Jump to content

Template talk:Video game reviews

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Related pages

Request to update title parameter

[edit]

Is there a way to change the title and subtitle parameter? The text for these does not show well in dark mode. See Berzerk_(video_game)#Reception for an example (through Dark mode obviously!) Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I noticed that 1Up.com had been merged to form the 1Up Network a few years ago. Can you consider changing it to "{ "1Up.com", '1UP' }" in Module:Video game reviews/data to avoid a redirect? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 21:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, the rename of the article should be reverted. It is principally about the website. The podcast network is a subtopic. IceWelder [✉] 18:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I try to get to the 1Up.com article link, it always redirects to the 1Up Network article instead. Angeldeb82 (talk) 19:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. It was moved. IceWelder [✉] 20:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request to add Mean Machines to the list of reviewers

[edit]

The magazine Mean Machines differs from Mean Machines Sega which came about after Mean Machines split into two, along with Nintendo Magazine System (see the article for more info). The lack of a separate reviewer for Mean Machines has lead to inaccuracies in Video game reviews template data such as in the ActRaiser article which lists it as having being reviewed by Mean Machines Sega instead of the original Mean Machines; this is somewhat preposterous given that ActRaiser was a game for a Nintendo system, Mean Machines Sega is a magazine exclusively for Sega games, and the rivalry that existed between the two companies at the time. Please consider adding Mean Machines to the list of reviewers so that inaccuracies such as that of the ActRaiser article can be easily fixed. I also noticed that the Mean Machines Sega link provided by the template is a redirect rather than an article, so you may want to fix that too. Also consider adding Nintendo Magazine System to the list of reviewers for completeness and to help fix other inaccuracies where Nintendo Official Magazine is listed instead. 186.30.182.176 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated in sandbox here: http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Module:Video_game_reviews/data/sandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1260501092
Successfully tested in testcases here: http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Template:Video_game_reviews/testcases&diff=prev&oldid=1260502134
186.30.182.176 (talk) 03:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that I have included a complete and specific description. If there is something that's unclear or if you feel I could give more information on something, please say so and I will be happy to help. 186.30.182.176 (talk) 00:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 05:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! 186.30.182.176 (talk) 21:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help! Paine  01:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Famitsu scoring

[edit]

When Famitsu originally reviews games, at least older ones, they did not average out the ratings to be out of 40, which is currently what the article states ("Famitsu (Fam) 0 to 40, based on four individual reviews").

While occasionally shown on their website as an average, it would be wrong to suggest Famitsu initially gave a score out of 40 on given dates or on the initial reception. Per WP:STICKTOSOURCE, "Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication." which means we shouldn't tally them up if we are citing the article. That said, how should Famitsu be displayed in the ratings box? I've made an attempt to clarify it on the Otogirisō i've worked on, but the instructions on Template:Video game reviews seem to be a bit confusing if not a bit contradictory. What's the approach for this? Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrzejbanas The documentation currently states Collective scoring: Publications such as Electronic Gaming Monthly and Famitsu review games among a group, with each reviewer offering their individual score. Using the average or cumulative score from these publications will result in the loss of that breakdown, so include the individual scores, either in the table itself or in a footnote.. Otogirisō appears to follow this to me. -- ferret (talk) 17:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see that, but the documentation also states "Famitsu (Fam) 0 to 40, based on four individual reviews" so it seems to contradict itself @Ferret:. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrzejbanas Yeah, that second part should be updated. Someone was trying to say it in the fewest words possible I think and it make come from a bad effort to condense for the VisualEditor template parameters. -- ferret (talk) 19:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. What steps are required to update it? Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly just edit it. It's part of the documentation subpage, not the template itself. I'd take out the "0 to 40" and say "Four individual scores of 0 to 10", or something similar. -- ferret (talk) 19:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh I didn't realize it wasn't locked. I'll go forward with it. Thanks! Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 27 December 2024

[edit]

Request a change to add VIC-20 as a format (perhaps as V20? or simply VIC?) to add scores from rankings for early games for that system. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Video_game_reviews&oldid=1265552802"