stay a WikiProject? It is misleading to users to come to this page and expect to be able to get involved in what is claimed to be a "WikiProject" when there is actually almost zero activity. And there's no offer to decline or accept; the decision is made by consensus and consensus only. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:27, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Who's consensus? Ours or yours? Why do you want this place turned into a task force anyway? Bottom line is; you guys wanted to turn this place into a task force without any policy to back it up. Therefore, you can't force us into this. Who gave you the right to decide what becomes a task force anyway? This is not up to a higher graded WikiProject or an admin! They don't have that kind of power, and if they do, please show me where it states so! I may be a kid but I know you guys can't force us into becoming a task force just because you say so. If anybody wishes to reply to this, please lift up your hand, and cover your mouth with it!Fairfieldfencer FFF 16:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The policy of consensus is the only "backup" needed; many people have stated already this project's inactivity is the reason it should be turned in a TF, and no-one in opposition to the change has given any reason other than "it doesn't need to be changed". And I cannot see where any admin or other WikiProject has assumed authority in this discussion. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:57, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject:Video games are assuming authority by saying we should be a task force for them when they have no right too. You can't blame us for the inactivity. It's the rest of the members who are too lazy to help out. Most of the members that joined were Sonic fans, not fans of the electronics and finacial gain made from to SEGA from the Sega Mega Drive. After most of the Sonic articles were deleted they had lost a significant amount to edit. This WikiProject may be dying but it's not dead, yet. Until activity stops all together for a significat amount of time, that's the only reason I see for this becoming a task force. What benefits would we get from being a task force anyway?Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

There is not "yours or mine" in consensus. EVERYONE who isn't banned from WP has a right to their input. Consensus is based on feelings of those who have an opinion on the issue. There's no 'authority' going on, since it doesn't really matter who is and who isn't currently a 'member' of a project (a really silly term, all things told, given WP's structure). If only two people are actually active in the project then yes, that IS a reason to make it not a project -- especially if there's nothing apparent going on. You can't horde the space simply because "I wanna". ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 17:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to regard this WikiProject as if it were a person. A young man is on his deathbed attached to a life support machine. He is holding on for his life and the doctors say there's a good chance of recovery after a significant period. Do you pull the plug? NO! An old man is on his deathbed attached to a life support machine with little chance of survival and is in a great deal of pain. Do you pull the plug? YES! You put the man out of his misery out of common decency. This WikiProject is the young man who can recover, but when it turns old without hope, then pull the plug.Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a person, so that comparision doesn't work. Also you've been given time: and NO ONE has joined from what I can see. You can keep saying "we will get more members", but that's just an excuse at this point. I think Fairfield and Gaogier just need to be mature, and let the project be a task force. A project of two members isn't productive. This seems to be a never-ending argument: you want it kept, and a majority (the consensus) is to change it into a taskforce. I think we need to just be bold and change this to a taskforce already. Fairfield can claim "members will come" and other things, but it hasn't happened. I doubt it will happen either. This is just a distraction from the actual purpose of Wikipedia: EDITING ARTICLES. How about working on articles, instead of complaining about a project being changed? Being obsessed about a project isn't getting anywhere. Lastly, projects are meant to be places to discuss ways of helping articles. This project hasn't done that in a while. The talk page has just turned into a place where people yell at each other, and a tiny amount of people refuse to let the project go. RobJ1981 (talk) 17:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that that was a metaphor and this WikiProject has nearly sixty members. We are being mature, and even if I'm not I'm a kid so I've got a good exscuse. Why aren't you guys helping us out? Why can't you guys be mature and try helping us out before the alternative. Be gentlemen and help people in need why don't you?Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Then why aren't any of those sixty members ever bringing up issues to the page? If even 25% of them were dedicated to the project there'd surely be SOME sort of discussion about something that needs to be brought up here -- and there isn't. Some projects work out, some don't. It's a fact of life on WP. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Melodia is correct. Anyway...in a few weeks (if this hasn't been settled), I will probably redirect the proper pages and change this into a taskforce. This needs to stop. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

It would probably just be best to put it up for deletion. I really doubt they'll ever accept anything besides full protection of the redirects or an MfD result. TTN (talk) 18:18, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Why is deletion your answer to everything? *Starts acting like TTN* That article has a type! DELETE! That article doesn't have an image! DELETE! Honestly! You say delete more times than the entire Cyberman army.

That's the problem. We have dozens of members but they're too lazy to do anything. I've asked a good hard working editor to become a member here and he denied. You know why? Because of this merge discussion. SynergyBlades, (the one I'm refering to), a very good editor didn't want to become a member because of the merge. It's been scaring people off and stopped them from joining. I asked a member a month ago by E-Mail to search for new members. And the merge stopped them from joining.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

This is a discussion about the Sega Project, NOT certain editors. Don't drag personal attacks/uncivil behavior into this. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Persoal attack? I'm asking the guy why he keeps deleting everything.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Discuss that elsewhere, it's irrelevant here. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 19:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

If they're too lazy to do anything, that = "no one is doing anything", and that = "no one is participating in this project", and that = "this project is dead." You have no right to say "oh, you can't tell us what to do because you don't own this project". A significant number of people have voiced their opinions that this project is inactive and has shown no sign of life, and that is a consensus. If you oppose this consensus like that, then the only measure possible may BE to MfD. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

←No signs of life? What am I then? Chewed liver?Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

A taskforce isn't even considered active if only a few people contribute to it, why should a few people be considered active enough for a project? - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Because it may be considered inactive by users but not by Wikipedia policy.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

By a consensus of users. How do you determine that any policy says that this project is active? - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd support changing this over to a task force, for the sake of efficiency and organization. The Wikiproject is essentially inactive, and is incapable of doing many of the functions that are required for an active Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/WikiProject. A task force would be more appropriate than simply deleting it, however. Randomran (talk) 21:36, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

You'll be forced to delete eventually. Things aren't going to change and get everybody active jsut because we're a task force. What's the point of it all? How can becoming a task force improve this WikiProject? It'll still be the same members. If anybody at WikiProject:Video games wants to join they would have done that ages ago. The task force will end up inactive unless things pick up. Which can also happen here as a WikiProject. What is the God damn that can be made as a task force!?Fairfieldfencer FFF 22:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Because then we'll have only 2 or 3 inactive pages, rather than 2 dozen. Listen, maybe we can establish a better understanding if you can tell me what this group currently does. Don't talk about task forces or wikiprojects. Tell me: speaking as a member of this group, what do you think this group of editors wants to accomplish on Wikipedia? Randomran (talk) 00:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I believe that this WikiProject was made to help SEGA related articles, but that most of the members joined purely because of Sonic or some other SEGA character. But we have managed to get a none Sonic article to GA along with a featured list thanks to Red Phoenix. I'm the de facto of the Sonic Task Force here so it's my responsability to help Sonic articles. After most of the Sonic character articles were merged, there was less content and the members lost interest. But a few us still remain. Me, the de facto of the Sonic Task Force, Gaogier are leader and the temporarily retired Red Phoenix, who managed to get the GA and make the featured list. One of the best here. During the merge, Super Badnik helped save an by making a reception section for Rouge the Bat's page. SLJCOAAATR 1 is helping on Sonic video game articles by supplying us with new information, I do the same and keep watch of the Sonic articles. All in all, our goal is to help SEGA related articles whether they be Sonic, Nights or Crazy Taxi. The remaining active members still hold those goals. The inactive ones either don't give a damn anymore or have left Wikipedia, I actually met another member on a different website who hadn't edited Wikiedpia in a while. We can't force members to be active, there's nothing much we can do about that, but you can't lay that responsibity at our shoulders. Why not help us out? Recommend some members at WP:VG we could invite here. Try to fix the problem before you merge it. It would certainly be a great help to us. Maybe one of you guys would like to join?Fairfieldfencer FFF 08:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You still fail to explain what being a project accomplishes that being a taskforce does not. - A Link to the Past (talk) 09:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

A project is more impressive. People think "Ooh! A WikiProject! This sounds like it could be a big deal." Compare it to a task force and you've got "Task force? What's that? Some place I do all the errands for a WikiProject I'm not even a part of?" What would you with join? WikiProject or task force? And I'd like you to explain what being a task force accomplishes that being a WikiProject does not.Fairfieldfencer FFF 09:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

People judge WikiProjects and task forces by their activity, not by how impressive they sound. By your reasoning, task forces don't even have a purpose to exist. And you can stop right now this "me and Gaogier are leader" rubbish, you've been told numerous times to stop assuming authority over the project, which you do not have. You've had a month to try to raise activity, and you've clearly failed, so now we have progressed to discussing whether this should remain a WikiProject. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 12:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not assuming authority! I'm telling you my position in the project. Most of the more important members are active. As long as there is activity this should stay a WikiProject. What counts as activity anyway? Where is it stated in policy what an inactive WikiProject is? Where is it stated in policy that a WikiProject should be merged? Consensus is one thing, but you need the solid ground of policy to back it up. I might even go to Jimbo Wales to see what he thinks of this.Fairfieldfencer FFF 12:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If a bunch of editors got together and decided to vandalize Wikipedia, would that overright policy because of the consensus?Fairfieldfencer FFF 12:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Claiming yourself or someone else to be in the position of leader implies enough authority. The only policy we have been using here, and the only one that needs to be used, is consensus, as I have stated too many times before; Wikipedia:List of policies states nothing related to WikiProjects. There is, now, apart from you, an established consensus that the previous month, in which there has been no activity whatsoever, shows this project to be inactive enough to be downsized to a task force. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 13:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

←Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Wasn't the deadline six months?Fairfieldfencer FFF 13:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Izno did suggest giving them 3 to 6 months in late September, but there was never any agreement from any other editor from either side of the discussion. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

It's been more than long enough. We didn't have this sort of deadline before WP Nintendo was converted to a TF, and most people agree a task force is most appropriate anyway. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If there was never any confirmed date then the deal about this becoming a task force is null and void. Give us six months and I can promise you this project will be alive and kicking. It doesn't matter how long other projects took by the way. This one is different. I can get new active members easily now that I know where to look for them. Sonic forums that I've found and members from a Sonic News Network. Mostly fans of Sonic already editing that would be glad to help out.Fairfieldfencer FFF 16:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

That's far too long, and for all we know it could just remain dormant in this state without any development, promise or no promise. One month is more than long enough to attract such members, and you've failed to do so. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like this Wikiproject is inactive. What do we do with inactive Wikiprojects? We tag them as inactive, and try to clean them up. Turning it into a task force makes more sense than deleting it at this time. If you improve the activity of the task force and find you need something more, I'm sure you could build a new consensus to split away as a WikiProject. But not right now, with basically 2-3 editors stonewalling a routine clean-up. Randomran (talk) 17:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Randomran. That I agree too. But to make the consensus an entirety Gaogier is going to have to jump on board. But if this can be made back into a WikiProject once activity has boosted up, I'm sure he'll agree. But what will happen to the Sonic Task Force?Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

That's another topic of discussion. Maybe we'd make both of them task forces of WP:VG -- a sega taskforce, and a more specific sonic task force. If you look at Talk:Super_Smash_Bros., you'll see an article that is monitored by two task forces: the Super Smash Bros. task force, and the Nintendo task force. I imagine sonic articles could be the same way. I'm thinking out loud. It seems there is overwhelming consensus to go with the task force approach... but keep in mind consensus is not permanent, and opinion can change depending on how the task forces perform. Randomran (talk) 17:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, the Super Smash Bros. task force would be a good template for a potential Sonic task force. Fairfieldfencer seems to think that being a task force is somehow a downgrade from being a project: it simply isn't! Group collaborations are judged on the quality of their work (usually expressed in the number of GA/FA) and nothing else. Do Sega-related articles use the WP:VG peer-review, assessment, image guidelines, article guidelines, etc? Of course they do. Look at the accomplishments of something like the Devil May Cry task force: with 3 GAs and 3 FAs, they've accomplished a great deal more than the Sega project has, with a limited scope. FFF: why not make this a great task force, personally I don't think that going to war with WP:VG is helping you at all. JACOPLANE • 2008-11-10 18:10

Agreed, thank you Randomran.
As for the Sonic task force, we can make that a specific task force to Video games, merge it with the Sega task force when it is moved, or delete it. If (when?) this project ever sees enough contributors, and you wish to move back to being a WikiProject, you'll have to ask the people involved in the Sonic task force if they wish to move back to being a task force of Sega if we go with the former. If it's merged as in the latter, than you take it with you if (when) you are no longer a task force of Video games. What we do when moving to a task force of WPVG is largely dependent on how many people are active in it currently. If no-one's contributing to the task force, I would consider either a) deletion or b) simply redirecting to the Sega task force. I think I'd rather see it redirected/merged, as Sonic is nearly synonymous with Sega, instead of deletion. If there are a lot of people contributing to it, I would take the option of making it a task force of WPVG.
In this case, the choice is essentially yours. I've laid out what I see to be the options. My final opinion on what happens to it would be simply to redirect it to the Sega task force, as again, when one thinks Sega, one usually thinks Sonic. --Izno (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

←I'm perfectly happy with the new agreement. Merge the Sega Project and Sonic Task Force to WP:VG with the chance of being made back in to a WikiProject. This suits me perfectly, just so long as it doesn't get deleted because of inactivity as a task force. I've even been thinking of making a Sonic Project, but I don't think I'm cut out for that sort of thing, plus I don't want to give the Sega Task Force any competition. I'd stick this in your diaries if I were you. I'm as stubborn as a mule and am not persuaded so easily.Fairfieldfencer FFF 18:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion as a task force will surely depend on how active it is in that state. SynergyBlades (talk) 18:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

And like most everything else on Wikipedia, deleted pages can be recreated under the right circumstances. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. We know what we have agreement to do now. So let's create those two task forces under the VG banner, and move the Sega WP / Sonic TF over. We'll figure out the next step later, because that depends so much on activity. Who has the patience to pull off this re-organization? Randomran (talk) 18:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Just for the hell of it, how about whoever came up with the idea in the first place? There idea there responsibility. Sounds fair. I can move most of the pages if you like but somebody's got to take care of the images. Because I know zip about all that photoshop stuff.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If you feel comfortable doing it, you can go ahead. I'm sure someone else can fill in the gaps if you run into any trouble. Keep us updated. Randomran (talk) 19:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

It no-one's "responsibility". That, as has been said, is not the idea in a voluntary project. And I'd say, for the sake of simplicity, it's best to deprioritise editing images until all work on the pages is done. They're mostly trivial in the functioning of WikiProjects/task forces. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 19:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I've got a full plate of things to do, but can certainly assist whoever wants to head up the move. Here's a listing of the Sega pages. Most will go to either WP:VG/Sega or WP:VG/Sonic. Some look like test pages that didn't get finished and may be candidates for deletion if the members have no plans for them. The newsletter issues can be moved to an archive page under WP:VG/NEWS and linked there as well. I think anything labeled as "WikiProject Sega & Nintendo" can probably be tagged as speedy delete as unlikely redirects. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

Page moves and cleanup

←Err... I seem to have made a mistake by moving this talk page instead of the page itself. Otherwise, all main sections done.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

All linked pages have been moved.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Are the moves alright? Or has the f*** up fairy visited me again.Fairfieldfencer FFF 19:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I've fixed the main TF page, it seems to be fine. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 19:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Here are the pages that look like deletion candidates:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega/to do/to do -tagged for speedy delete
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega/Selected picture -tagged for speedy delete
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Header/Nintendo -tagged for speedy delete
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Big the Cat
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Blaze the Cat
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Chaotix
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Cream the Rabbit
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Guardian Units of Nations
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Knuckles the Echidna
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Miles "Tails" Prower
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Sandbox/Amy Rose
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Silver the Hedgehog
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Shadow the Hedgehog
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Sonic the Hedgehog
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters/Template:Sonic Characters
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/to do -tagged for speedy delete

Any thoughts on them? We can do a batch MfD, but I believe most can be tagged as speedy delete for house keeping reasons. There are also several double redirects using the Sega and Nintendo name. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

They all seem more or less redundant. Speedy delete. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 20:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually the Sonic/Character ones are pretty important. They're prototype potential articles that could be made into real ones once all the info is added.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't see the Sega & Nintendo.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Updated the listing. Someone may want to check the Shadow the Hedgehog page because it has substantially more content than the others. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

I don't think we need to worry about that. The article doesn't need anything done to it at the moment.Fairfieldfencer FFF 21:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Updated listing again. What should be done with the character templates? Delete, move, or tag inactive? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC))

If you're talking about the ones on the prototype articles, they're there to help get around and should be kept. If you mean the Sega & Nintendo redirects to the prototypes, delete all of them except Guardian Units of Nations, which appears to be the main version that should be moved to the proper name.Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Redirects

With this move there are some double redirects from pages titled "Sega & Nintendo". I'm not sure if they qualify for speedy deletion, so a batch deletion at WP:RFD may be the best venue. Either way, since they are unlikely search terms they can be deleted. Here's the listing of redirects:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Assessment
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Awards
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Header
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Images
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Members
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sega/Awards
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sega/Images
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sega/to do
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sega Assessment
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sega to do
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/Sonic/Characters
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/leftpanel
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo/rightpanel

Any thoughts on which route would be the best, Speedy Delete or RFD? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 21:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

I think technically you're supposed to put it up for RFD. Which, if there are no objections, works the same as speedy deletion... I think. Either way, you're not supposed to speedy delete anything but articles. We can chime in to make sure this is polished off okay. Randomran (talk) 21:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

See RFD: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Wikipedia:WikiProject Sega & Nintendo. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 21:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC))

It is likely we could have had them CSDd per R3 or G6, but since you started an RfD, I'll go add my delete there. :) --Izno (talk) 23:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Rename of Category:Sega CD games to Category:Sega Mega-CD games

I have proposed renaming Category:Sega CD games to Category:Sega Mega-CD games. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 November 7#Category:Sega CD games. Garrett^Talk 06:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

finishing the clean-up / change

There's a lot of mentions of "Sega Wikiproject" all over the place that probably need to change over to "task force". Are they centralized, or are they kind of all over the place? This is gonna take a lot of work. But I'm willing to help out, if we can organize our efforts a little bit. Randomran (talk) 21:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

All we need to do there is edit a few images and templates.Fairfieldfencer FFF 21:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

One of the few major difference between a WikiProject and a Task Force is that Task Forces use the main wikiproject's assessment scale, rather than having to work through their own. This lets task forces focus more on writing articles, and less on administrative overhead. What should we do with: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sega/Assessment? We don't really need it for the time being, and might even be able to remove it from the template. Randomran (talk) 22:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and WP:BOLDly tagged the pages as historical, and removed them from the navigational template. If anyone wants to go in and do a little further clean-up, be my guest. Randomran (talk) 22:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I did a lot of other clean-up. Hopefully a few other editors can check in and fill in any gaps I've missed. Randomran (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I figured we'd just use separate templates but change the name to Sega Task Force. The assessment departments could be handled by different editors but we use the same system, saving us from bother WP:VG/A all the time.Fairfieldfencer FFF 09:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh... There was definitely misunderstanding prior. The assessment scheme for VG/A is what you use now as a task force, so you are by no means 'bothering' them. :) --Izno (talk) 15:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Well I'm sure RP will be relieved that he doesn't have to rate those article anymore.Fairfieldfencer FFF 16:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

He's still welcome to do so. But he can do so knowing there are others helping out. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC))

Again, just one of the key differences between a task force and a WikiProject. If your main goal is to improve articles, a task force might let you focus on that and waste less time on other stuff. Something to think about, in the future. Randomran (talk) 16:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Good to know. I'm actually trying to bring an article back by working on an article of the same subject on a different wikia. Hitting two birds with one stone you might say. Who is the head of your assessment department? Usually I just run it by RP because he's a mate and this isn't really what an assessment dept. is for. I might run it by him now though. This is the article I'm working on.Fairfieldfencer FFF 17:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Bot request

Izno made a request on my talk page to replace {{Segaproject}} with {{WikiProject Video games|tf=Sega}}, as I did for the Nintendo project (here). I am almost done modifying the code to handle that. Do you want me to preserve the Sonic task force as well (i.e. {{Segaproject|tf=Sonic}} → {{WikiProject Video games|tf=Sega|tf2=Sonic}})? Anomie⚔ 03:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I think that's the plan: two task forces, both with WP:VG as the parent. Randomran (talk) 04:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

BRFA filed Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 10 Anomie⚔ 04:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Doing... It was speedily approved. Anomie⚔ 05:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Y Done Anomie⚔ 11:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Are you (as a project) planning to TFD the obsolete template? Anomie⚔ 13:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Segaproject

Template:Segaproject has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Anomie⚔ 03:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

After Burner II - Sega Genesis

I noticed that there is some stuff that has my curiosity going. On the title screen on the bottom right it mentions the name "DEMPA"

Who are they and what was with their connection with Sega?

Also the page fails to mention it was released on Sega 32X. JasonHockeyGuy (talk) 23:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Dempa is a game developer. I believe they developed the arcade version, if I remember right, and Rutubo Games did the port. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:33, 23 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 06:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Future of this task force

A discussion of the organization of the projects and taskforces for Wikiproject:Video Games has been started, and I have mentioned both the Sonic and Sega task forces, which have been largely inactive for a while now. Please visit the Inactive project cleanup to discuss. SynergyBlades (talk) 18:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't find it surprising at all that people said this taskforce WOULD be active. But it's not, and I doubt it ever will be. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Humm seems the future is bleak for The Sega Project :'( Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 01:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Might I suggest you try what the Nintendo task force has done, and start an active/inactive user list to gauge participation? Move everyone to the inactive list, then leave a message on everyone's talk page and let them move themselves to the active list. By getting people to mark themselves as active editors in the task force, you might be able to spur some people into participating and getting involved. SynergyBlades (talk) 02:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

• I have listed the former WikiProject categories for deletion here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 15#Category:WikiProject Sega. Unless someone objects, they will be deleted in about 5 days. –xeno (talk) 17:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

• It does seem like this taskforce is dead in the water, but I am sure it could be revied to a force for maintaining and improving all of the SEGA articles on wikipedia, and not just the ones relating to video game characters. I believe an active/inactive user list would be of help, but after the initial movement of editors to the inactive user list and their claim that they are active, how will it be possible to keep a check on weither they are active or inactive, in the future? I'll see if I can write a message to be posted on every ones talkpage, something like:

"Hi, you are on the member list for the Sega Taskforce, we are cleaning up the member list and includding a active/inactive editor list so that editors may know who to turn to for help with Sega related articles. If you can help and still wish to be a part of the attempt to maintain and improve all arcticles relating to Sega please consider visiting the Sega Taskfore members page and moving your name for 'inactive' to 'active'. If you just wish to show that you are a fan/supporter of sonic the hedgehog or Sega its self, you maybe better adding a related userbox to your profile, than adding your name to the active list."

Maybe it could have a few links to userboxes that the editor could use, and be a lot better worded. Hopefully I'll be around a lot more this time than I was before.  Doktor  Wilhelm  12:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

As no one seems to have a problem with my idea, I'll get started on it in the next week, I just hope that this time we can get editors who are interested in (and know more about than I) SEGA as a company instead of just the publishers/developers of Sonic the Hedgehog games! :P  Doktor  Wilhelm  22:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

WHAT IS LEFT

Honestly this task force is deader than road kill, It was once popular.... We were breeding like rabbits.... Then along came a car and everyone got run over...

Gaogier ^{How can I help?} 17:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Dreamcast at Valued Pictures

The picture of the Dreamcast is currently a Valued Picture nominee so can some of you please go review it? Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 00:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Article about Shenmue series

Can we have an article about the Shenmue series rather than have all information about the entire series directed on the article of the first game in the series? --Victory93 (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

There are only three games in the series, and while this may work for other series such as Super Smash Bros. or EarthBound, none of the games in this series (especially Online) have a great deal of RS coverage to imply that the articles are worthy of a collective series article. Tezero (talk) 04:43, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Phantasy Star Universe

Phantasy star universe articles really need some clean up. For some odd reason, some wikipedians believe adding links to the characters is a good idea, rather than actually adding information to the article. Also those articles are in desperate need of references, they hold no citations or refs. the only thing they do have is external links. i would say the only two articles from phantasy star universe that hold refs is phantasy star portable and phantasy star portable 2.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

1994 magazine scan to help with console sales sources.

This magazine scan from 1994 shows sales numbers of the Mega Drive, Mega 32X, and Mega CD at the time.
Keep in mind it is only for the end of 1994, and does not include any 1995 sales of any of those consoles.--108.2.2.183 (talk) 15:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Wishlist

Hi, could somebody write an article about the Davis Cup World Tour. I linked the article in the Tennis Girl article since Sega used it in their advertisement. mabdul 15:28, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

One day Simon ^{How can I help?} 20:15, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hows about we write that article? Simon ^{How can I help?} 22:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Feature

• Aamoth, Doug. "Sonic the Hedgehog Turns 20: A Look Back at His Achievements." TIME. June 23, 2011.

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Our Efforts have been Overturned

We prioritised 100s of articles, only to find they no longer have our banner, I'm not sure what to do, we worked so well as a WikiProject... Simon ^{How can I help?} 08:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

What is with Category:Sega task force articles? mabdul 11:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

It shows that those articles are within our scope though we had a banner which specified the level of priority, a banner which has since been removed Simon ^{How can I help?} 22:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Is this still alive?

Wow, I'm actually pleasantly surprised. Simon, I'm glad to see you're still around as well. I might switch from retired to semi-retired. I'm through all my schooling and could use something that keeps me interested, not to mention a useful resource for the world. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 14:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Most excellent, I am also through schooling and would love to bring this to life again with you :) Simon ^{How can I help?} 05:39, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I'd love to. All the bitterness from the politics of Wikipedia is gone; it seems to me as I read through the pages of Wikipedia nowadays that there is a clearer direction to the project as a whole. There does seem to be a fair bit of updating that needs to be done, though, but I'm sure that with a little polish and updating, the Sega Task Force can stand as a strong project all unto its own and we can collaborate to improve articles again. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 15:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Assessment department

I don't see a link to the assessment department page off the main page, but it does still exist at WP:SEGA/A. Given how much more comprehensive the assessment has become at WP:VG/A over the past four years, and the new structures of ratings all across Wikipedia that is much more comprehensive from the top down than it used to be, are our assessments necessary anymore? If nothing else, with our limited contributor base it'd likely be more helpful to get assessment straight from the Video Games wikiproject since they'll have more outside eyes who can take a look and give us better feedback. About the only feature I can see us needing from the old page would be our importance scale in regards to priority with the task force, but I'm not sure that's something we'd need an assessment page for. We might be more suitable with that on a "pending projects" page for priority articles to be worked on by the task force, and a list of specific high-priority items to work on. Thoughts? I'd like to get some opinions before we make a decision on it. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 15:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

This is one which I will have to think about, and really requires some team thought, you see WP:VG have different priorities. I do think as you say that priority tasks should be made clear so that individuals know what to do, given our wide scope.

I also one of the main tasks right now is that we update the whole of Wikiproject Sega TaskForce to fir with the new decade and the given year. We must also start bringing new members into the group.

Having you here Red is the number one greatest motivation I could ever have to bring this back to life. Simon ^{How can I help?} 22:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Simon. I'm not sure you'll like everything I have to suggest, but given that it's really a small project, I'd love to do whatever I can to save it. On that note, I spent an entire day revising Sega v. Accolade a couple of days ago, if it'll show you my commitment ;)

Going a few steps further

Here's a few things I see us having to do in order to revitalize WP:SEGA:

Modernize - So many of our pages are outdated. We have to keep up with the times. FA/GA lists need redone, prioritization needs redone... we have a lot of old pages that probably need to be deleted. We still have links on the template to the Sonic mini task force that hasn't existed in years.

Mobilize? - Simon, I tried to view WP:SEGA on my phone, but it looked very choppy. I still very much like the template you have up there, though, so might there be a way to recode it so it works on mobile phones? We may need to ask up about that and see if there's anything we can put in the Wiki markup that won't mess with the layout.

Drop the old references - This is probably the hardest part. We're no longer WikiProject Sega, and the more we dwell on formerly being a WikiProject before the standards tightened up in 2008, the more we're going to push away any new membership. What I might recommend, though, is we go back to basics. Remember when you first started the project? We were WikiProject Sega, but we didn't really call ourselves that. We were "The Sega Project", plain and simple. That's the term I think we need to use again, of course with the subheading "Sega Task Force" so as to avoid confusion to those we bring in. Everyone else stopped talking about the demotion years ago; we're sort of in a new era of Wikipedia and none of the old faces, save for you and me, are still around anymore. Removing the references from the main page and all over will help with that.

Stuff with the Video Games project - Absolutely, the video games project does have different priorities, but that's why we exist. We have our own pages in order to work on our own priorities for Sega-related articles. That's why we're the Sega Task Force. We're here to work on articles together, and what we have here is to help us work on them together, stay motivated (i.e. WP:SEGA/W), and watch out for vandalism and other issues. That being said, it's not best if we do it all ourselves because we don't have enough eyes to evaluate ourselves. Here's a thought, though: WP:VG is the core of all of the video game task forces. If we trust certain things like assessment and policy to them, and we focus on article writing and improvement of our articles, then 1.) we've established our own priorities independent of the main body, and 2.) we'll be using them just enough to improve ourselves. And don't forget, most editors who edit video games articles like the ones we work on are members of WP:VG. Getting back into a system where we focus on being the best task force in the Video Games Project and not treating it as a competition with them will mean we can start recruiting new members into our reborn task force and take some serious focus on Sega articles.

Just some thought, and I'm sure you won't like all of them, but what do you think? Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 02:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

- To help envision it, I'm going to start working on a new look in my sandbox. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 15:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, I just went ahead and made the changes. Next step is to see if we can bring some people over to help contribute and make Sega an excellent topic covered on Wikipedia. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 01:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Sega task force logo

You may be able to use the Sega logo to identify your task force. Please see the related conversation at WT:VG#Taskforce logos. czar · · 09:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I replied over at WT:VG. I'm a bit concerned about trademark infringement if we do, but it would be nice; especially since we're trying to rebuild the project. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 13:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic Reference

Just wanted to point out an awesome reference for all things Sega from their start up until the end of the Dreamcast:

Kent, Steven L. (2001). The Ultimate History of Video Games: The Story Behind the Craze that Touched our Lives and Changed the World. Roseville, California: Prima Publishing. ISBN 0-7615-3643-4.

^ This book is an AMAZING reference, and covers a lot of things. I used it to basically rewrite Sega v. Accolade, and it could also be an excellent backbone for Sega, Sega Genesis, Sega 32X, Sega Saturn, Sega Dreamcast, Mortal Kombat, and possibly as a supporter reference for a bunch of games and Sonic the Hedgehog (character). Happy editing! Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 15:15, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

SEGA pages being vandalised

can someone stop this person? he keeps replacing the word Japanese with american in SEGA pages. Everything related to SEGA including Japan-only releases are apparently American. i dont know how to stop it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:186.92.132.188 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.123.171 (talk) 23:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Can you show some specific articles and edits? Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 04:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Here are all his edits[1]. All of them are for SEGA pages, and all of them are replacing 'Japan' with 'american'. One example is his edit on the Shadow the Hedgehog page[2]. it discusses a 'Japanese Sonic character poll'. he changed it to a 'american Sonic character poll'. All of his edits are like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.123.171 (talk) 08:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

All right, I have issued a warning on the user's talk page. If any further action occurs, we will report it at WP:AN/I. Also, 82.0.123.171, would you make sure to sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes (looks like this: ~ ) please? It's very helpful and proper Wikipedia etiquette. And thank you for reporting the incident, I'll make sure we see it through. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 22:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Second warning issued. Next one goes to WP:AN/I. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 01:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Red Phoenix for sorting that out. I had no idea what steps were meant to be taken in this situation. 82.0.123.171 (talk) 12:52, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. I'd say that's part of the reason why we even have a Sega task force, is to protect Sega articles from vandalism. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 16:37, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Good to see you around :), I'm here too now! Simon ^{How can I help?} 21:49, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Now that's awesome :P Hey Simon, make sure to check out List of Sega 32X games, I've got it nominated to bring it back to FL criteria. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 14:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Sega Genesis

There's another discussion to move Sega Genesis to Mega Drive at Talk:Sega Genesis. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 23:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Sega Project's first FA candidate

Heads up: Sega v. Accolade is at WP:FAC! Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 01:10, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Nice work! Don't stop till you get enough!
Simon ^{How can I help?} 17:40, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey

Nice use of the Sega logo also! feel free to delete (or fix) the MJ thing.Simon ^{How can I help?} 18:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I haven't been here quite as much in the last few days thanks to work, but I'm still chugging away. Sega 32X is at GAN, and I'm working hard on Sega CD. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 13:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

All is quiet...

On the SEGA front: Sega v. Accolade up for FA status; Sega CD, Sega 32X, and Sega Game Gear at WP:GAN. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 21:44, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Sega v. Accolade is now an FA! Man, I wish you guys were all here to see this... kind of a shame that this place is silent. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 01:04, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

So sorry, I just keep forgetting o pop by and contribute, but I will find a way to remind myself Simon ^{How can I help?} 15:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

It's cool, Simon. Just kinda lonely around here... haven't managed to generate interest in WP:SEGA. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Also added: Sega CD just passed a GA nomination today. Sega 32X passed a while ago. Sega Game Gear is still being reviewed. Since this place is so silent, I might as well just announce all of my Sega-based achievements :P Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 00:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Sega Game Gear also passed, but it's worth noting there's still flames going on about the Sega Genesis article name... sigh, will it ever end?

Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) failed at GAN, but I got Sonic Adventure up to GA status actually. We should make the Sonic video games a featured topic. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:44, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I'd love to ;) Always been a big fan of Sonic games. Actually, as of late I've been hoping to make Sega Genesis a featured topic but the name debates there will never let it be stable enough. Sonic the Hedgehog (series) would have to be the focus article there, but certainly doable. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Taking a stance toward Sega Genesis

So, there's still a raging debate going on at Sega Genesis as to whether or not the article should be named "Mega Drive". I know this project is mostly dead, but any opinions? Here's my official take: I prefer Mega Drive myself and feel it's the better title overall, but feel that consistency is more important and we'll never have it if we don't pick a title and stick with it, so I'll argue for Sega Genesis any day of the week while attempts are being brought up. It's not about shooting down the proposals; it's about maintaining consistency and order so that Wikipedia may be a serious place. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 01:13, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Mega Drive, it's far more widely used, I also think it sounds better and I would argue Mega Drive also. Simon ^{How can I help?} 22:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a variety of proposals are being considered there right now. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 00:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

{{SG-1000}}

template:SG-1000 has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 00:10, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the update Simon ^{How can I help?} 23:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Article assistance request

Hey Sega fanboys and fangirls! I'm submitting a request that anyone from this project offer assistance at Sega. (This almost seems tautological...) Over the last fourteen days, several anon. IPs (or possibly a single user over multiple IPs) have made extensive revisions to the article, mostly a drastic expansion of the "SEGA [sic] studios" section, all without a single reference. (At one point, I swear it was posited that Nintendo now owns Sega!) Unfortunately, I don't know anything about Sega's development studios, so I'm not qualified to asses the veracity of the info added. Per WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:V, I would simply remove the info, but I'm not sure this is a clear case (i.e. I don't know if such info is within the scope of a video game article, nor its accuracy therein). Therefore, I must defer to your knowledge on this subject; any and all assistance from this WikiProject is greatly appreciated!!    DKqwerty    04:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I can see no one's gotten back with you... it's kind of a dead project. That beside the point, here's what I can tell you. A lot of the information is fairly accurate, but I would disagree with its implementation like that in the article anyway. Personally, I happen to be more quality focused than quantity of information present, and whoever postulated that Nintendo owns Sega is out of their mind (It is currently owned by Sammy, operating as Sega Sammy Holdings, and Sega operates as Sega Corporation). About the most I know of Sega's development studios myself come from their Mega Drive/Genesis years when they were Sega Enterprises, Ltd., and they ran 9 studios (Sega-AM1 through Sega-AM9, most of these were later renamed: AM8 became Sonic Team, AM3 became Hitmaker, AM5 became Sega Rosso, etc.) Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 23:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I feel so lonely...

Sega Nomad is now at GAN. Sega Genesis passed one a while ago, which means we're progressing toward a featured topic. *sigh* It's nice to update things, but it still kind of feels like it's just me around here, and that makes me sad. At least once we have a Sega Genesis featured topic, I'll preserve the name of WP:SEGA and call it a project featured topic. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Heads up. I am planning to take Sonic Adventure 2 to GA status. I made Sonic Adventure a GA a while back before I took a two-month semi-retirement. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Haha, know how you feel there... I'm about seven months in after coming off of a six-year retirement. Still looking forward to really getting this task force going again, especially with so much progress going on the Genesis articles. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:51, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Roll call!

Sega Task Force members, are you active? I'll be sending out roll call notices to everyone's talk page. If we're to rebuild the project and collaborate on Sega articles, we need to know who on WP:SEGA/M is active and editing. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

1. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
2. Did I miss anything? MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 02:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
3. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:42, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
4. WM-86 - WM-86 12:23, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

@Matticusmadness: Just trying to rebuild the task force for the good of Sega articles on Wikipedia ;) Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:42, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I figured that out. That's kind of my way of saying that I'm here. Heh. MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 03:42, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Heh, well, we're still kind of blowing the dust off :P Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 03:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the role call. I am primarily interested in writing Dreamcast pages, specifically for our indie games. My best article is IRiDES: Master of Blocks I would very much like to see it become a featured article.--Cube b3 (talk) 05:33, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

While I am active in Wikipedia, I have not done much editing to any Sega articles recently. I have, personally, not seen many games being released by them lately, though I have not been active in looking to see if they have been releasing anything. Shadow Android (talk) 16:29, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Cool, well, we're glad to have you all on board ;) I'm going to make sure to keep things updated here, and I hope WP:SEGA will be a useful tool for everyone here. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 21:59, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

What's all changed?

@Simon Alexander Tolhurst: This one's specifically for you, but it's also for everyone who's coming back from a long period of absence. It's been quite a while since WP:SEGA has been active, but it's time to really get caught up on things. Here's what's happened since at least my retirement six years ago (and from what I can tell, not a whole lot happened here after that...)

• I've restructured a few pages here. Our old assessment department kind of didn't make sense anymore since WP:VG does all of our reviews after we became a task force, so I've converted it into a review department, WP:SEGA/R. This is a place where editors can have Sega articles reviews by editors who are experienced and knowledgeable about Sega topics, and for right now that's namely me since I've been the only one here.
• Sonic mini-task force is gone, but there's nothing that was there that we can't do here.
• Sega Genesis is still a naming dispute firestorm... the only consensus there is is that any proposal will be shot down for the reason "not this shit again". However, it has been redone into a GA, so at least it's a good article nowadays; just don't count on "Mega Drive" being the naming convention.
• All sorts of new, high quality articles, all in the name of WP:SEGA! Sega v. Accolade is a featured article, and was on the main page two days ago. Sega Genesis, Sega CD, Sega Game Gear, and Sega 32X are all GAs as well now, and List of Sega 32X games was restored to FL status. On that note, in keeping consistency with the situation at Sega Genesis, the remaining articles have had their names changed to fall in with the "parent" article and establish a consistent article series that may hopefully be a featured topic soon.
• Sega Nomad is at WP:GAN
• A lot has changed, and most of the old editors we once knew here are gone. Most of the editors at WP:SEGA/M are inactive, but so are the editors that many of them fought with. Both are sad losses that Wikipedia no longer has these editors. We stand now as a new WP:SEGA, and WP:VG is mostly a new WP:VG as well, and perhaps more helpful than ever.

There's a short list. Any specifics I can help with? Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 03:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I think we should completely reformat the list of members who are still active to this day. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Probably not a bad idea, but we really need to establish the project and have it active first, I think. Not much point in doing so until we find out who will be involved actively with the task force and who won't. That being said, I'm not sure there are a lot of active editors on that list; maybe a few. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 03:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I have yet to get over this task force demotion, i'm getting there slowly, is Wilhelm gone? Simon ^{How can I help?} 23:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Haha, don't worry about the "demotion" - it's just a name change for organizational purposes; nothing's really different in that regard. Honestly I don't even use assessments anymore because I just go straight for GAs and FAs anyway. Yeah, as far as I'm aware, Wilhelm is gone and has been for some time, and so has most of the old guard, per se. Fairfieldfencer and all of his Sonic fan buddies are gone; I don't think they took too kindly to having a bunch of Sonic fancruft removed, although in the end I think it was the right call in terms of building the encyclopedia. It's just a shame there was so much drama here, and that's part of what drove me into retirement for several years. We're here to improve articles together as a group; as far as I'm concerned anymore, that means it doesn't matter what they call us. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 04:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

That is so very true Simon ^{How can I help?} 16:24, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

It is. Also, here's a quote from WP:TASKFORCE:

A task force is, essentially, a non-independent subgroup of a larger WikiProject that covers some defined part of the WikiProject's scope. For example, the United States military history task force of the Military history WikiProject deals with the military history of a specific country; and the Warcraft task force of the Video games WikiProject covers a single game series. The distinction between a task force and a WikiProject is that the task force minimizes bureaucratic overhead: It relies on the parent project to provide much of the procedural and technical infrastructure. A task force, for example, uses the core project's peer-review and assessment processes rather than creating its own, thereby allowing it to focus on writing and editing.

I'd say that makes us a task force. WP:SEGA/R still exists, but I wouldn't trust myself to peer review every article that comes our way, just to help conduct some as an experienced editor of Sega articles. WP:VG/A is a better helper for that because it'll let us get some different sets of eyes on things. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 22:08, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Future project ideas

Just sharing some things I'm looking at working on, would be glad to collaborate ;)

• Awaiting GA review of Sega Nomad
• Sega Genesis for FA status, further GA promotions of Sega Net Work System and Sega Channel, as well as FL promotions of List of Sega CD games and List of Sega Genesis games (note: these last two will take a long time, because of the number of games), working toward a featured topic.
• Would really love to work on Phantasy Star Online and get it to GA status.
• Sjones23, I haven't forgotten about Sonic Adventure 2, but time's getting tight for me as we approach the holiday season. I work in retail, so that should kind of say why that is. If nothing else, I can help to review it and offer suggestions if I don't have time to work on it fully and do all the things I want to do.

Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 21:24, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Phantasy Star Online 2 Edit Lock Request

Hello, I like to request an edit lock on the stated page. It suffered a lot of vandalism and it lacks the attention of editors. That is all. Thank you. --(,･∀･)ノシ(BZ) (talk) 21:51, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I think you're in the wrong place; as far as I'm aware, I don't think any administrators are involved with this project. You may want to check out WP:RPP for such a request. Thanks, Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 02:00, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that, thanks for showing me the link. You may keep this as a reminder about some barely abandoned page that needs attention. --(,･∀･)ノシ(BZ) (talk) 02:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Featured topic progress: Sega Genesis and expanded Sega in the fourth generation of video games

This is an exciting time to be a WP:SEGA member, with all of the huge work going on. Here's some of the progress we've been making on articles about Sega in the fourth generation of video gaming (the Genesis/Mega Drive era):

Genesis/Mega Drive topic concept

• Sega Genesis
• Sega CD
• Sega 32X
• Sega Nomad
• Sega Meganet
• Sega Channel
• List of Sega Genesis games
• List of Sega CD games
• List of Sega 32X games

Note: List of Japanese Sega Mega Drive games to be merged into List of Sega Genesis games at a later date.

Expanded fourth-generation of Sega topic concept

In addition to all Genesis/Mega Drive articles above:

• Sega Game Gear
• Sega v. Accolade
• Videogame Rating Council
• Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game)
• Sonic the Hedgehog (character)

Note: There are likely others, some of which may warrant a merge or redirect, others which likely could be expanded.

Now isn't this exciting? Yesterday, for instance, Sega Meganet was a stub - it's now a GA nominee. Sega Channel is next on my hitlist, as well as the two featured content candidates - I'm also thinking Sega CD and Sega 32X could also make good featured article candidates with more polish, but having Sega Genesis as one first will be critical to this and immensely helpful. The passing of its FAC would be fantastic for this task force, as it is one of the most important articles to our topic material. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 15:49, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

SSF (emulator) is nominated for deletion

An article that is probably of interest to this task force has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SSF (emulator). Comments welcome. --Mark viking (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

:(

i've lost my inner passion for this, sorry Simon ^{How can I help?} 16:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Legitimate web source for Sonic-related articles

There's currently some dispute over at the Sonic Boom (2014 video game) talk page, debating whether [sonicstadium.org The Sonic Stadium]] is considered a suitable source when citing information for Sonic-related articles. As of this writing, there are 24 different articles that cite Sonic Stadium, many of them containing multiple citations, but to my knowledge, there has never been an official discussion as to its legitimacy in the context of Sonic-related articles. So I figure it might be a good idea to discuss it now so we have some precedent to fall back on in the event someone attempts to use this site in the future, and to decide whether we need to replace the existing citations on all those articles.

I myself side with the belief that it should be considered a reliable source. Unlike sites such as TSSZ, Stadium tends to only report news that is confirmed factual, either through the reporting of other websites or direct contact with Sega and/or the individuals involved. Furthermore, the site has strong ties to Sega itself, having been granted exclusive content and reveals in the past (such as Sonic Colors' fourth cutscene months before release) and collaborating with the company each year on the Summer of Sonic convention in London. However, my opinion alone is insufficient, so I ask the rest of you: is The Sonic Stadium an acceptable source for citing Sonic/Sega-related news or not? -- 69.14.66.237 (talk) 17:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

I think you'd be better off getting more feedback from WT:VG where there are more editors, but having surveyed the site myself several times, I'm of the opinion that it's NOT reliable. There's not a lot here to indicate that there is reliability: reliable sources usually indicate that content comes from sources that have a reputation for fact-checking. As I review Sonic Stadium, it looks more to me like an overly well designed fan site, and their staff links indicate no reason to indicate they possess this quality. Some individual sites outside of media entities do have reliability because their staff are published members of the video game community, but in this case there's nothing to show that that's the case here, so we must assume they're not. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 18:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

An interesting resource... but be very careful!

Hey, Sega fans. I thought I'd bring your attention to this book. It's a book about the history of Sega consoles from the SG-1000 all the way through Dreamcast. It's full of interesting information, but beware. This is not a reliable source and cannot be directly cited. The reason for this is that the book is self published by a member from Eidolon's Inn, which has proven not to use sources up to Wikipedia standards for its information and the book itself comes from a Kickstarter project. Therefore, no fact-checking has taken place. That being said, it can be a nice launching pad to find some more information out before seeking out reliable sources and as a "Further reading" for a bunch of articles, so it may be a useful resource in this regard. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 16:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Current projects

So what's everyone working on? I notice that Menacer was posted at GAN but removed shortly. I assume the Genesis topic is still coming along?

Currently I'm building Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) and Big the Cat up to GA status; I have no idea what will come next. Tezero (talk) 17:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Genesis has been my focus for a while. I have Sega 32X at FAC, then Sega CD is ready to go there, as well (candidate rules specify only one FAC allowed per person at a time, and I'm really the only "significant contributor" to that version of the article). I've been working on a Sega Genesis WP:FT since last year, but I lost an argument to get rid of Menacer, which may be setting a precedent that will make that topic very much harder to accomplish. I've been considering a number of projects beyond that - I'd love to do a Hyperdimension Neptunia featured topic, as it's a series I'm very much a fan of and though it's not a Sega series, the main character is named for the unreleased Sega Neptune. I was also working on Phantasy Star Online until I got into an argument with Lucia Black about it. I'd also really like to get the Sega consoles all up to at least GA status, with the remaining being SG-1000, Master System, Sega Saturn, Dreamcast, and the key article to it all itself, Sega. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 17:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Alright. I'd be willing to work on a different Phantasy Star article (or for some other game) if you need that for a topic; my guess is that you'd most appreciate work on a game historically significant and relevant to Sega as a company. (I have to say, I generally don't like starting with articles that are already upper-C-class or better, as there's too much there to comb through and my changes seem somewhat meaningless.) ...Or keep to yourself; I don't care either way. Tezero (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, I just spent all day on SG-1000 and sent it to GAN... it's Sega's first video game console, how could it not be important? Anyway, in response to your query, Tezero - I'd absolutely love any work on anything historically significant, and Sega has a ton of it, but first and foremost, you should work on something you enjoy and something that means a lot to you. That's the way I got into the Sega task force and into working on Sega consoles. In the grand scheme of things, it's nothing, but it's important to someone, and it's fun. I had a Genesis growing up, I was (and still am) a Sonic addict, a few friends got me really into Phantasy Star Online... Sega's had that kind of significance for me, and I've always been so inspired by their stories, even the bad like Sega 32X, which didn't end well at all. That's where I recommend you start is on an article, no matter how insignificant to this task force or to WP:VG as a whole, that you feel strongly about. Improving the encyclopedia just works better that way, and we as a task force are all here to lend a hand to each other. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 02:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Also, if you're really looking at Sonic characters like Big the Cat... Sonic the Hedgehog (character) is going to be on my hitlist at some point soon and wouldn't be too terribly hard to find the references to make an FA. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 02:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

I'd be down with helping you with that. Yeah, I generally focus on articles for games I care strongly about. (As well as ones I think would be hilarious to get to FA status. Apparently I succeeded.) And yeah, I do care about Sonic a lot. Tezero (talk) 03:13, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

As I'm continuing work on Big and scrounging up reception for a possible Silver the Hedgehog article, I wonder if a Sonic characters good topic is possible in the future. If we had those two and Sonic done, we wouldn't be too far away. Tezero (talk) 23:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I've been requested to help out at Sega Saturn, so I'll have to see where my projects go next. It may be a while before I can get to games and characters if the consoles continue to draw so much focus, and that's been where the center of my editing has been so far since I came back to Wikipedia last May. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 16:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Alright. I expect you'll take interest in Dreamcast as well, so I won't hold out for anything anytime soon. Big the Cat's at GAN as of a few hours ago. I'll pick my next Sonic article project sometime soon. Tezero (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks like that might be Amy Rose. Tezero (talk) 00:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Intriguing. In addition to Sonic, I'd love to do Tails (character) if I ever had time. List of Sega Genesis games passed FLC today, so barring the subjective case of whether or not Menacer ends up being a requirement, and the not necessary but would-be-helpful FAC of Sega 32X close to passing as well, that Sega Genesis featured topic is pretty much right around the corner. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I may get to Sonic and Tails eventually; I will if you pick them up. If it matters, I'm working on Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) as kind of a side project, which may help your efforts, and (I forgot to mention this) we already have Chao (Sonic) for the characters topic. Tezero (talk) 05:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

It's surprisingly hard to find reception for Amy; I've been poring over magazine scans and old articles and come up with very little. In a way it makes sense: she debuted in an obscure game, but because of that she was thought of as an established character come time for Sonic Adventure and the like, so reviewers didn't think there was much to say about her. Tezero (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Concerns of too many fork articles at Dreamcast

Looking ahead to Dreamcast, it seems unnecessarily fragmented. We have Dreamcast, History of the Dreamcast, Dreamcast accessories... are these even necessary? Dreamcast accessories looks like an OR dumping ground, and the History article is actually better sourced than the main article. I think it's time to consider merging it all back together again, as part of a collaborative rewrite of the article. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 18:05, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

The Dreamcast accessories article appears to be a summary style expansion of Dreamcast#Accessories, which is appropriate since there's a lot to cover that doesn't need repeating in the main article (and those individual accessories have coverage but don't warrant their own article). This said, it has way too many section breaks and can be better organized. History of the Dreamcast is awkward because it contains a lot of stuff that should just be in the main article... I think it would make more sense to organize that page as "(History of?) Dreamcast development" or something similar, where it can expand the Dreamcast's Development section out summary style (if even necessary) and the rest can be merged into the main article. This is to say that I think both are rectifiable: the first needs cleanup and the second needs rescoping. czar ♔ 19:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Organization of Template:Sonic characters

I could ask this at that template's talk page, but let's be honest: no one would ever notice it. Here, hopefully someone will soon. Anyway, I'm not satisfied with the template's organization. Why is the video game list being given preference over the comics list to the extent that the former is linked in the template's title while the latter is in "Other" along with Chao? There's also the fact that I'm considering starting up articles for Silver the Hedgehog, Chaotix, Blaze the Cat, the E-Series, and/or Wisps (depending on how much reception I find - last two are unlikely), and the template's current state looks cluttered enough already. I'd much prefer something like this:

Thoughts? Tezero (talk) 00:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

There's a long history of back-and-forth about this style of organization on the template's talk page. I think this is fine as long as every one of the member articles contain a citation for being a "hero" or "antihero" (etc.) and where the only links are to characters with dedicated articles (unless some template rule says otherwise). czar ♔ 00:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

(I have the template watchlisted, I would have answered.) I'm not crazy about "Chao" being all by itself in a section, but fine with the rest... Sergecross73 msg me 00:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

It's a bit ugly, yeah (though this wouldn't be the case with Wisps added), but my later-mentioned idea could alleviate that. Tezero (talk) 01:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not so sure "heroes" and "antiheroes" is an appropriate separation, especially given that they flex a lot. Rouge, for instance, starts on the Dark side story of Sonic Adventure 2, but ends up becoming a hero character by Sonic Heroes and further on. The lines for several characters are blurred in that regard. I'd almost prefer this be combined into a full Sonic template, with games, characters, other media, etc. listed in one convenient template. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:59, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Not so much in Heroes (or Sonic X), but after that, yeah. I'd forgotten. I guess there could instead be a section on characters with significant roles in both good and evil, encompassing Rouge, Eggman, maybe Knuckles, Shadow, and the Chao. Tezero (talk) 01:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Er, that doesn't sound so clear cut either. Maybe we need a new criteria for organizing them? Or maybe it doesn't need reorganization yet? Not much organization is necessary, there's still only 9-10 character articles at the moment. Sergecross73 msg me 16:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, Draft:Wisp (Sonic) has a good amount of reception so far, and at least some of the other characters will also have enough. What if we divide it by the years the characters were introduced, or Generations' "eras"? Tezero (talk) 18:10, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

It'd look like this, barring any characters I can't find enough reception for. Tezero (talk) 18:39, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Again, if these categories aren't confirmed and cited in RS, then this is OR. Have you considered doing no categories? Or just "characters" and "lists"? It's not like there are so many right now. czar ♔ 18:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Is Generations a reliable source (or any of its reviews, which might mention the division)? No categories really doesn't seem like a good idea. At the very least, by decade or something. Tezero (talk) 19:21, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Problem again here -Technically, Sonic is in all of these eras. Very few characters are exclusive to one era. Honestly, I still don't think a strictly characters template is going to be too helpful, but that's just me. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:04, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I meant by when they were introduced, as in Template:Pokemon directory. To be fair, there are never going to be as many notable Sonic characters as Pokémon, but I still think the overall Sonic template would be a bit cluttered with all of the characters. Tezero (talk) 01:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

There isn't one yet, but I can't see it being too much worse than {{Sega}}. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

In fact, if you don't mind, I think I'll sketch one up in my sandbox. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm also not a fan of this organization, since the characters aren't typically characterized in such a manner. On one hand, I see Red Phoenix's concern about having one at all, but at the same time, if you look at the behemoth of a template that is the Sonic series one, you'll see there's really not room to tag the characters on to that, its' huge as it is. Again, as long as its short, I think the template as it is, is still the best choice. Sergecross73 msg me 18:04, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I also think the Sonic series template is big enough as it is, without the characters and related media. For now, I'm at least going to put the two species and two lists into their own headings, as I think we agree on that much. Tezero (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

To update on the other characters:

• E-Series: Definitely not an article covering all of them. Maybe one for E-102 Gamma, as there are two pieces on his entry on the list and I've found one more so far (a retrospective article, which may be worth a little more), but still probably not. Most coverage of Adventure doesn't even mention him, and most of what does is just, "Oh, a character with a gun. Huh. At least there's no swearing."
• Wisps: Surprisingly, there was a good amount of reception, and I got the article from nothing to GAN in three days. Huh.
• Chaotix: Maybe. I have access to a lot of Knuckles' Chaotix articles, and a few sources from later mention them. Just depends on how opinionated it all is.
• Blaze: Maybe. It'd be mostly in reviews for two games, but there's a good chance of any given one of those saying something about her.
• Silver: Probably. I've got a decent amount gathered.
• Babylon Rogues: Probably not. Major roles in three games, but I get the feeling that only reviews of the first really gave any opinions on them, and I don't see any of them appearing in retrospective lists.
• It doesn't look like any other characters will be notable enough, although it surprises me that Orbot and Cubot have received so little coverage.

The reason I mention this is that before too long the set of characters with their own articles will be pretty stable, so discussions about organization will be more meaningful. Tezero (talk) 02:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

If anyone's noticed my lack of recent attention to the existing characters, I want to wait until I finish Sonic X before getting too into them; Amy's article is actually pretty close to GAN, and doesn't need much more than X info. Tezero (talk) 03:22, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Master System reconstruction

I've begun another full-page console redesign, this time of Master System. As it's being a little more actively edited than past articles, I'm doing this one in my sandbox. Everyone is free to chip in ideas, and we can discuss it here if anyone would like. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Dried-out, forgotten task force?

Does anyone object to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sega/Sonic/Characters being merged back here? It hasn't been active for years and, if all goes according to plan, will have little to no purpose a few months from now. It really only serves to make me long for the past, for users I once knew but who are long gone (though interestingly, @Unknown the Hedgehog: last edited a few days ago – perhaps he will see this). Tezero (talk) 02:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm surprised it still even exists; the Sonic mini-task force died out a long time ago and was merged back, so why its sub force wouldn't is beyond me. Unknown the Hedgehog was actually an adoptee of mine back in 2008; he may remember me if he sees this place. It's been a long time since I've spoken to him or any of the Sonic inclusionists of the days of my pre-retirement; Simon Alexander Tolhurst was the last one I did, and he kind of gave up on coming back ever. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

That name rings a faint bell. I remember talking to some of those users way back in the day when I was working on Shadow the Hedgehog (though maybe not about that article); maybe he was one of them. As for the continued existence of the task force, it's got to have been that the regular Sonic task force was so clearly abandoned that whoever merged it into this one did so quickly and without noticing that it still had a task force of its own. Tezero (talk) 02:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, that goes a little further back, actually... This was once "WikiProject Sega", which was created by Gaogier (now Simon Alexander Tolhurst), and the Sonic task force was its direct task force. Around the time I retired, WP:VG stepped in and reassigned the project as "WikiProject Sega & Nintendo" (go figure how they managed that), then eventually made it the Sega task force and the Sonic task force of WikiProject Sega became the Sonic mini-task force, with the Sonic Heroes Committee a further subdivision. Really, that honestly kind of took it a little too far in my opinion; that much subdivision was never necessary. In other words, it was sort of a playground for the editors here. The conversion and page condensation was a messy process, one that I retired before being put through, but that's another story. I'm still surprised when I find remnants like this of what the Sega task force once was, but am grateful it's not like that anymore. I very much like the way it is now, with a commitment to quality over inclusion and real team efforts. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Huh, @Matticusmadness: (formerly "CHCSPerfect" - but to be fair, I was "Tezkag72" until late 2009) is still quite active, but the rest have disappeared years ago. This is a sad feeling, like if I was a senior in high school who had moved to a new town after middle school and was poring over that middle school's old yearbook, looking at pictures and inside jokes of students who were in eighth grade when I was in sixth, now long gone to the winds. I mean, that place was dying or dead even when I was getting Chao (Sonic) and Espio the Chameleon to GAN, and that was before my semi-retirement.

Speaking of teamwork, do you have any plans for after the Genesis FTC? (I'm assuming it'll go through.) Tezero (talk) 03:06, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm still finishing up the Sega consoles. Master System is almost through a GAN leaving just Dreamcast and Sega Pico on the consoles. I have a few games I want to do too, but I'd love nothing more than to work on the Mac Daddy of all articles for this project... Sega. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey what can I say, when your username links to your school/work and the boss says to cut that link you kinda do it no? Anyway, I'll be honest, I probably could be more active, I do chink into the occasional SEGA Sonic thing but with people like User:Sergecross73 watching over them there's not really much to pounce on. There's a thought actually, is Sergecross in this Wikiproject? MM ("Well? What have you got to report?") ^{("I give to you...")} 13:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Not that I know of. Within Sega's scope, he only seems interested in pre-Adventure Sonic games and preferring general maintenance (particularly de-crufting) rather than building up individual articles to GA/FA/FL status, but users with more niche interests have joined. Tezero (talk) 15:58, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

De-crufting is definitely something important, but there's a whole scope to it. I'm just glad to be back on Wikipedia and with the project I started with back in 2007. I'm hoping we can really collaborate more in the future and really get this page booming again; when Sjones23 comes back off wikibreak, that ought to help, as he's an interested editor in pre and post-Adventure Sonic games as well. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh, don't get me wrong; I very much value Serge's continued attention. It's just that I'm not banking on him being interested in any task force collaborations. As for pre- and post-Adventure Sonic games, I suppose I could focus on those again after the characters are done. Tezero (talk) 01:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

In the words of B.D Joe, "shut up n move your butt." We've got articles to build! o3o I have Sonic 06 on my watch list if it's any help? MM ("Well? What have you got to report?") ^{("I give to you...")} 19:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

A potential second topic

I realized something a few days ago and have finally remembered to post it here. Sonic Adventure is a GA, as are two of the three characters with articles it introduced. Only E-102 Gamma, which has been at GAN for a few days, and the soundtrack remain. Would Adventure be viable as a good topic? Admittedly, Adventure itself needs a few more citations and some expansion in Reception, particularly regarding the game's role as a serious competitor with Super Mario 64 (for a while, at least). Assuming necessary fixes were made and the soundtrack promoted (or merged), would it work? Tezero (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

What pages would be in it other than Gamma and the game? Because I have a feeling you'd need to include all the characters. --Lightlowemon (talk) 11:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

You might also need Sonic Adventure 2 as well, given that it's the direct sequel. I'm not sure about it being a direct competitor with Super Mario 64 though, given the three-year difference between their releases. The Dreamcast was considered sixth generation, the one with the GameCube, Xbox, and PS2. It's really more of an in-between, though. Had there been a direct competitor to Mario at that time, it would have been the (cancelled) Sonic X-treme for the Sega Saturn. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 11:59, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with that role either; there are just a few sources that mention it. Tezero (talk) 13:08, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

We'll never really know that for sure because it wasn't released, but it would have come out in 1996, the same time as Super Mario 64. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 13:43, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I meant I'm also not sure I agree with Adventure being a serious competitor to Mario 64. But plenty of sources do. Tezero (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

And I think Adventure 2 would be out-of-scope, although I can see the existing characters not being so. Tezero (talk) 18:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd just like to ask again, what would be all the pages in the topic, the game, the soundtrack and any existing characters? If so you may need to develop a character article for the game. I'd say the best bet would be to create a Sonic Adventure series topic but even then that'd be a bit nitpicky. There's no precedance really for characers who exist in multiple game universes without a linked storyline. --Lightlowemon (talk) 23:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

@Lightlowemon: It'd look like this:

Sonic Adventure

4 articles

Big the Cat

E-102 Gamma

Chao

Sonic Adventure: Songs With Attitude Vocal Mini-Album

Alternately, with all of the characters:

Sonic Adventure

9 articles

Sonic the Hedgehog

Tails

Knuckles the Echidna

Amy Rose

Doctor Eggman

Big the Cat

E-102 Gamma

Chao

Sonic Adventure: Songs With Attitude Vocal Mini-Album

As for an article about the two Adventure games, I think that's unpromising. When they're considered part of a series within the main Sonic one, this is usually the 3D games or the Adventure era (roughly Adventure 1 through Shadow the Hedgehog), and even that much segregation isn't likely to have much reliable coverage. Rather, I'd propose a topic with two leads; I'm not sure if this has been done before. It'd look like this:

Sonic Adventure and Sonic Adventure 2

11 articles

Sonic the Hedgehog

Tails

Knuckles the Echidna

Amy Rose

Doctor Eggman

Big the Cat

E-102 Gamma

Chao

Sonic Adventure: Songs With Attitude Vocal Mini-Album

Shadow the Hedgehog

Rouge the Bat

Tezero (talk) 00:07, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I'd just see Adventure 2 as another article under Adventure as the main topic. However, I might recommend you take this question to WT:FTQ for some more input from editors more experienced in featured and good topics. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:33, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I was about to retitle the Songs with Attitude album per WP:SUBTITLES but is the album even notable enough for its own article? Unless there are some RS, I think it's better merged (at least for now). If anything, I'd think the OST would get an article before this release. If you want to do a combined topic, I think the best title is "Sonic Adventure titles" and not "SA and SA2". And speaking of the SA article, it needs cleanup: lots of unsourced paragraphs. czar ♔ 00:43, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't really care whether the soundtrack gets merged; while foraging for Gamma reception in Adventure reviews, I don't remember seeing much about the music. I'm not sure topics are allowed to have no main article, though, as would be the case if the title was "Sonic Adventure titles". Tezero (talk) 01:42, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Without the soundtracks, this looks more like a Sonic characters topic, which might make a little more sense czar ♔ 04:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, Sonic characters is what I was envisioning as a third topic (and just the second one before I thought of Adventure). I'm developing it in my sandbox at the moment. Granted, if I have to include this many characters and no soundtrack, an Adventure topic would be pretty much useless, especially since only a handful of notable characters have debuted after Adventure 2. Tezero (talk) 05:58, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

If we're on the subject of including Sonic Adventure 2 then shouldn't we include its soundtrack CD? MM ("Well? What have you got to report?") ^{("I give to you...")} 20:00, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't know whether there is one, but we don't have an article for it. Tezero (talk) 20:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

There are two, actually; I have both of them. Neither of them have articles here, though, but they are covered in the Adventure 2 article already. Provided it stays that way, you shouldn't have to worry about them. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 21:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I was gonna say 'why limit ourselves?' But eh I guess it's fine if they already serve a purpose in an article. That there was two surprised me mind you. MM ("Well? What have you got to report?") ^{("I give to you...")} 23:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Personally I don't tend to favor splitting off articles unless there's significant notability to do so—quality over quantity, after all. The two are called "Cuts Unleashed", which are the character themes and the game's main theme ("Live and Learn" by Crush 40) and "Multi-Dimensional", which are the level themes, since every one of the game's 30 levels plus boss fights, etc have their own songs. I do have to wonder, though, what we'll have to do with "Songs with Attitude". I can't imagine its notability from Sonic Adventure is any different from the other two soundtracks to Sonic Adventure 2, so we may have to decide as a team which way to go with both sets. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm boldly redirecting Songs with Attitude after no response on its talk page. I don't see how it'd otherwise pass the GNG. czar ♔ 02:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Honestly? I'm relieved. In the spirit of boldness, I'm GAR-ing Adventure. Tezero (talk) 02:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Game rating scans

• 
  VRC GA
• 
  VRC MA-13
• 
  VRC MA-17

I need your help. A kind volunteer is offering to make vector versions of the Videogame Rating Council icons but it would be easier if we could supply higher resolution copies of the images (included above, for reference). If you have any games with these logos and can scan higher resolution copies (the icons themselves are PD-simple so there isn't a copyright issue), please pass them along so we can make better vector files. I tried to extract some scans online but I can't find anything with a high enough resolution. (I'll take suggestions for better sites, too.) czar ♔ 23:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, these are from before my time. I do own a Game Gear and a few games for it, but I got them from a secondhand shop without the cases, and they're two states away anyway. Tezero (talk) 23:23, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

This might help a little, better then the current MA-13 one anyway - Ratings on the Portugese pedia. --Lightlowemon (talk) 01:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Article examples

I tried out a new organization style for our article examples; this time it's by category rather than status. We can revert it if no one else likes it, but I think I prefer it this way. Tezero (talk) 17:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with a new style, but I would suggest that the three Sega Genesis featured lists not be under "formerly recognized content". Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 17:07, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Aheheh, I missed that. Thanks. Tezero (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I feel old.

Sonic Advance 2 came out closer to the Soviet Union than to the present day. I... I just can't... Tezero (talk) 00:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Getting older is just a fact of life. Still... that's an awfully weird comparison to make, and an odd bit of data. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 03:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm well aware, and even death I don't intellectually think is anything to be afraid of. I meant this more as a musing on the bizarre ways recentness plays out in our minds. Tezero (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Sonic characters

A discussion regarding Sonic characters is currently taking place at WT:VG. Please see that page. Krator — Preceding undated comment added 00:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Sonic character work

I don't know if anyone noticed, but I was plowing pretty intensely through Amy's and Knuckles' articles for a while and then stopped rather abruptly. The reason is that I wanted to watch Sonic X to get a full picture of what needs to be covered and in how much depth. I've been waiting until I finish the show to resume activity on those pages, since I want to finish this ideal off (as well as not get spoilers via looking at someone else's summary of the show and paraphrasing each character's role). I'm a few episodes from the end now, so this should be wrapping up. (I feel so horrible for Tails.) Just letting you all know; I do try to finish what I start here. Tezero (talk) 05:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Just a side note, you ought to check it out in its original Japanese if you get a chance. It's rather astounding how much is cut out in the English version, and the number of subtle plot differences. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 16:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to. I was powerfully unsatisfied at Cosmo's death, which seemed rushed and stifled, and I've heard that the Japanese version is much more authentic. (I wonder why Season 3 never aired there?) But yeah, I'm done with the show now. Tezero (talk) 05:44, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Heh, I had a dream last night that some IP (dunno how) resurrected our ancient page for Cosmo the Seedrian and stuck it - with a massive intro - into Wikipedia's "Today's featured article" template. Poorly sourced and everything; no image. And... everyone seemed okay with it. I tried to edit the template and at least stick in a real FA, but my Internet connection was bust. (For the record, I don't think any Sonic X character will be considered notable within the foreseeable future, with the possible exception of Chris as the reviews I've found so far seem to unanimously disparage him. Still, weird.) Tezero (talk) 15:46, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Sonic FA

It's been a stated goal of the task force for some time to get Sonic the Hedgehog (character) to FA status. I'll be heading that way within a few months for at least GA, and @Red Phoenix: you've expressed interest in that article. How about getting it on the main page on June 23, 2016? (Or 2015 for his 24th, if we're impatient.) In addition, we could do another character; with Amy's recognition today, there are now five characters at GA status and I plan to get at least a few (if not the 50% required for WP:FT – God, it's escalated since I went on semi) to FA. Tezero (talk) 23:56, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

You know what? Fuck it. If people are gonna start notability discussions during an FAC when they knew about ithe article beforehand, as well as oppose based on non-actionable complaints and almost never come back to check up on them, I'm not dealing with this 8+ more times, especially when GA is easily enough for the average reader anyway. The list will still have to be an FL, and I'll work with you on any you pick for FA, but otherwise, I'm beyond done with the process for the time being. Tezero (talk) 15:34, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

How else would you prefer me to raise what I did? czar ♔ 23:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

@Czar: I'm sorry; I was pissed off earlier today for a variety of reasons, such as there being so little reception out there for Sonic X and Digimon, which I'm working on and are well-known shows. It's just... I wish you'd mentioned it when you first thought of it, maybe while it was at GAN. Also, I feel the standards you mention for notability are unrealistic, aren't in line with Wikipedia as a whole, and, if properly implemented, would cause the deletion of the great majority of game character articles. Maybe Wisps aren't notable for some other reason, but I don't think that's a fair one. Tezero (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey, whoa, guys. I'm on a wikibreak for the next couple of weeks but just stopped in and saw this. Before this gets too out of hand - Yeah, FAs can be tricky to get, and part of why we have GAs is because not every article can have enough to be an FA by the standards as they are now. That's perfectly fine; much to SexyKick's chagrin I'd be much content with Sega Nomad staying a GA and not really having much more of substance to get it to FA (though I certainly applaud czar's work on Menacer and getting it to FA status when I didn't even think it should be an article). Non-actionable complaints are just bound to happen sometimes based on the article in question and you can't please everybody - it's a sad reality. That being said, some articles certainly can make FAs and you could in theory have enough for a FT if done the right way. I would be much interested in both Sonic the Hedgehog (character) and Tails (character) (Tails being my personal favorite Sonic character since I played with him in Sonic the Hedgehog 2) at a later date; my current projects when I come back from break are the Sega CD FAC which I believe is in line for a pass, and Lucia Black has requested I help her with WonderSwan, which I could probably make a GA with a few hours of work. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 23:28, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix: It's just so frustrating; I feel like a good amount of it is luck. Actually, I remembered that I still do have Amy's PR up and Big's recently closed, and since those articles have Reception sections of several decent-length paragraphs, they're in little danger of even being proposed for deletion so that's one fewer thing to worry about. I still have wavy plans to FAC those before that long, even if the topic never gets beyond GT. Tezero (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Luck isn't really much of a role in it, Tezero. Reasons like this are part of why redirection was considered for these articles to begin with; the only reason they can even stand as articles again are because of committed editors like you. WP:WIAFA is not an all-inclusive list of everything needed to be an article on Wikipedia (i.m.o. WP:WIAGA is, but that's my personal opinion and part of why I'm a deletionist-mergist-redirectionist Wikipedian). What you've done with the character articles is just outstanding, and I don't see why Sonic the Hedgehog (character) couldn't be a FA with some polish. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 03:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I've read your positions on merging articles; while I don't necessarily agree with them, they're closer to Wikipedia policy than mine are and I definitely see where you're coming from. Nice-looking things are nice, so to speak. Regardless of value judgments, though, my guess is that Sonic, Tails, Eggman, and Knuckles will definitely stay; Amy and Shadow almost certainly will; Rouge, Big, Silver, Chao, and Wisps could go either way; and the rest are as good as dead. That, er, alters my priorities a little. As it happens, I'm thinking of going on Wikibreak for a few days or weeks after my GANs, the Wisps' FAC, and the notability discussion are done, just to think long and hard about what how my efforts could best be directed here at Wikipedia. (I actually considered ragequitting Wikipedia entirely when the discussion started, as it came off as a giant middle finger at me and the Sonic series, but that wouldn't solve much, and there are still things here to be done that nearly no one but me has the patience for or even knows about.) I'll be interested to hear what you're up to. Tezero (talk) 04:19, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Please do not take it personally. I brought up these discussions now specifically to avoid upset down the line. I don't think anyone would have even said anything if it didn't start going down to the most minor of series characters. Since you've alluded to knowing that several of your articles did not meet notability, I'm curious why you didn't just choose not to work on those. There is plenty else to do and I hope you'll stick around for that since you're a good writer. czar ♔ 05:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

It's tough not to take it personally when the standard seems so inconsistent, not only between video game articles and the rest of Wikipedia but internally between Sonic and the rest of WP:VG. Maybe I'll never understand. Anyway, I don't remember saying I didn't think the articles in general met notability; only that I could see how certain ones (i.e. the Rogues, Gamma, and Omega) might not. Actually, had I thought more about it at the time, I might've figured that bringing up more articles would make the less-notable ones seem more so and thus shield them a bit. (Didn't happen to turn out that way, but hey.) I could've gone more minor toward that end; Metal Sonic, Orbot/Cubot, and the Chaotix had at least a couple solid-looking pieces of reception each, and the Deadly Six had a decent pile but I really do feel those fit better in the Lost World article as they've appeared in literally one game and no other media. I guess it's better that I didn't waste any more time raising sick chicks.

And... I may as well end this on a fleeting positive note. I appreciate and am mildly encouraged by you and Serge thinking I'm good at writing, though with all the copyediting issues that still get brought up I really can't be sure. Tezero (talk) 14:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Source-for-source bounty

Hey members, I have a huge favor to ask and can return it as requested. I am looking for any reliable sources, preferably reviews but anything at all, on Crush 40. For those who haven't been following Sonic the Hedgehog since 1999, they're actually a band featuring Sega music producer Jun Senoue, and they're known for a lot of songs from the Sonic series of games. They've even done some live shows in Tokyo and performed at the Summer of Sonic festival a couple of times. This was actually my first GA a while ago but I've since seen it's missing a lot of critical commentary and more recent information, and I'm struggling to find any coverage. In return, I'm willing to do some source hunting for someone who can find me good sources with my new HighBeam Research account I got through WP:TWL. Thanks, Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 20:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll give it my database rush this weekend. Have any leads on print magazine stories we could track down? czar ♔ 21:21, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Nada, but I'd be willing to bet they have more coverage in video game based sources than music sources. They have a couple of releases and their only "real" album is self-titled and was a European-only release. Everything else they've done has pretty much been for Sonic, although their "greatest hits" album included a cover of "Fire Woman" and they've done more songs not used in any game material since then. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 23:24, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

So I barely found anything. How would you feel about merging this into a section on Jun Senoue? He's the center of all of the commentary and the other sourcing is paper thin. Maybe there is Japanese commentary? czar ♔ 00:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Not getting much of anything on a "クラッシュフォーティー" Japanese language search either... (wikidata:Q1142078) czar ♔ 00:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, I'd be a little sketchy on that, but it would be better than the fancruft that it's become. I could probably stitch up a history by simply mentioning releases along with the "History of Crush 40" article that's archived, replacing all of the unreliable track listings with the releases themselves. In music articles, musical style is often a notability-conferring section because that often comes from outside reliable sources, but I'm a little sketchy on the ones I used in 2008. My biggest concern is the amount of WP:SELFPUB that would likely result, although I doubt there would really be any "contentious" material in there. I want to say thank you for your work so far, czar. I haven't really touched the article yet at all, but maybe the best approach would be to take what you've given so far, give it a full rewrite as I envision, see how it looks and where it stands on the notability and quality lines, and if it's not up to par offload it to a Sonic wiki and proceed with the suggested merge. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

That's all very sensible. I'll add that there were a bunch of cursory mentions in a WP:VG/RS search. Between that and the self-published history of the band, you could have a nice neat section in Senoue's article without getting into OR (or unreliable source) territory. Let me know if you need a hand. czar ♔ 00:37, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I will do that. It may be a bit until I get to it, though; I promised Lucia Black I'd finish up WonderSwan soon and I keep putting it off, so I'd really like to finish getting it to at least GA-worthy shape before I take this one on. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:39, 17 May 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 ♔ 01:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

YOU WILL NEVER KILL WIKIPROJECT SEGA, OVER MY DEAD BODY WILL YOU DEMOTE US FURTHER, IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE US, GET US SUPER ACTIVE, YOU WOULD ALLOW US TO BE THE WIKIPROJECT WE ONCE WERE AGIN. WE ARE NOT A TASK FORCE, WE ARE LEGION!
Simon ^{How can I help?} 14:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

It's not being redirected, I think. WP:VG decided this one and I think the Visual novels task force are active enough to continue. Tezero (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, Sega isn't affected, but the all caps screed really drove the point home czar ♔ 15:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Simon Alexander Tolhurst, really? This isn't 2008 anymore; there is no WikiProject Sega and there won't ever be again, and I'm okay with that. The discussion wasn't about demoting the task force; it was about redirecting the talk page, and I've seen to it that that won't happen, as have czar and Tezero. Still, this task force is super active, one of the more active in WP:VG. Slow down and get yourself caught up; I realize you've lost your passion for contribution but there's more to it than meets the eye and you've missed a lot while you've been gone. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:57, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I've missed worlds, copious amounts of big data. Maybe I don't know what I am talking about as you say, maybe i'm living on the edge of a black hole and maybe, just maybe, I seem to have slowed down in your eyes but in truth, I have been crushed into a singularity, with no purpose, no mass and no meaning and the elements I once consisted of are entropically radiating disorder out into the local interstellar neighbourhood where I will float off into the wider universe, for maybe I am null
Simon ^{How can I help?} 11:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Making some changes to Onyx Blitz

One will be modifying some title glows visible on specific browsers, you may see some text with poor sharpness for a while, this will pass, and shouldn't exceed 2 - 3 days, the outcome will be worth it. Simon ^{How can I help?} 12:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog: The Squeakquel

Sega Task Force, there's a game I've had the demo of for some time and will apparently be released before long: Freedom Planet. With several articles dedicated to it, I'm not concerned about its notability; I just created its article. What I'm wondering is whether it'd be appropriate to mention the game as a "See also" aside of any of the Sonic series articles or stick it in the "Related games" field of that series' template. Not only are the similarities flagrantly obvious upon starting the game; every single critic who's covered the game has taken care to mention this and compare the two IPs. That being said, I'm still not sure if this is enough of a tie. Tezero (talk) 03:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Without reading too much about the subject, I think it'd be fine in the See Also of the series article. Wouldn't say it's related to the actual series enough for inclusion in the navbox. czar ♔ 03:30, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

List of Sega video game consoles sourcing help

Hey guys, I'm down to the last few bits that need sources on List of Sega video game consoles, and they're a huge pain. Does anyone know of any sources that I can use for: the Japan and Europe discontinuation dates for the Master System, and the European launch/discontinuation dates for the Sega Pico? That's all I really need source-wise now, though it'd be nice to have more specific launch dates for the Master System and the European Sega CD. If anyone can point me to anything, I'd be most thankful. --PresN 21:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

According to this Japanese list from Sega themselves, the last Japanese release was Bomber Raid on February 4, 1989. Europe's going to be a trick because a lot like Brazil, it lasted a lot longer there than it should have. It's really not entirely done in Brazil, although Sega themselves don't make it directly anymore. I want to say, though I don't have a source, that the Master System ended around the same time as the shift to Saturn. At the very minimum, it ran at least until 1993 and we have sources in the Master System article that show it sold then. I'm planning to work on Pico soon, although I can't imagine it'll be an easy or fun research project. I'll let you know if I find anything. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 03:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Potentially useful source on Sega's history in the 90s

"Console Wars: Sega, Nintendo, and the Battle That Defined a Generation" came out a month or so ago. Went to a talk by the author today and picked up a copy myself. It's basically a sequel to the book "Game Over" and concentrates on the business side. It covers both Sega & Nintendo - and later on, the beginnings of Sony - but the focus is mostly on Sega (partially due to the accident that the Sega employees were easier to find and were more talkative) and its internal strife between Sega of America & Sega Japan. The author came off as a bit of a fanboy, but as the book includes information from a bunch of direct interviews, it's probably more reliable than most on internal office politics of the era, and I know that finding "serious" published sources is hard for video game related topics. (warning: I've only skimmed it so far, having only gotten a copy today.) Could be useful for some of the people who worked on the Sega Genesis featured topic, I figure. Console wars is a pretty awful section at the moment, too... ugh. SnowFire (talk) 00:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Potentially useful Hardcore Gamer retrospective article

Here. It offers a decent-sized paragraph each of review coverage for a number of less popular Sonic games. In case anyone's been working on those or wants to, well, here you go. Tezero (talk) 16:50, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Opinions on List of Sega video game consoles

Hey all, I was inspired to revamp the List of Sega video game consoles to reflect all the work that's been going on around Sega consoles recently, and I've started writing it in a sandbox here. I've hit a bit of a snag, though, regarding inclusion criteria, and I'd like some opinions from people who know more than me. Basically, my problem revolves around console variants- should they get their own rows int he table, and what's the criteria for that? For example, the SG-1000 II is an upgraded version of the SG-1000, and added support for Sega Card games, but the Sega Genesis II is just a design remodel that played the exact same games, and it's difficult to tell if Sega discontinued the original version in favor of the II or if it's just a minor variation that's still considered the "Genesis". Not to mention all the third-party variations, which I'm leaning towards not including, and where to draw the line on add-ons- the Sega CD seems like a unique thing that needs its own row, since there's a bunch of games that need it to play, but Sega Channel had a hardware component as well and had some region-specific releases that required it. Basically, it's all a big mess once you hit the fourth generation; does anyone have any opinions? --PresN 18:33, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Once you hit the fourth generation? It's a big mess all over. I made the decision to untangle SG-1000 and SG-1000 II from the Sega Mark III and Master System, but the lines are blurred there as well. Master System has a different library from SG-1000 and is based on the Mark III, but it's not completely clear what's really individual and what isn't, although sources call all of them separate consoles. So here's my interpretation of what I can see: I think basis in articles should be the criteria of due weight; is it included? Should it be a section or a subsection? The following would be my interpretation with multilevel sectioning, personally, just from experience working on all of these articles minus Dreamcast and its series of unnecessary extras:

Video game consoles (sectioned off individually because this was truly the focus of Sega's business; Game Gear was one console that suffered because of this)

• SG-1000
  • SG-1000 II
  • Sega Mark III (placed ahead of Master System for chronology).
• Master System
• Sega Genesis
  • Sega CD - subsection because it has a distinct game library
  • Sega 32X - subsection because it has a distinct game library
• Sega Saturn
• Dreamcast (may be worth a shout-out to mention VMU here for its mini games, but not worth a subsection).

Handhelds and other consoles

• Sega Game Gear
• Sega Pico

Network services (note: if these were merged into the consoles, that would also be a practical solution).

• Sega Meganet
• Sega Channel
• Sega NetLink
• SegaNet and Dreamarena (not sure if these are two distinct products or one with two names)

Thoughts? The variations can be mentioned, but just as in the articles I don't think full subsections are necessary for everything. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 19:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, so the limited version of the list. I think I'm going to stick with a table, rather than a sectioned list-article. Given that there's not a lot of handhelds, and the services all required the initial console to work, I think I'll make it one big table (arranged in chrono order), with the "includes" generally just being a bullet point:

• SG-1000
  • includes 1000, SC-3000
• SG-1000 II
  • includes 1000 II, SC-3000H
• Master System
  • Includes Master System, Mark III, Master System II
• Sega Genesis
  • Includes Genesis, Genesis II, Nomad, Multi-Mega, TeraDrive, MegaJet, Channel/Meganet
• Sega 32X
  • Includes 32X, Neptune
• Sega CD
• Sega Saturn
  • Includes Saturn, Pluto, NetLink
• Dreamcast
  • Includes Dreamcast, VMU, SegaNet/Dreamarena
• Sega Game Gear
• Sega Pico

Then have a separate section (probably not a table) for 3rd-party consoles- Sega Zone, 5 million Genesis versions, etc. I'm still a bit iffy on splitting the SG-1000 II from the SG-1000, but since there are games you can play on the II that you can't play on the original, due to the addition of the sega card slot, I'll leave it split out. --PresN 21:09, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I went ahead and revamped the whole List of Sega video game consoles, except for, you know, those pesky citations. Those shouldn't be too bad, given all the work that's been done on the console articles themselves, now that I don't need to hunt down individual discontinuation dates for the SC-3000H, etc. Assuming I find everything, and nobody has any major structural concerns, I plan on taking the list to FLC this summer; I alternate between video game lists and sci-fi award lists there, and this will be in the queue behind the current List of Mass Effect media nom and World Fantasy Award for Best Collection. !Voting at those noms should make it show up faster. --PresN 23:13, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

That would be awesome. It would also mean if I can complete Sega Pico and Dreamcast, we could have another featured topic using the list as the main article. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

You might need to merge in Advanced Pico Beena, though, which I found buried in the Sega template and which destroys the narrative of Sega leaving the console market after the Dreamcast. --PresN 00:37, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

You're not advocating shushing information that doesn't agree with a preconceived story, are you? Tezero (talk) 20:48, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

No, I'm saying that a) It's an article that might need to get merged into the Pico due to lack of information and b) it also ruins the narrative. Still keeps a line in the table in the list, just the title goes from a blue link to a black not-link. --PresN 20:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

That and can you really call the Pico and Advanced Pico Beena video game consoles? They're really no different than Leapster in all reality, and doing the sources ought to shed some more light on whether or not it can be called one. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Sources might change things, but as much as I dislike it I don't know what else to call a stand-alone machine that can play games whose data is fed to it via independent physical means (aka cartridges) and displayed on a screen. The content is weak and child-focused, but it still seems to meet the definition of a console (both the Pico and the Beena). --PresN 02:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Make that a definite yes on that merge. Doing the math on "featured topic" vs. "good topic", the following would be featured: List of Sega video game consoles (upon completion), Sega Genesis, Sega CD, Sega Saturn (provided its FAC passes; TTAAC has done a fantastic job there), and Sega 32X, with the following GAs: SG-1000, Master System, Sega Pico, Dreamcast, and Sega Game Gear. That should make enough for an FTC instead of a GTC, although it would be nice to add another featured article in there. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

You'll need one more FA, since you missed Sega Nomad - it may just be a repackaged Genesis, but I don't think you can get away with not including it since it has an article, unlike the TeraNet or the VMU. You could say that its a part of the Genesis subtopic, but then you'd have to drop the 32X and CD from the topic as part of the subtopic as well- which may be ok. --PresN 02:41, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

VMU has an article, or at least had one last I checked. Nomad is a little different IMO in that it does not have a distinct game library - its library is that of the Genesis. It'll get a lot worse if Nomad has to be included; that'll mean Sega TeraDrive will also need a look. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 03:47, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I meant that while Sega Nomad, VMU, and Sega TeraDrive all have articles, TeraDrive and VMU are clearly not consoles in their own right, and are subarticles of the main console article, but Nomad is in this weird grey area where it's a version of the Genesis but is still a distinct console. Now that I think about it more, I think it doesn't need to be included- it doesn't have it's own library of games, unlike the 32X and CD. --PresN 02:33, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

I'd analogize it to the Game Boy Micro. Tezero (talk) 00:57, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Alright, List of Sega video game consoles is done. It's ready to go to FLC whenever the lists in front of it in my FLC queue are done, which at the current (glacial) pace of FLC means that it won't get nominated until probably late August. If you want it to go faster, please please please review some FLCs, especially List of Mass Effect media. --PresN 20:55, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Sonic X

This article isn't too far from GAN; I've done a ton of work today and a decent amount previously. I've never worked on an anime article before, though; do you guys have any suggestions? Tezero (talk) 05:32, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I ended up continuing by myself and GANing it anyway. I do have a concern about what kind of screenshot would be ideal, though; see the talk page section for further details. Tezero (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Disney's Aladdin

I am trying to find reliable sources for the Disney's Aladdin (1994 video game) article about the Sega Game Gear game, and I am finding it particularly difficult. The search is complicated by the fact that two better-known video games with the same title were released in 1993 (one by Virgin Games and one by Capcom), so most of the reviews I can find are about the 1993 games. If anyone is able to help me find sources, it would be greatly appreciated. Even if you know the citation information for a review in an obscure magazine, if you let me know that information, I should be able to request the article through my local library. Thanks in advance! Neelix (talk) 16:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

FAC

Sonic: After the Sequel is at FAC as of a few days ago, if anyone's interested in reviewing. Tezero (talk) 02:03, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog comics (USA) character list?

I notice Sonic the Hedgehog (comics) does not link to a character list. The character roster of the comics differs from that of the video games. Rotor (Sonic the Hedgehog) had been erroneously deleted by a bot... WhisperToMe (talk) 05:17, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

That list was deleted a month or two ago for its subject matter presumably lacking notability. I can't see why - it's a freaking list; there weren't individual articles on Sally, Rotor, Antoine, Nicole, etc. - but it's gone. Just goes to show that you can't rely on Wikipedia for fiction if you care an iota about depth - unless your forte is Shakespeare, comics, or The Simpsons. Tezero (talk) 05:25, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

AFD link? And for a comic series that old, reliable sources must exist. Has anybody scoured Google Books for comics reviews/analysis? Maybe comics reviews magazines or comics industry magazines may have sources. If you can get sources that add content that addresses the issues, the AFD is automatically invalidated and a new AFD must be started to challenge it. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's the link. A quick search on Google Books of "sonic the hedgehog comics review" turned up nothing relevant, although I'm very much uneducated on typical comics review sites. (I was that way for anime, too, until I had to find them for the Sonic X article.) My guess is that the best chance for list notability would come from articles about the history of Sonic non-game media or video game comics in general, and IIRC an article I've used somewhere on Wikipedia mentions that every straight boy in the early '90s had the hots for Sally. Tezero (talk) 08:15, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Based on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Sonic_the_Hedgehog_comic_book_characters what you can do is start a short "characters" section and have a basic outline of the comic's characters. That is okay. Another hint: If you can find creator interviews and "creation and conception" stuff (I used a Volume 13 creator interview book for articles on Death Note characters) that can help too. WhisperToMe (talk) 08:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Just an FYI

I'm planning on nominating Sega 32X for WP:TFA for November 21. It will be the 20th anniversary of its launch. Such a sad yet interesting story in the history of Sega. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 15:21, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Wait, I nominated Sonic: After the Sequel for TFA the same day (to mark the release of Sonic 2, its predecessor); if you check my talk page, it was removed for being nominated too early. Something needs to be worked out. Tezero (talk) 15:28, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

November 21, really? You can't nominate until a month out; that's probably why it was removed. I'd hate to miss the 20th of the 32X. Could November 24 be a good day for After the Sequel? While the 21st was Sonic 2's initial release, the 24th was its release in English-speaking markets, both NA and EU. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 15:34, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that's a better justification. I will caution that requests of the same category (like VG) closer together than a couple weeks are typically denied or moved to another day. The day for AtS isn't that important, I guess; I think being the first fangame, the first game developed in South America, and the first game starring Sonic to be a TFA will be enough to get it featured at all. I think I'll nominate for a sooner date, like early November/late October. Tezero (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Red Phoenix, I've nominated Sonic: AtS for a nonspecific date at WP:TFAR. You may want to give an opinion there. Tezero (talk) 01:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

FLC

Just nominated List of Sega video game consoles for FLC here. Come on by and give a review! --PresN 23:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Review given. It's very nicely done. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Would like some feedback

Hey all. I'd like some feedback here for my Master System FAC. After some feedback from Tezero and Indrian, I'm more confident than ever that it fits the FA criteria and deserves to be recognized, and I'd like to get some more to really get this article into shape and make it another great Sega article. Thanks, Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 02:44, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Featured topic considerations

List of Sega video game consoles

11 articles

SG-1000

Master System

Sega Genesis

Sega CD

Sega 32X

Sega Saturn

Sega Pico

Sega Game Gear

Sega Nomad

Dreamcast

So, here's where we stand on our progress to a Sega consoles featured topic. PresN currently has List of Sega video game consoles at FLC, and I have Master System at FAC. I have been trying to convince TheTimesAreAChanging to renominate Sega Saturn at FAC, as it really is a very high quality article deserving of that rating. Once that is wrapped up, all that's left is Dreamcast and sorting out that mess... a project that is on my hitlist for sure. That will be one I intend to take to FAC when I can get it rewritten.

We're not too far off, team. Sega Project members, I'm very proud of what we've accomplished as a team. This year, we already have a featured topic and numerous FAs and GAs, more than this task force ever had in its history, or could have ever imagined when it was started in 2008. Good work to everyone; as we keep it up, we'll be the feather in WP:VG's cap. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 04:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

If it's not too late to jump on, I'd like to help with the Dreamcast article. I'm a bit busy at the moment here, but some of my projects are close to wrapping up. Tezero (talk) 04:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

It's not too late; I'm a little ways away from getting started with that still. At some point I have several articles I want to get rid of as part of this, including History of the Dreamcast... all I can say is, why does this need to be here? Why not just fix the history section of the Dreamcast article? *sigh* Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 05:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I was just wondering about the need for that page. Do you want to AfD it or just cold-merge? Tezero (talk) 05:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to handle it and other sub-pages as redirects, actually, but we'll do that later. Number one, one of my favorite rewrite tactics is to salvage what's still there, and number two, it's nice to have the page history preserved via a redirect so that way it can be referred to. Though I am slightly deletionist as an editor and don't have any qualms about saying that, I prefer to redirect whenever possible because it means keeping all of that information just in case. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 05:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

What I meant isn't deleting the history forever, but starting a formal discussion instead of just boldly redirecting. I don't attempt to hide that I don't deal with notability disputes anymore, but since you seem to feel strongly about it I jumped straight to the next choice. Tezero (talk) 05:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

As you probably know, I'm a huge fan on bold redirection when a page has little to no activity. After all, WP:BOLD encourages us to take the moves necessary to improve the encyclopedia. I often believe there are some misconceptions as well that redirection is a form of deletionism. My consideration on the subject is this; a topic can be notable, absolutely, but is it due weight to have an article all to itself? Goodness, almost every article could have a ton of content forks, and then it gets really hard to navigate the actual subject. The same can be said here; with the possible exception of VMU, what part of the Dreamcast set couldn't be better covered in the main article with some expansion? For that I would prefer a cold-merge, but only if when we start that there is still no further significant editing on the articles being looked at. An active attempt to maintain the page will warrant discussion first. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 16:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

There appears to be more than enough material about the development of the Dreamcast for its own article, but I don't think it would be a big deal to just have it split out summary-style when the new draft gets to that point. czar ♔ 02:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Idea for 2016

I've just had an idea, an awful idea. I've just had a wonderful, awful idea! We get Sonic the Hedgehog, the game, featured on the Main Page on June 23, 2016.

"You mean the '91 one, right? O-of course you do, Tez. No one would in their right mind... right?" Right you are, reader! Kinda. I propose that we get Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) and Sonic the Hedgehog (2006 video game) featured side-by-side, a la Barack Obama/John McCain, to show two very different sides of the franchise and give a little nod to two generations of Sonic fans. We've got plenty of time (probably about a year and a half to allow for TFA nominating time), I've worked a little on the '91 game already, and '06 isn't terribly unrealistic, though of course plenty of work still needs to be done. Any thoughts on this? Red Phoenix?

Also, dear God, R.I.P. Robin Williams. Tezero (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Tezero, props for the Dr. Seuss reference. That was pretty good. Let me start with stating that October and November have a lot of potential for TFAs of Sega consoles: 25th anniversary of the North American launch of the Sega Genesis is this October, as is the 20th anniversary of the launch of the Sega 32X in November. Now, to your idea... Curious. I'm not sure what the TFA coordinators would think about that, but it's a neat concept. I can tell you I'm right now inactive as an editor because I'm working on finishing a book I'm writing and have been for a few months, trying to have it wrapped up, and when I get back I know I've got a set of things I'd like to work on. Still, I like the ambition here... worth a shot. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 01:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Again, nice job with your FAs. As for thi- ...ese two, I should tell you that I'm going back to college in the fall. On top of that, I'm gonna be resuming work with some friends on a video game and I'd like to form a band for the first time in over a year. So, while I plan to still be editing, I won't be as ferociously active as now. Nice to see your encouragement, though; I'm ready to collaborate at least to some extent whenever you are. Tezero (talk) 04:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Red Phoenix, just to clue you in to the progress of this, I've been fixing Sonic 1 up quite a bit lately and I think it'll be GAN-ready within a few days. If you've got any suggestions about the organization or the information covered - since most of the issues I see are citation-related - please, say 'em now. Tezero (talk) 02:17, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I will help towards this cause Simon ^{How can I help?} 15:38, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

This Dreamcast thing is happening

It's happening in my sandbox. I'm sure since it's an edit in userspace, we can use the Sega Task Force page for some discussion on the matter as it comes up. It looks very much like this article needs a full rewrite from top to bottom. Also, still waiting on some Master System feedback... Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 00:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Is there anything I can do Simon ^{How can I help?} 15:40, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Cleaning up the Sega studios

I suggest moving the 2nd party Sega studios, that existed until 2000-2004. SEGA AM3, Sega Sports R&D, it's all outdated and inaccurate. Just name them what they were called between 2000-2004, Smilebit, Hitmaker etc. Also make the pages for WOW, Overworks, Sega Rosso, United Game Artists and Sega Technical Institue seperate.

Like with Capcom, Namco Bandai etc. most of us don't know which exact department made which game, especially with lots of the JP-exclusive SEGA has. Like the Japan wiki, I suggest, branding everything "SEGA" like the japanese wiki articles, except when it explictly states on the packaging or title screen. Like Sonic Team and AM2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tripple-ddd (talk • contribs) 12:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Sonic Retro magazine scan library (info.sonicretro.org) is down

This poses a problem for me as I rely heavily on those scans when writing Sonic articles. I'm going to try to contact the administrators to ask when it'll be back up (or if it's just been removed for good on copyright grounds), but for now we're in a bit of a bear's den. Tezero (talk) 18:39, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Featured topic considerations redux

List of Sega video game consoles

11 articles

SG-1000

Master System

Sega Genesis ^(subtopic)

Sega CD

Sega 32X

Sega Saturn

Sega Pico

Sega Game Gear

Sega Nomad

Dreamcast

Just reminding everyone, if they didn't know, that you've got a Good Topic all completed here, with it converting to a Featured Topic once Sega Saturn passes FAC. --PresN 04:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• I see that the Sega Saturn is now a Featured Article? Are there any plans for a FTC nomination to be made in the future? GamerPro64 01:48, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

• Don't ask me. Red Phoenix? Tezero (talk) 02:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

• Just a suggestion. Anyone can nominate the topic, really. Just gotta give credit to who promoted the articles to their current status. I could start a nomination for the topic if no one else is interested. GamerPro64 15:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

• That's fine. Ping me if you need a support or something; everything looks to be fine. Tezero (talk) 21:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix, @Tezero: Reminder about this. I'd feel awkward about nominating it myself since I only did the List of consoles, but if you want I can. --PresN 21:58, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I think it'd be fine to just go ahead with it and just give the primary author credits where due czar ⨹ 22:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Alright, nominated at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Sega video game consoles/archive1. Feel free to add anything I forgot. --PresN 22:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

This page needs a major cleanup and update

I never knew that the Sega Task force was a thing until I did a major cleanup for the TMS Entertainment article. Point being, I really feel that the page needs a major update. For starters, the Sega Sammy Holdings and TMS Entertainment templates are not on the front page of the task force, and, Yakuza and Valkyria Chronicles are not template pages to be monitored? Plus, ever since the acquisition of Atlus, most of the Sega Task force have been fixing Atlus articles too so I think that deserves a mention on the task force. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 17:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sega/Archive 2/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Video games.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Video games, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Anybody still around?

Just wanted to see if anyone’s still reading the or following this page, and what they’re up to? Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 19:54, 17 December 2017 (UTC) Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 19:54, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix: Just happened to see this post by chance. Not watching the page, but I might as well now. I wasn't really around when you were around but I'm working on many of the classic Sega Treasure games. Already tackled Alien Soldier, Dynamite Headdy, and Ikaruga. Next up is Radiant Silvergun. After that: Bangai-O, Guardian Heroes, and to cap it all off, Gunstar Heroes. TarkusAB^talk 15:03, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm also around, but I've found these specific game Wikiprojects to be mostly symbolic rather than helpful, as 99% of potential discussion is better held at the general purpose WT:VG. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm around too. Mostly Sonic, but some Batman. JOEBRO64 20:16, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Sounds exciting, guys. Right now I'm pretty focused on Sonic X-treme and maybe making a potential FA run with it if I can get some more relevant period sources, but also a little bit of maintenance on the console articles just to keep them looking good and factually accurate to the sources. It's good to see Sega articles still getting a focus on Wikipedia. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 21:29, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:005

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Draft:005 may be of interest to this task force. Warmest regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 03:57, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

The Sega Improvement Project

This will serve as sort of a project plan in order to improve coverage of Sega as a whole in Wikipedia, with a focus on key articles. The goal is, that after all areas are addressed, it will provide a roadmap to successfully improving the task force's top-priority article, Sega to FA status.

Please feel free to add to this list, as I'm sure I've missed plenty.

Consoles (mostly done since 2013)

• List of Sega video game consoles
• SG-1000 (would be nice to get FA, but unlikely)
• Master System (needs maintenance/expansion on Brazil)
• Sega Genesis
• Sega Saturn
• Dreamcast →
• Sega Pico (would be nice to get to FA, but unlikely)
• Sega CD
• 32X
• Genesis Nomad (would be nice to get to FA, but unlikely)
• List of Sega arcade system boards → (This will be a difficult project, but needs to morph into coverage of Sega's arcade business and become comprehensive and reliably sourced. Sega's arcade business is too important to ignore).

Japanese studios

• Sega development studios → (This will need a lot of work and a lot of history untangling).
• Sega AM1 + AM7 (Wow Entertainment and Overworks) →
• Sega AM2 → (→ ?)
• Sega AM3 + AM5 (Hitmaker and Sega Rosso) →
• Sega AM4 + AM6 (Amusement Vision and Smilebit) →
• Sonic Team + Sega Studios USA → (→ ?)
• United Game Artists
• Wave Master?
• Atlus

Other studios

• Sega Technical Institute (reasonably unlikely to be an FA)
• SegaSoft →
• Sega Sports R&D + Team Andromeda →
• Tectoy →
• Others identified as needed (Sega Studios San Francisco, possibly?)

Characters

• Sonic the Hedgehog (character) →
• Alex Kidd →

Critical games and series

Sonic

• Sonic the Hedgehog →
• Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) (→ ?)
• Sonic Adventure

Arcade classics

• Pong-Tron (Sega's first true video game, not including electro-mechanical games, pinball, etc.)
• Flicky
• Frogger →
• Virtua Fighter (video game) →
• Hang-On →
• Out Run →
• Space Harrier →
• Fantasy Zone →
• Daytona USA (video game) →

Iconic RPGs

• Phantasy Star Online →
• Phantasy Star (video game) →
• Phantasy Star IV: The End of the Millennium →
• Shenmue (video game) →
• Sakura Wars →
• Shining (series) →
• Skies of Arcadia →

Definitive Mega Drive games

• Streets of Rage →
• Shinobi (series) →
• Golden Axe →
• Ecco the Dolphin →
• Gunstar Heroes →

Definitive Saturn games

• Nights into Dreams
• Panzer Dragoon Saga
• Panzer Dragoon (video game)

Definitive Dreamcast games

• Crazy Taxi (video game) →
• Jet Set Radio →
• Rez (video game) →
• Crazy Taxi
• Space Channel 5 →
• Seaman (video game) →

Other

• Segagaga →
• Puyo Puyo →
• Virtual On →

• I'm sure there are plenty of others I'm missing, and I need help to fill in what else might be super important!

Critical people

NOTE: I don't consider researching the people themselves as crucial to Sega, but some of their history with Sega will help dictate that article, and as such could be beneficial.

• Rieko Kodama
• Hayao Nakayama
• David Rosen
• Isao Okawa
• Hideki Sato
• Shoichiro Irimajiri
• Michael Katz
• Tom Kalinske
• Bernie Stolar
• Peter Moore
• Yuji Naka
• Yu Suzuki
• Naoto Ohshima

Companies

• Sega → →
• Sega Sammy Holdings → (→ ?)

If you have any input or somewhere you'd like to focus, feel free to reach out. If there is anyone still reading this, let me know your opinion. I'd be glad to hear your focus. Red Phoenix ^talk 18:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I added several games/series, Alex Kidd, and Rieko Kodama. I'm not sure how critical these are so feel free to remove if you disagree. For some of the series articles, I added, I'm not sure how critical they are or if there are one or two particular games in the series that should be focused on. For example, I don't the Shinobi series is particularly critical but Revenge of Shinobi and a couple of the early games are. TarkusAB^talk 21:10, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely, go right ahead. I don't want this to all be "my idea" of what is critical and what isn't. The goal of posting this here is to try and instigate a collaboration, and if it went on WT:VG it would likely just end up buried in the archives and forgotten. This page can be a hub for said collaboration, if editors are interested. My main goal is to, in the process of improving articles critical to Sega, to come up with a master plan for promoting the Sega article to FA status and generate some featured topics and good topics. Red Phoenix ^talk 22:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• I have a draft for the main Sonic series article. I haven't worked on it in a while because it's going to be big and there are other, smaller projects I've been taking on, but I'll get back to it soon. I'm also interested in rewriting the Yuji Naka article, but won't mind if someone beats me to it. JOEBRO64 23:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @TheJoebro64: Ouch, I looked at the Yuji Naka article today. That's really bad, especially since we learned a lot more about Naka in doing the Sonic Team article. If you decide you want to work on this and want to collaborate with me, give me a shout. I'd be up for trying to get it into shape. Red Phoenix ^talk 20:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
• It's also worth sharing that the main Sonic series is inching closer to being a good topic. TarkusAB^talk 02:52, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Main Sonic the Hedgehog series

28 articles

Consoles

Sonic the Hedgehog (1991)

Sonic the Hedgehog (8-bit video game)

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (8-bit)

Sonic CD

Sonic Chaos

Sonic the Hedgehog 3

Sonic & Knuckles

Sonic 3D Blast

Sonic Adventure

Sonic Adventure 2

Sonic Heroes

Sonic the Hedgehog (2006)

Sonic Unleashed

Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode I

Sonic Colors

Sonic Generations

Sonic the Hedgehog 4: Episode II

Sonic Lost World

Sonic Mania

Sonic Forces

Handheld

Sonic the Hedgehog: Triple Trouble

Sonic Blast

Sonic the Hedgehog Pocket Adventure

Sonic Advance

Sonic Advance 2

Sonic Advance 3

Sonic Rush

Sonic Rush Adventure

• Oh and with the exception of PSO and 3 others, every Sonic Team game for Sega systems is GA or better

Sonic Team on Sega

28 articles

Sonic games

Sonic the Hedgehog (1991)

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Sonic CD

Sonic the Hedgehog 3

Sonic & Knuckles

Sonic 3D Blast

Sonic Jam

Sonic R

Sonic Adventure

Sonic Adventure 2

Other games

Ristar

Nights into Dreams

Burning Rangers

ChuChu Rocket!

Phantasy Star Online →

Samba de Amigo

Puyo Pop Fever

• • I'm admittedly a little sketchy on if we can defend "main series" to featured/good topic reviewers. Red Phoenix ^talk 17:03, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

If anyone has any idea where I could find good sources about Sega's arcade boards, let me know. After Sonic Team and Tectoy get through GA, I'm on a toss-up to do Sega AM2, Sega AM3, or List of Sega arcade system boards next. I'm very tempted to do the arcade boards next because it's the one bit of Sega's hardware we really haven't explored yet, but almost all of that article's sources are pretty unreliable. Tech specs, history details, anything really if anyone knows where I might find some reliable info on it. I'm still planning to go through The Sega Arcade Revolution by Ken Horowitz, but that book is more focused on the games than the system boards themselves. Red Phoenix ^talk 17:03, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

The definitive source would be Sega Arcade History. It's full of interviews and I would not consider the article complete unless that source was combed through. Problem is it's all in Japanese. I don't have time to translate it right now, maybe in a few years (not kidding). Here is a translation of one interview. Oh and this site is handy too but it's all in Japanese as well. TarkusAB^talk 19:18, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Holy cow, TarkusAB, that's pretty epic. The websites I can run through Google Translate, and I know it'll take a little interpretation from there to figure out what it's actually saying. That's already a better start than I had, so I appreciate you very much for it. Red Phoenix ^talk 00:28, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

The website is a little difficult to navigate, but there's quite a bit there. There are some interviews here, history articles here, and other editorials here. TarkusAB^talk 01:46, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

• Anyone think Sonic 1's development has been documented enough for a standalone article? From what I've seen, it seems like there's been a lot about it revealed in recent years (like the recent GDC talk about it), and games like The Last of Us and GTA V have their own development articles. JOEBRO64 15:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  I have thought about this and think the answer is yes, but I think the best approach would be to expand it in the game's article, then split it off if/when it gets unwieldy. TarkusAB^talk 16:10, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  I would agree with TarkusAB on this one. It's possible it could be, but split offs are really only best when it can't best be handled in the main article practically. Red Phoenix ^talk 01:12, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

I've sorted out a bit of my thoughts on the development studios. I think Sega AM2, Sonic Team, and United Game Artists can stand alone. I think Hitmaker (AM3) and Sega Rosso (AM5) can safely be handled together because AM5 split from AM3 (as AM Annex) and was merged back into AM3 later on. Overworks (AM7) could probably be handled with Wow Entertainment (AM1) really just because AM7 had a short history aside from Skies of Arcadia and I'm not sure it has enough to be well handled on its own. My question here I have left is on AM6, also known as Smilebit and also included part of Team Andromeda, if it could be handled on its own or as part of Amusement Vison (AM4, which absorbed Smilebit in 2003). Red Phoenix ^talk 21:08, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

If anyone's interested...

I've started my massive rewrite of Sega and could use some input and ideas on what should go in. Red Phoenix ^talk 02:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Priority Genesis game articles

This month, Sega began adding Genesis games to Amazon Fire TV, adding yet another avenue for people to play these classics. On modern platforms, there are three services by which people can play classic Genesis games: Sega Genesis Classics (PC, XBONE, PS4, NS), Sega Forever (mobile), and now Fire TV. I took a look at the games available on each, and below are the games available on all three. If anyone is looking to improve Genesis game articles, I'd recommend picking one of these. I know I'm eyeing Gunstar and Shinobi. This is by no means a topic candidate, just looks better in a box and thought I'd share. TarkusAB^talk 13:29, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Sega Genesis games available on Amazon Fire TV, Sega Genesis Classics, and Sega Forever

14 articles

Altered Beast

Beyond Oasis

Comix Zone

Decap Attack

Dynamite Headdy

ESWAT: City Under Siege

Golden Axe

Gunstar Heroes

Ristar

Sonic the Hedgehog

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Streets of Rage

Streets of Rage II

The Revenge of Shinobi

• I'm interested in taking Ristar. I'll start a draft after I finish a GA review I just started. JOEBRO64 20:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Awesome. Depending on where I go after Sega and History of Sega get through their GA reviews, I might be willing to have a look at Altered Beast and possibly Comix Zone as well. Red Phoenix ^talk 22:36, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Linkle Liver Story

Game was published by Sega and developed by Nextech. I have restored the article which was deleted in 2014 for having no sources. I have added three reviews, and the magazines GameFan and Sega Saturn Magazine (JP) are going to be the main sources of the article, as those mags did extensive coverage of the game. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Sega development studios

There's an important discussion regarding a cleanup of the Sega development studios article and some of its development teams (i.e. Sega AM1) with the ultimate goal of making it a featured topic. It can be found at Talk:Sega development studios#GA plans. I'm also posting here to invite task force comments for those who don't watch the Video game project talk page. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:19, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Dreamcast 20th Anniversary

I randomly had an interest in working on Dreamcast games. I'm trying to improve Jet Set Radio and will be moving to Cool Cool Toon, and eventually Space Channel 5. Does anyone here want to join me?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 10:49, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey Blue Pumpkin Pie, that's awesome. I've thought about it, but I've got a bit of a full plate already with working on making Sega a FA and hitting a few select arcade games on the way to help tell the story (Hang-On, Daytona USA (arcade game), etc.). If you do make it over to Space Channel 5, I found some sources while working on United Game Artists and might be able to help there. Red Phoenix ^talk 11:47, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

I had my eye on that game for a while. I'll first establish notability for Cool Cool Toon. Once there is enough to make it a start-article, i'll fix Space Channel 5.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Samba de Amigo is another one we have to look into.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 07:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

• Airforce Delta
• Blue Stinger
• Capcom vs. SNK: Millennium Fight 2000
• Carrier (video game)
• Cool Cool Toon
• Crazy Taxi (video game)
• Ecco the Dolphin: Defender of the Future
• Illbleed
• Jet Set Radio
• L.O.L.: Lack of Love
• Mars Matrix
• Mr. Driller (video game)
• Rez
• Samba de Amigo
• Seaman (video game)
• Segagaga
• Shenmue (video game)
• Shenmue 2
• Soulcalibur (video game)
• Space Channel 5
• Space Channel 5: Part 2
• TrickStyle

I moved the list over to here so it wont be archived. ProtoDrake and Namcokid47 have done great work. Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 15:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:25, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Sakura Wars GT/FT discussion

Hello. There's an ongoing discussion regarding potential GT/FT plans for the Sakura Wars series over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#GT/FT plans for the Sakura Wars series. Input from project members would be very helpful. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:12, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

R360

@Namcokid47: and anyone else who may be interested:

I'm taking a cursory look at R360, since we're doing a good look at trying to revamp this together. I'm hoping that I'll have a little more time next week to drive this forward, but I'll be occupied at least through the weekend. In any regard, I wanted to start a conversation here because there are some important things to consider as we get started, not specific to just one article. And on that note, I want to suggest that we may want to do some merging.

Here's what my research has found:

• For four years, G-LOC: Air Battle was the only R360 game - its release was 1990, not 1992. This also lines up better with the timeline of the Sega Y Board; Model 1 was already going by 1992, and System 32 was there by 1991, so by 1992 the Y Board was already somewhat obsolete.
• Wing War, in 1994, was the only other release for the R360.
• It took me some digging to check the Rad Mobile fact in the article currently; the only statement I could find on it was from Ken Horowitz' The Sega Arcade Revolution: A History in 62 Games, in which he interviewed arcade collector Kevin Keinert (who owns one of the 150 R360 units, no less) and states that neither he nor Keinert found record of an R360 with Rad Mobile outside of a version seen at Japanese trade shows and speculated it was a prototype or perhaps a single unit equipped with it.
• There are very few sources out there for Wing War that I could find. It sort of makes sense; it was a Model 1 game, but by 1994 the Model 2 was already out there. There were no ports for Wing War except for indications there may have been a version in development for 32X that was later cancelled. MobyGames has no reviews; SegaRetro has maybe 2-3 sources. Google might as well be empty. So, not a lot.
• G-LOC does have sources. It received several ports. Of course, R360 is a big deal in all of that.

So, here's where I'm at: For starters, Wing War probably doesn't need its own article, especially if R360 is an article to itself. My question, then, is with so much coverage between the game and the cabinet interlinked, do they need to be one article? And if so, which one? I could use some assistance brainstorming this. Red Phoenix ^talk 15:55, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your time to assist me in this, Red Phoenix. I appreciate it. I'm focusing on other stuff right now (such as a few Namco games and the Neo Geo Pocket Color), but I'll squeeze some time into this too. Anyway, I'll respond to some of your points:

• Yes, Rad Mobile was only used to show off the R360 at entertainment expos, it was never given a full release for the R360. I've seen several make the claim that Galaxy Force was also used to test the machine and to advertise it, but I'll need to see some concrete evidence to support that statement.
• I'm on the fence about Wing War too. I've checked the Internet Archive and didn't find a whole lot; most of the ones I found were for a completely unrelated game for the Atari 2600, and the rest either mention it or talk about the unreleased Sega 32X version. I'll keep looking though, I'm not saying we should get rid of it right now.
• I think the R360 and G-LOC can be separate pages, instead of being merged into one. I've been able to find quite a bit of coverage on the R360 alone (ie. no mention of G-LOC), and since G-LOC got plenty of home ports it could easily pass notability.

Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 16:49, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

• • Perhaps then it might be good to work on R360 and G-LOC together, merge Wing War into R360, and if in the end one or both articles doesn’t shape up right consider a merger at that point and not earlier. Red Phoenix ^talk 20:10, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
    • I can do G-LOC myself if that's easier, since I've already got plenty of sources for it on hand, but you're free to help if you wish. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 20:31, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
      • I'm having some real trouble trying to find R360 sources, though - the best one I have is the Horowitz book. Have you had better luck than me? Red Phoenix ^talk 03:11, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
        • Sega Retro has a good amount of coverage on just the R360. I've also seen a few issues of a Japanese publication called "Game Machine" that has covered it on numerous occasions. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 06:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix: - I was able to find a two-page review on Wing War from Ultimate Generacion . Came across this while trying to find stuff for Namco, and I think it was a great find. I'll keep looking for any additional reviews. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 01:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

2020 roll call

So, over six years have passed since the November 2013 roll call. I would like to propose doing another one here. Please put your name below if you're still there.

• Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:08, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
• Red Phoenix ^talk 03:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
• Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 05:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
• Blue Pumpkin Pie ^{Chat Contribs} 14:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm not fully sure how much help this will do; task forces in general are slowly going the way of the dinosaur, and I haven't even maintained these pages in years, really. The talk pages are very seldom used, too. Regardless, I'm still kicking; currently focusing on Sega arcade games that are historically significant, with plans to work on History of Sega some more and maybe send Sega back to FAC if ever I can find reviewers. Red Phoenix ^talk 03:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Hmm... I think we should reorganize the members section; some of the users have since retired, semi-retired or indef blocked. Meanwhile, I'm going to help make the Sakura Wars and Yakuza articles Good or Featured topics. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:08, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I feel my interest in Sega has rejuvenated after reading Ken Horowitz' book The Sega Arcade Revolution, so I'll likely be a lot more active here than I used to be. Right now my plans are to cleanup Fantasy Zone, Space Harrier and a few of the late-70s and early 80s stuff (like Zaxxon, Head-On and Congo Bongo), and to get Galaxy Force and After Burner to GA status. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 21:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Sega at FAC

To whom it may concern,

Sega is celebrating its 60th anniversary on June 3, 2020. I am attempting to get Sega as the featured article of the day on that day, but so far the article has gone through two FACs and both were closed due to a lack of feedback. Your feedback at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sega/archive3, if you have the time to provide it, would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Red Phoenix ^talk 16:49, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Sakura Wars FAC

The Sakura Wars article is undergoing an FAC at the moment so it can be featured on the main page on September 27, 2021, which marks the 25th anniversary of the series. The FAC can be found at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sakura Wars (1996 video game)/archive1. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I called TheJoebro64 to participate in the FAC review. I think he will respond. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 07:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Same "let's participate in the FAC review!" thing applies to Red Phoenix. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 07:44, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@I'm Aya Syameimaru!: I've become more time limited due to being an "essential" employee during the coronavirus outbreak, but I will see what I can do this week. I don't mean to be rude or sound condescending (and if I do, I apologize), but I do caution you to please be careful of WP:CANVASS - some users and administrators may interpret that very strictly if they think you're canvassing for supports. I don't think you've crossed that line yet, but be cautious. Red Phoenix ^talk 02:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I be cautious. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 03:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hideki Sato nominated for Speedy Deletion

Somebody expand his article so it is not deleted.

Sakura Wars reception plans

Hello. There's an ongoing discussion about expanding the reception section of the 2019 Sakura Wars game, which has just been released worldwide. It can be found at Talk:Sakura Wars (2019 video game)#Reception section plans. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:22, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Mega Drive

Hi,

I saw the article on Sega Genesis, which states that it's also known as the Sega Megadrive. Shouldn't it be the other way around? The console is known as the Mega Drive everywhere in the world except the USA, I think it's worldwide name should be more suited for the article.

Thanks for reading! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mickazilla (talk • contribs) 11:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mickazilla and welcome to Wikipedia! The Sega Genesis article has had a very, very long history of warring over the title of the article. Please read Talk:Sega Genesis/FAQ for an idea of why it's the way it is now and just how long this has been argued for years. Thank you! Red Phoenix ^talk 12:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

What should we include in our scope?

Hello again. I'm thinking about what to include in our project, inspired by the previous discussion at the Square Enix project. As such, please state the whether you think the following should be included or not included under this task force by adding yes or no to the following sections. Feel free to add new sections if needed. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles developed by Sega

• Yes, obviously. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Sergecross73 msg me 02:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 03:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes, or else what's the point of this task force? Red Phoenix ^talk 21:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles developed by Atlus prior to being acquired

• No, too distinctive. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• No Sergecross73 msg me 02:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• No Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 03:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• No ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Case by case basis - Maybe none now, but suppose it's part of a series developed beforehand and a significant quantity of later Sega-published releases in the series are released. If there's significant context of that series, the older titles could then be covered under this project as part of the scope of the topic. Of course, whether or not anything exists like that now, I don't know (and don't think so). Red Phoenix ^talk 21:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles developed by Atlus after being acquired that are not part of series developed beforehand

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Sergecross73 msg me 02:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 03:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Red Phoenix ^talk 21:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles in series run by Sega that are developed by other companies (such as Media.Vision, spinoffs and remakes)

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Sergecross73 msg me 02:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 03:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes - Titles containing Sega intellectual property should be covered. Red Phoenix ^talk 21:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles published by Sega where Sega was well-known as the publisher

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes. Red Phoenix ^talk 21:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Remakes of Sega titles that are not in the scope themselves

• I'm not sure what we're getting at here? Red Phoenix ^talk 21:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles developed by Sega of America's subsidiaries

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 15:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes, as long as they are published by Sega. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes. Red Phoenix ^talk 21:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles developed by Sega Europe's subsidiaries

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes, as long as they are published by Sega. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes - Sega Europe has done a lot to try and integrate Amplitude Studios, Relic Entertainment, Hardlight, Sports Interactive, and Creative Assembly more closely into Sega Europe as five "pillars". As long as they're published by Sega, absolutely they should be covered. Red Phoenix ^talk 21:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titles developed by Sammy prior to being acquired

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• I argue Yes. Sammy merged with Sega (instead of being bought out, like what happened with Atlus), so I'd argue they fit the scope of the task force. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 15:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes, as long as they are published by Sega. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes - Sammy didn't do a ton of video games before acquiring Sega, but for all intents and purposes, the two companies are one and have been since 2004. While not "Sega", they're still productions of current company, Sega Sammy Holdings. I think that while this is the Sega task force, it should cover Sega and Sammy both unless the two companies ever split again. Red Phoenix ^talk 21:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Sega has also owned all of Sammy's video games (like Viewpoint and the Rumble Fish series) ever since they merged in 2004. So yes, it would be strange not to cover them. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 22:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Titled developed by Sammy after being acquired that are not part of series developed beforehand

• Yes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 15:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Does Sammy make many video games outside of Sega? Honest question, I don’t know. Sergecross73 msg me 18:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

They release a lot of digital remakes of their pachinko games for mobile, and they've produced games for arcades and other consoles. So yes, they do. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 20:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah gotcha, makes sense. I knew of the pachinko but forgot about the mobile space, which I don’t follow as much. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 21:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Yes. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Yes per my argument above on Sammy. Red Phoenix ^talk 21:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Help with Technosoft

Greetings. Currently I am pondering if I should clean up the (rather rough, to put it mildly) article for Technosoft, a company whose games are now owned by Sega, but I'm rather stuck. While I'd argue the company is notable enough to have their own article, my question is regarding the company's history. Outside of the Thunder Force series, I cannot find really any good sources that discuss the history of the company itself, from their beginnings to its decline and eventual collapse. If anybody could point me in the right direction, that would be great. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 01:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Namcokid47: Sorry, I hadn't seen this - I've been pretty IRL busy since Sega appeared on the Main Page. I think a key here is that Thunder Force is probably going to be the focus, and we'll have to use supplementary information in those sources to piece together the rest of it. That happens sometimes with developers that are mostly known for one work or one series of works - for instance, to piece together Hardlight I had to filter a lot of sources about Sonic Dash. This article notes that Technosoft started out developing for Japanese computers before working on Mega Drive games, and some significant bits are noted here, with the company's 1980 founding noted and its 2001 acquisition by pachinko manufacturer Twenty-One Company. (quick note - I would vouch for the reliability of both articles, as they're written by Damien McFerran who is a writer for Retro Gamer magazine). Admittedly, though, this may be a hard one - I have to wonder if there are good sources in the Japanese language that discuss it, but the Japanese Wikipedia hasn't shown me anything worthy of note yet. Red Phoenix ^talk 13:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

General video game lists for Sega

@Red Phoenix: So I definetly want to have comprehensive lists for Sega's games, arcade games and mobile games, similar to how Square Enix has several comprehensive lists. I have begun a general list for Sega in one of my sandboxes, and you already know about the current state of expansion of the arcade game list article. The franchise and mobile game page would be next. However I am not sure if the mobile games should be intergrated into the general list. Now I ponder about several things about what should be added in those lists. I think that adding all the several ports in the arcade game list is too expansive in retrospect, am I wrong? Its often hard to categorize what is a port and what isn't, and several are based on the arcade game, but are not really a port and often remixed that they are entirely different games (Initial D on PSP, Jambo Safari on Wii etc. etc.). Its also often hard to find which regions specific ports were released in terms of older games that were released on home computers. The second question is, how big should the scope of the general list be? Should mobile games be added? Licensed games that have Sega IP (Shenmue III in recent times, Super Fantasy Zone by Sunsoft etc.).OtopNr.3 (talk) 21:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

So here's my two cents on the issue: I completely concur that we would be going too deep listing ports, absolutely. I think you'll find that's a trap that would make completion almost impossible, to extremely minimal benefit and a lot of clutter. On the scope of the general list, perhaps the best way to approach that would be to start a discussion on that talk page (or here, if we need), and we'll get a consensus going. I'll need some time to formulate an opinion myself, but I think we ought to have some experienced members consider this question and give their opinions. That will give us a direction to go that aligns with the community best. Red Phoenix ^talk 22:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Sega development studios

Sega development studios

10 articles

Sega AM1

Sega AM2

Sega AM3

SegaSoft

Visual Concepts

Relic Entertainment

Atlus

Sega Racing Studio

Sonic Team

United Game Artists

Sega Technical Institute

Hardlight

Creative Assembly

Sports Interactive

Three Rings Design

Sega Studios San Francisco

Amusement Vision

Smilebit

Sega Sports R&D

Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio

Amplitude Studios

Two Point Studios

Demiurge Studios

Other related articles that may be a part but worth considering merging: Career Soft, Creative Assembly Sofia, Atlus USA, Technosoft.

Although this is going to be a very long project, I'd like to pitch a long-term overhaul of Sega's development studios, with the potential of a good topic being in the cards. There's been a lot of work here recently; there are already 3 GAs and four more in nomination at the moment. But wow, there's a lot of potential here. At the top, I'd love to rewrite Sega development studios and instead of a list, do it as an article as a history of Sega's research and development as a whole, which is usually considered one of the most notable aspects of the company. Furthermore, more research for Sega and History of Sega has shown the research and development has not been so straightforward as to put it into rigid time frames.

There are several mergers I'd like to consider looking forward into this. Some of them are easy; Creative Assembly Sofia into Creative Assembly, Atlus USA into Atlus. Another one will be tricky; I'm still determining if Amusement Vision, Smilebit, Sega Sports R&D, and Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio should all be merged or to what levels they can be combined. (Basically, AV (AM4) and Smilebit (AM6) merged in 2004, Sports R&D continued with Smilebit team members and merged into CS1, which included the former AV and Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio).

Personally, I feel this is the next step in continuing to explore and develop the history of Sega, since it's often given credit for its creative prowess historically, and sometimes a lack of it in recent years. I welcome any and all feedback and thoughts on the matter. Red Phoenix ^talk 18:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

For whatever reason this wasn't on my watchlist, so I missed out on quite a few discussions it seems. It's a bit depressing to see so few people in this task force (we had a roll call this year and only four responded, compared to the 70+ when the project first began), but I guess that's what happens to task forces like these. To answer your question, I thought about taking some of those studios up to GA in the past, like Smilebit, but I can't find a whole lot of references to them that would make them comprehensive. My knowledge on Sega is not nearly as big as Namco, so maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place. I personally think Technosoft would fit right at home with this GT you're striving for, and I've done some minor cleanup work on their article, so I can help out in that one.

I really commend you for your efforts at this. I have seen almost zero company division articles, let alone video game ones, be at GA or better, so it's great that something like this is in the making. I thought about doing some of the Namco ones in the past, but quickly lost interest as they were either so insignificant that sources (reliable, anyway) don't exist, or they were integrated back into Namco or Bandai Namco, as was the case with Namco Tales Studio. I'd like to help in whatever way I can, but real life will likely keep me busy for a bit. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 23:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I know the feeling - it'll probably take years for me to get this done, especially when I have other work to do and a real life as well. My biggest concern might be protests - Sega development studios is an absolute mess, but it's a little busy with edits, and restructuring it is is likely to ruffle some feathers. Even my rebuild of List of Sega arcade system boards has caught flak at the talk page because of what was kept and what was removed. There's a long history of cruft and debunked stories in this field as well, especially with development studios. Red Phoenix ^talk 20:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

If anyone's interested in pitching in, I'm starting a rebuild of Sega development studios in my sandbox. Since it's such a large subject, I have it outlined there. What I'm most concerned about is missing something from the history as I go, and that's where I could use extra eyes if anyone wants to look and edit. Red Phoenix ^talk 17:25, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Toshihiro Nagoshi page renewed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshihiro_Nagoshi Any comments, thoughts, ways to it better? At least it might be a decent template for GA level, I know that Mobygames as a source isnt the best, I realize.OtopNr.3 (talk) 14:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, so I see quite a few things. I see what you're getting at, but there's a long way to go. For starters, reliable sources are going to be a big deal here, and there are some factual issues in part because they're not being used (for instance, Daytona USA came about at the suggestion of Sega Enterprises USA president Tom Petit as a way to demonstrate the Model 2, although Nagoshi did play a significant role in developing it). MobyGames is a kiss of death too, because it's listed at WP:VG/S as an unreliable source, though you could use it as an external link; that's usually acceptable. Source 22 is also a wiki and is not reliable as a result. You have some great articles here though that you can milk for all they're worth: #13 is a great article originally published in Edge that has a lot from Nagoshi's personal perspective, for example.

His department, AM11/AM4/Amusement Vision needs to be mentioned at some point—I will note I've considered merging Amusement Vision with Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio and covering from AM11 through all the iterations to today's CS1/Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio. It's also important that whenever you copy over paragraphs from other Wikipedia articles, per WP:COPYWITHIN you have to give attribution for where it came from. Usually most people just link the article they copied it from in the edit summary to do this.

Long story short: there's still a long way to go here before we can even think GA, but the first steps have been taken. I'll have to see if I can dig up some good sources, but you may check Sega AM2 if any of the sources there might be more helpful. Red Phoenix ^talk 02:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

it's interresting how nagoshi said that daytona usa was his idea due to seeing a NASCAR race, while it was also suggested by the western arcade division. not sure how you can word that in the article. in hindsight, i am not sure if I am currently motivated enough to edit for GA status, but yeah its good to hear that its at least an improvement to before.OtopNr.3 (talk) 05:27, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

If anyone's working on Genesis and Saturn-era Sega games...

... I recently requested access for, and was granted access, to Ken Horowitz' "Playing at the Next Level: A History of American Sega Games". All sorts of Genesis and Saturn games that were developed in America from 1990 to 2001 are covered in the book. If anyone wants some referencing if they're working on such an article, let me know and I'll be glad to share the information I have. Red Phoenix ^talk 15:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I intend to work on Rolo to the Rescue eventually. all the sources are on the talkpage. someone was very kind to provide that info.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^{Chat Contribs} 15:13, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Sakura Wars and Sonic the Hedgehog GT/FT (Revisited)

There's an important discussion at the Video games WikiProject regarding the Sonic the Hedgehog and Sakura Wars GT/FT proposals that I did a while back. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Revisiting the Sonic the Hedgehog and Sakura Wars GT/FT proposals. Input from task force members would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:09, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

～This winter, you get to know SEGA more.～

I assume everyone's seen this educational video by now? Popcornfud (talk) 23:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Some potential Today's Featured Articles for thought and improvement?

Let's start with the most important one: good work to TheJoebro64 as it's looking like Sonic the Hedgehog will be the featured article on June 23 of this year, based on how it's going at WP:TFAR. Truly amazing what has been done over there. I have a couple more TFA suggestions for this year I'd like some opinions on:

• Non-specific date, but August: Sonic X-treme - this year marks 25 years since the game was cancelled, and August 1996 was basically when the game was dead in the water with Chris Coffin's illness. Although there's not a specific date associated with anything here, a non-specific August TFA makes sense to me. FA promoted in 2018, so it's still in pretty good shape.
• December 12: Sega CD celebrates 30 years since its Japanese release. FA promoted in 2014, and I'll be honest, it needs work. I'm looking at it now, as I have with quite a few of my 2013-14 FAs, and we've had new information come to light in the last few years and more sources to tap. It would also conflict with someone else's FA of a Japanese battleship, so we can either push for it or relent and wait until October 2022 for 30 years since the North American release.

What do you guys think? Red Phoenix ^talk 02:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Should mobile games be included in the general Sega list?

@Popcornfud, Red Phoenix, Sjones23, and TheJoebro64: I am currently working on making a list of non arcade Sega video games similar too List of Sega arcade games. Should the mobile games be included in that or be kept under the current existing page. OtopNr.3 (talk) 09:04, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

OtopNr.3, I'd probably keep mobile games separate if possible. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:02, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

I’d also go separate as well based on how mobile games are usually considered separate from arcade and console/PC games. Red Phoenix ^talk 15:03, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

List of Sega video games created, without mobile games. Franchises and mobile games in the works in my sandbox.OtopNr.3 (talk) 12:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Sega Racing Game Release Dates Without Sources

Greetings. I was over on tcrf's article for Sega Rally Championship and noticed the release dates were pulled from here on Wikipedia. I decided to cross-reference these release dates with SegaRetro and I came across some conflicting information. The "Sega Arcade History" book published by Famitsu DC page 135 states Sega Rally Championship would have been released in Japan in February 1995. Tracing back the edits of the page reveals a specific edit to the dates for the page here. After looking at other contributions by the same address, a pattern forms. They began arbitrarily changing dates of Sega racing titles to specific dates without so much as a single reference. OutRunners, GP Rider, Out Run, Cool Riders, Daytona USA, Sega Rally 2, and Sega Rally Championship were all altered. Pages such as Cool Riders (diff here) have had these edits reverted already, but I wanted to leave this information here for the Sega task force. I'd take care of it myself, but I feel the scope has broadened from a single article and would feel more confident leaving this in your capable hands. --Biggestsonicfan (talk) 20:55, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix: would you happen to know anything about this? I don't have time to take a look and you're probably the #1 Sega expert on this site. JOEBRO64 23:50, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

As I look at this, a lot of it looks like random IP edits that are just insensible. If you think about it as well, it would have been difficult for there to be a specific release date for arcade games, especially as early as the 1980s. Some of these are on articles I improved, and I’m ashamed to admit I haven’t been keeping up a lot lately with these kinds of edits in the interim. I don’t have a lot of time and I’m focused on neatening up Sega CD before it’s the TFA for the 13th, but after that I can try to trawl through these. Red Phoenix ^talk 01:06, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Sega Technical Institute good/featured topic?

Sega Technical Institute

10 articles

Dick Tracy (Genesis video game)

Kid Chameleon

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Sonic the Hedgehog 3

Sonic Spinball

Sonic & Knuckles

Comix Zone

The Ooze

Die Hard Arcade

Sonic X-treme

This is strangely pretty close, believe it or not. I'm doing a revamp of Sega Technical Institute right now (thanks Joebro for getting me interested with the new info you found) and may have an FA run at it when it's done; amount of sources will likely be the limiting factor there. The Sonic articles, well, they're the Sonic articles and they're in pretty good shape. The rest isn't as far as it looks.

As I've been doing this revamp, I've found a lot about each game's development in Ken Horowitz' book, Playing at the Next Level: A History of American Sega Games - minus "Die Hard Arcade", but I know of at least one Retro Gamer article on that game. This would allow each one to get a Development section. Taking a look through SegaRetro as well, each seems to have a good deal of reception, enough so that I'm even thinking I could spin out an article on Dick Tracy from its current location with a bunch of others at Dick Tracy (video game). If anyone has one or more on these they'd like to collaborate on, give me a shout. Red Phoenix ^talk 02:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Red Phoenix, I'd love to work on Comix Zone. JOEBRO64 16:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Cool. I remember you offering once before, and this time I'll have to take you up on it. I'm still focusing on Sega Technical Institute at the moment, but I will have to do development for Comix Zone as part of it, and will likely build it in Comix Zone and trim it for STI's article. Ref section in the SegaRetro article for the game looks like it has a ton of reviews. Red Phoenix ^talk 02:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)