Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/List of Digimon video games

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games‎ | Peer review

List of Digimon video games edit

I want to take this to FLC at some point in the future, because WikiProject Digimon doesn't have any FLs, and neither do I. I'm still looking for a few more release-related references, and none of the fighting games have release dates. Other than that, though, I'm not really sure what to do due to my lack of experience with lists. Any comments about organization, sourcing, or whatever you have is welcomed. Tezero (talk) 18:30, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm not certain, I think that every entry in the list needs notes. GamerPro64 (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They do. But what needs to go in the notes? How long of plot summaries? Is sales/reception info ok for there? Tezero (talk) 20:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in List of Donkey Kong games, some notes say who developed the game, what genre the game is, its gameplay style, etc. I also believe that sales and reception is acceptable. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Nomader

Did someone say List of Donkey Kong games? Just for the record, I went overboard with some of the notes in List of Donkey Kong games, but for the most part if you're going to use Template:VGtitle you need at least one note per game. Well if you're trying to get it to FLC, here's what I'd do:
Lead
  • It's important that the lead give an overview of both the series in general (its premise). I need to be able to get a basic idea of what Digimon is in a one to two sentences, and what makes the Digimon series unique from other video game series. For Donkey Kong I literally said something like "The franchise revolves around Donkey Kong and his family, who are usually the series' protagonists, in a series of adventures". Basic stuff.
  • You need to list both the main developers and publishers of the games in the lead. If Namco Bandai didn't develop most of the games, than who did? If it's a bunch of companies, say "the Digimon series was developed by a variety of developers, including...."
  • The first game and the latest video games in the series need to be mentioned in the article. Remove the reference from the title screen of one of the games about the first copyright, and mention list the first video game as the video game series's beginning. Remember, this is a list of the video games from the series, not the series itself.
  • I would combine the parts about the different genres, maybe even expand the first sentence to include information about the genres.
  • Add sales information into the lead if you can find a source about sales throughout the entire series. Usually you might be able to find those kind of sources in press releases about a new Digimon game. Might be hard to dig up though.
    • Couldn't find anything. At all. Digimon just isn't that successful; it looks like the most any of the games have sold is under a million. Tezero (talk) 21:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's quite alright then. I kinda figured that it might end up being the case, but it was worth a glance. -- Nomader (Talk) 06:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just remember, expand. Your lead will probably end up being about two paragraphs.
List
  • All release dates must be sourced. To find good sources, use GameSpot and put the reference into the "|refs=" parameter of Template:VGtitle. This way it will source all of the release dates. If for some reason, you can't find release dates from GameSpot, use the GameFAQs page, which sometimes has other foreign releases and draws from the same database as the GameSpot one. If only a year is included and not a specific day, or if certain regions are missing, only include those regions unless you can find another reliable source with those release dates.
    • Doing... Here, I found several Japan-exclusive Digimon games that I didn't even know about. By looking hard elsewhere on the Internet I found that they are in fact legit games. However, it's largely non-RS's that cover that type of stuff due to the limited scope. This may not have been the best list to create and get to work on. Tezero (talk) 01:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's quite alright-- remember, the inclusion criteria for lists is much lower than it is for articles-- you can have items in your list that may not be notable enough for their own article. As long as there's a reliable source like GameFAQs that you can cite though, you're golden. -- Nomader (Talk) 04:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • All games now present in article. I will commence the rest of the comments tomorrow. Tezero (talk) 02:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Release dates now listed and cited for all games. All that's left is the notes. Tezero (talk) 17:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • All current references for release dates should be moved to the "|refs=" parameter, unless you use different sources for different dates.
  • If a game is re-released, the later release date should be cited in the "release dates by system" section. The original release does not need to be cited as it is cited in the main release dates section.
    • That should be true, but the Final Fantasy, Kirby, and Harvest Moon lists, for example, cite the original dates just like the others. Tezero (talk) 18:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's always flattering to see that my Kirby list is still being cited. True, every video game featured list cites it in both, but I just kind of realized how redundant it is. I guess it's best if you follow the example of other FLs. Nomader (Talk) 17:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • All alternative and foreign titles should be listed in the notes section, not the release dates section.
  • The notes section should include one note about basic gameplay, and if the developers change with different titles, development information or a different publisher should be noted as well.
  • The release dates by system should not have colons (:), but n-dashes (–).
  • All notes should be cited.
    • Done for the notes now; I need to add more notes, though. Tezero (talk) 21:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't worry, you've brought this list from nothing to something very quickly. Take your time with the notes, they can be the most frustrating part. -- Nomader (Talk) 06:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Systems in the list should only be linked upon their first appearance. Afterwards, even in different sections of the list, links should not be wikilinked.
  • What makes Geo-online.co.jp, and CDConline reliable sources?
    • First has been removed; will try to find a replacement for the second. Tezero (talk) 01:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually, the second is from CDC Games, who published the game in China. I think it should be ok. Tezero (talk) 18:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yep that's perfectly acceptable. Nomader (Talk) 17:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Try to stick with GameSpot release dates instead of Japanese Amazon ones-- it standardizes the source that you use for the dates, and the Amazon dates may be the day it was released on Amazon, not in Japan in general.
    • Just a note: I think Amazon should be reliable enough per the VG guidelines, sorry about that note. -- Nomader (Talk) 04:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, go with GameSpot over Gamezone for release data if you can.
    • I like to use as big a variety of sufficiently reliable sources as possible, since many of these games are Japan-exclusive and have very little RS coverage. Tezero (talk) 01:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I understand where you're coming from, and if this were an article, I'd completely agree with you-- a variety of sources is great in most articles. But for lists, I think it's usually best of data comes from the same place. Sometimes IGN and GameSpot will have totally different release dates. I'm also wary of using a site like GameZone which has recently changed all of its links to old articles so I can't access them anymore. It's best if you can find a stable site like GameSpot which is considered one of the stalwarts in the industry. -- Nomader (Talk) 04:40, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright... I think that's good enough to start. I'll check back in if you address my concerns afterwards to see if it needs any more work before going to WP:FLC. -- Nomader (Talk) 04:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Additional note: you should try to use a free image for the list article whenever possible-- there weren't really any on Commons, but I found a Digimon image for you on Flickr and uploaded it for you onto Flickr (link). The picture was taken of the booth babe, but it's really the booth in Seoul, Korea for the Digimon RPG. -- Nomader (Talk) 04:15, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Switched. Today isn't the best day for me but I'll get to the rest of these comments soon. Tezero (talk) 13:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • For one of the Japan-exclusive games, I used a quote reference, which obviously was in Japanese so I had to translate it as well. Is that okay to use? As I mentioned, there isn't really any RS media coverage for the game. Tezero (talk) 21:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • That should be fine, although you may have to reasoning to a reviewer why you put it in there during the FLC. This list is really coming along, outstanding work. -- Nomader (Talk) 06:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a note: barring the few notes you still need to add, I think you've done a great job addressing my concerns. The list's really come together, nice work. Nomader (Talk) 02:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • All right; the notes are about done, except for the fighting games. Will it be okay that I can't add more notes for the Japan-exclusive games in the RPG section? Tezero (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it's just fine although reviewers at the FLC may ask for something more in the notes section. If there isn't anything from reliable sources, just note that in your response to the reviewer and you should be golden-- Digimon has a lot of obscure Japanese titles and I think you should be okay. Barring a few minor changes you might be making, I think it's ready for FLC-- outstanding work addressing my concerns. Nomader (Talk) 04:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'll take it there once the notes are done. Until then, though... are there too many notes for some of the games like Digimon World 3? Also, will it be a problem that there aren't any print sources? Tezero (talk) 18:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Video game articles are commonly cited from the internet and lists are even more so-- List of Donkey Kong games has only one print citation out of seventy-eight, and List of Kirby media has none at all. As long as your sources are reliable you're just fine. Nomader (Talk) 23:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few smaller comments:

  • With regards to Digimon World 3, I'd merge "features an isometric viewpoint" and "features 20 additional digimon..." into one note. Nomader (Talk) 23:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be a formatting problem with the release dates for Digimon RPG which needs to be fixed. Nomader (Talk) 23:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Digimon for the Wii needs at least one note (i.e. Digimon is being developed by XXXX) Nomader (Talk) 23:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • All your latest comments done. I'm going to FLC now with this. Whatever happens, I'm glad you put so much effort into this review and appreciate your thoroughness. Tezero (talk) 03:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Peer_review/List_of_Digimon_video_games&oldid=373740431"