Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Visual novels/2008

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


Rename category "English-translated H games"?

Due to some minor edit warring on pages like Fate/stay night that I've observed lately, concerning whether fan-translated games ought to be in Category:English-translated H games, I suggested on the talk page that it should be renamed. This message is to solicit your attention. Please don't reply here, but instead visit Category talk:English-translated H games to discuss the matter - it will get confusing if we're talking about it in two different places! -Seventh Holy Scripture (talk) 01:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Higurashi no Naku Koro ni Rename Discussion

A discussion has been started here proposing Higurashi be renamed to When They Cry, the title the English anime adaptation was partly released under by Geneon.--Nohansen (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Machi

I was trying to fix up the Machi (video game) article a bit, but seeing as how I can't find a lot of info on the game, I'm stuck before I started. I saw that this game's in your guys' scope, so I figured I'd at least bring it up. For the 5th most popular game in Japan, there's very little info available. I can't even tell if I'm looking at vandalism. Evaunit♥666♥ 02:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

There is a ton of info on the Japanese wiki, though I don't know if anyone would be willing to translate.--十八 03:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Good idea, thanks. I'll probably just put it through Babelfish and sort out anything useful. Evaunit♥666♥ 03:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

True Remembrance article

I try to start a new article and, sure enough, within minutes it gets listed for speedy deletion. -_-"

Anyways, insani says this about True Remembrance: 

  True Remembrance was originally released in 2004; it went on to garner extremely positive reviews,
  becoming one of the landmark releases in the freeware visual novel community for that year.  In
  2006, an enhanced "Director's Cut" remake of True Remembrance was released, featuring a fully
  animated opening movie, an advanced scripting engine (KrKr2/KAG3), expanded scenario, and enhanced
  graphics.
  The official English localization of True Remembrance is based on this version.
 
  To this day, True Remembrance remains one of the most enduring and most popular freeware visual
  novels in the Japanese community; many people new to this form of digital entertainment are directed
  to this piece, just as English-speaking fans are directed to pieces like Narcissu.  And it's a
  wonderful choice ― high production value, warm artistic direction, and an intricately-woven story
  combine here to create a piece that must be experienced, no matter how new (or not) one is to visual
  novels.

Sounds pretty notable to me. I always fail to prevent article deletions for notability, though, so I'm afraid this thing is going to be deleted. I copied the page over to User:VDZ/True Remembrance, so we can use that as a start, and put that back when someone is able to prove that True Remembrance is notable enough. I hate notability rules, and I did pretty much see this coming already (which is the reason I didn't create the article immediately), but I'm pretty sure True Remembrance is notable, and it's an awesome visual novel, so I think it deserves a Wikipedia article. So...can someone help with this? (Also, for Japanese-speakers, the Japanese Wikipedia seems to already have an article about True Remembrance, which might help.) VDZ (talk) 23:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I have added an explanation as to why I don't think TR is a match for A7. Hope that will prevent its deletion by admins. --Remy Suen (talk) 23:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
First of all, you shouldn't be linking to insani for copyright reasons, so I removed them from the test page. However, I don't think it should have been deleted. Try to build up the article some before putting it in mainspace again.--十八 00:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Wait, what copyright issues are we talking about here? TR is a free visual novel and insani's localization is the official English localization for the game. If you go to the Japanese website, you will see it even links to insani's site at the bottom. --Remy Suen (talk) 01:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Do you mean this game was released into the GDFL, or else the author has sanctioned the English translation (as would seem due to the link on the game's website)? I'm confused because there's a clear copyright tag at the bottom of the website you linked.--十八 03:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
When I said free I meant gratis, like "free as in beer". --Remy Suen (talk) 12:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Article has been restored. Although, as we all imagined, it's going to take some notability sources to keep it alive. --Remy Suen (talk) 01:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
It's being nominated for deletion as we speak. Oh the trials this article must face. _dk (talk) 10:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Question: If the novel is as well known in the Japanese community as this page suggests, why does Google searching "link:true-re.sakura.ne.jp" only return 17 hits? I was attempting to find references, but there's nothing there except some blogs. -Seventh Holy Scripture (talk) 13:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Um, I've been doing a quick search for some sources...I'm not sure which ones can be useful and which ones can't. Also, I'm afraid that we'll need to use Japanese sources a lot, since it's only been out for 4 months in the English-speaking community, and I can't find many English sources.

I hope some of these sources are useful... VDZ (talk) 13:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The result was keep. --jonny-mt 05:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations and thank you, everyone ^_^ This is actually the first time I've seen an article nominated for notability deletion, not get deleted. Again, many thanks. Now let's make it a great article! ^_^ VDZ (talk) 13:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Requesting article review for Chaos;Head

I've pretty much been grinding on the Chaos;Head article single-handedly since I created it on April 7th and I think I've done about all I can for the time being. Comments are welcome for any part but I think the lead, settings and themes, music, and reception sections are the ones that needs the most work. I've looked at other GA VN articles but have not had much luck in figuring out how to add more to the lead since it's still a new game. The settings and themes and music section probably needs to be reworded as I don't think it flows very well. The reception section could obviously use more sources but googling just isn't turning up any reliable non-blog reviews. :( The article's pretty short compared to the other GAs so I've only put two images on the article for the time being. I can (naturally) add more if necessary, but I figured it's best not to overdo it with the non-free images on Wikipedia. And of course, feel free to edit the article directly instead of leaving comments. :) --Remy Suen (talk) 19:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

How to deal with peakspub.co.jp citations?

Several VN articles such as Shuffle! uses peakspub.co.jp for citing ranking information. Since the site seems to be dead, do we want to just start performing wipes of pages that are using it as a reference? I noticed that some articles are using the Wayback Machine, what's the verdict on that one? --Remy Suen (talk) 21:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe using the Wayback Machine is valid, per WP:DEADLINK, and it's been applied to the recently promoted Air (visual novel) GA article. Considering that that ranking is one of the best reception cites for visual novel's I've ever found, it would be wasteful to purge them.--十八 21:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
I am using wayback machine for quite a few articles I am working on to get to the rankings too, but much to my dismay quite a few issues containing what I need are not archived. -- クラウド６６８ 05:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

MangaGamer.com

http://www.mangagamer.com/hentai/

Looks like a new visual novel distributor that's officially translating visual novels into English. Might be worth taking a look and update our coverage of those games, and maybe fill up the Category:English-translated H games. _dk (talk) 03:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I've added mentioning of the English releases (seeming an European release due to prices listing) on D.C. Da Capo and Suika's article, though I don't know if any other of those games have articles. -- クラウド６６８ 04:01, 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) 20:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Ratings

I've been wondering for a while, but maybe perhaps we should change the "18+" in the infobox to something else (EOCS: 18 or something)? Since as it seems, it confused some people, leading them to change it to CERO: Z. -- クラウド６６８ 03:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I personally would love to get the article on the EOCS started before we considered the change. However, I am not sure if the EOCS is responsible for all the ratings of eroge, so that'd be something to look into.--十八 07:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Popotan

I have been told to ask this here. I am wondering whether the article Popotan should be split between the anime and visual novel. The anime appears only to have certain character relations that are common in both. Beyond that, they appear to be completely separate. I am trying to figure out a way to write it for GA status, but because all the GA Visual novels that have anime or manga subtypes, have them being very similar to the main storyline. I've asked in a half-a-dozen different places and no one has given me a clear answer, just told me to ask [insert other place here].Jinnai (talk) 17:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I guess if it's really dramatically different, then it would certainly be fine to split them. Though you'll need to then expand on the reception section to focus on the visual novel, and add in a characters section. -- クラウド６６８ 22:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I would agree with Cloud668, and might I add that a List of Popotan characters may be a good thing to create with distinctions between the anime and visual novel versions.--十八 00:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
How would I go about that? Most of the character lists I've seen are from anime, manga and games where the storyline, and thus characters are generally similar, unless a special character is added/taken away. Beyond that only mimimal changes are done. Here we are talking at times where the same character in the anime could have an entirely different relationship in the game. This isn't true for all of the characters though.
Also it's not quite as different as True Tears. The anime and game share a similar cast of characters, including incidental minor characters appearing in cameo roles in the anime that were in the game. The roles, personalities and sometimes the relations are similar, but the setting and plot are completely different. It would be closer to something like My-HiME vs My-Otome, though in Popotan's case, one is an anime and the other is a game and the anime is not considered a "spin-off".
EDIT:Also, Popotan's similarities between the 2 aren't quite as pronounced as those, but it seems a better match than to compare to than the differences between the Two Tears titles.Jinnai (talk) 02:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, as long as the characters still have some similarities I would say a list of characters would benefit. You can basicly summarize what's true about both of the character's appearances, and then note what's true about only one appearance in a few sentences, and the other appearance in another few. -- クラウド６６８ 03:54, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
So should I then keep 1 main article, sumorizing plot of the game in the main section and then again in the anime subsection (as it differs greatly) and split off character list and episode list (for the anime)?Jinnai (talk) 04:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
This suddenly reminds me of Koihime Musō which basically like this has a sorta different story anyways. Well, if you want to split the article, I'd suggest expanding the plot section of both the visual novel and anime to differentiate the two, as well as finding some production info for the anime (this is a considerably old anime, so I am not sure if you can find any, but exhaust yourself give it a try if you can). A character list would most definitely help differentiating the two versions, and so is an episode list to help organizing the anime article. -- クラウド６６８ 06:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Well I went and split the character list off. Right now it's just a quick and dirty move (only patched references) so it is currently lacking distinctions between major game only characters, anime only characters and those in both.Jinnai (talk) 19:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I took a look at it. I'd suggest that you organize the list of characters according to the visual novel, and instead of having three sections for the main characters that appears in different renditions, group them in one single section, and maybe leave a sentence stating which media they appear in. -- クラウド６６８ 01:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Not sure I quite follow you here, especially that last part. My big concern is that in some cases minor characters in the game, such as Nono, are more important in the anime. Also, characters like Daichi and Keith aren't present in the game at all and are major, in Keith's case later on, central characters to the story.Jinnai (talk) 07:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, to leave it more simple, I'd suggest you to get rid of the level 2 header "Characters", instead having "Main characters", "Secondary characters", and "Minor characters", and then after that list out the characters in their appropriate section in the following order: Main characters from the game first, game and anime second, and anime third. That's what I'd try at least, not necessary the best way to organize it. -- クラウド６６８ 01:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
No, but this isn't your typical visual novel -> anime port.Jinnai (talk) 02:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that I know, but still I am thinking that sort of an organization would work better. Basicly it really isn't much different compared to the organization you have right now, all that's different is uhh, the addition of secondary and minor characters to the list, and without the level 3 headers you have in there right now. I'd think that a sentence "Chris is the protagonist of the visual novel" would work better. But then again, it's perfectly fine to for it to stay this way. Oh and uhh, I'd suggest calling it "visual novel" instead of "game". -- クラウド６６８ 03:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
At this point I think it might be easier if you went ahead and did the reorganization and I could work from that.Jinnai (talk) 03:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Basicly it's really nothing different compared to what you have right now, with the exception of the level 3 headers removed and having a sentence noting that point under the character's section instead, but hey, I have never worked on a character page before, so it's not really necessary better than what you have now. If you are keeping this format you are having now though, I'd suggest you to rename them as Visual novel, Anime, and Visual novel and anime.-- クラウド６６８ 05:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Popotan Characters

The discussion has kind of gotten off the original purpose more on the character list, so i'm splitting it to this sub-topic.

As you can see, currently the format is not necessarily the best. The problem is, because the anime and visual novel differ so much, it's hard to figure out a way that can describe each character's importance and impact because it varies. Some characters are not in one, but in the other. Some character's roles are more important (Nono, Shizaku) in the anime than visual novel (for most routes).

Currently I am considering reorganizing it. New organization would be in order of importance of the game, the primary source by WP:Manual of Style (anime- and manga-related articles). This would mean Chris, Ai, Mai & Mii would be in the main characters for certain. Keith and Daichi from the anime would be listed as supporting characters. The real problem comes with the rest of the girls.

  • Unagi could possibly be placed as supporting due to lack of role in the anime and being only a short post-game scenario.
  • Nono and Konami would probably supporting characters due to their lack of interaction compared to the 3 sisters and the fact they are only romanceable after beating one of the sister's scenerio; however Mea is as well. Also, depending upon the routes taken in the game, their roles become more important and are just as in-depth as the 3 sisters.
  • Kokoa would be a minor or supporting character (probably the latter do to the fact she is a romanceable character). Her scenerio is too short to be considered a main character as well as her appearances. Question is though is it enough to justify minor character?
  • Mea and Shizaku are by far the hardest. Their roles in the anime, especially Mea, are clearly far more involved. Putting them lower because they might not be so important in the visual novel doesn't seem right, but nor does it seem right to rank them higher because of the anime.

Some clear ideas on how visual novels rank non-primary, but potential, romanceable characters would be useful here.

Any further characters added, such as nortable episode characters or important romanceable characters, beyond possibly Claude, would be listed as minor. Claude possibly would be listed as supporting.

The other problem then is how to easily let someone reading the article know which character was from which source and if they are from both, how to format it to give both explanations (beyond physical), which would be the same.Jinnai (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Looking at List of Clannad characters, I guess maybe you should list all of the main heroines from the visual novel under the Main characters section, and from there on out, if a character plays a significant role (In Clannad most of them has their own ending too), in either the visual novel or the anime, you can list them as a supporting character. Other than that, I suppose you can just list them under the Minor characters section.
And well, I think it won't be much of a problem if you can write up enough information on both renditions of the character. I'd suggest first writing a paragraph that summarizes the character's personality and physical stuff, after that a sentence or two about the background story of the character in the visual novel, as it is the original media. And then after that, in a new paragraph, I'd suggest writing a sentence or two about any notable differences in the personality and role changes, and the a few sentences on the background if any changes at all. If they only plays a cameo role in the anime, you can also just say so. I guess it'd be pretty easy to figure out their roles in the anime by looking at that section. -- クラウド６６８ 19:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Ok. Well i think that'll mostly work. It still leaves 2 questions though.
  • Should Unagi and/or Kokoa be listed as main or support characters. Both have their own endings, but they are both special endings. Unagi's is a post-game scenerio and Kokoa is more on the lines of a hidden character. I'm not familiar with Clanned so I don't know if such a character exists. I know from List of Kanon characters Sayuri is a supporting character, but it doesn't seem like it's an eroge ending like Kokoa. And none of the GA visual novels have anything dealing with post-game scenerio characters (where they become central to that storyline).
  • Second, how would I distinquish the any supporting characters not in the game from those supporting characters that are? I mean if they aren't in the anime, I can just add a line after their personality info and because the format is "assumed" to be by default visual novel and not anime that means that someone reading it would naturally assume it was (assuming they understand the VN is the primary work).
Other than that, it should be fine. The real challenge will be on the main article finding creation and development info. I guess if I could do something with Akio Watanabe since and his art style, but his website and Petit Ferret's website don't have much.Jinnai (talk) 22:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I think Unagi would qualify as a supporting character, but I'd say it depends on how long her scenario is and how you get to the scenario. As for Kokoa, it really depends on your definition of "hidden character". If you can only get to her scenario after one of the other character's scenario has been cleared, I guess then she would be a main character. But how does her scenario weighs into the main part of the story?
For the development section of the visual novel, you can pretty much just list out the staff that's involved with the visual novel. It's more like the reception that I guess you should worry about, since the visual novel is the original media, you should instead be writing about reviews and sales information of the visual novel. Reviews for visual novel however, barely even exists (I was lucky to be able to find some for Memories Off), sales information are however, if you are lucky, should be available here. -- クラウド６６８ 23:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'll move Unagi to supporting characters. Kokoa as mentioned has no real role outside her scenerio and unless a player is following a walkthrough, they more-or-less must stumble across her scenerio.
As for reception, although I cannot directly verify that the popularity of Caramelldansen and the "uma uma dance" were made popular by the VN, I was able to sidestep that by at least showing it is often refered to such. I am still looking for a way to verify it was the origin of it's popularity, but do to 4chan's nature that's hard. There has been someone claiming to be the first uploader on Talk:Caramelldansen, but as no article has been published, beyond a [blog] and 1 [academic research paper article] which seems in part based upon wikipedia (although [this] section seems to have in the user comments some better references), it's hard to do.
Reviews as such, beyond blog-type reviews are unlikely. Even in Japanese I haven't found any.
As for sales informatiom, I'll check that site. At least it's a shot, although given the age of the material, I don't know about the results.Jinnai (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I guess Kokoa would qualify as a supporting character too then if she has no role outside of her scenario. As for the sites that you have cited here, as they are blog and forum posts, they wouldn't qualify as reliable sources. And I think you should be able to find sales information for the game, since it's released in 2002 and 2003 (remember to check for sales for different versions). It's more like the newer ones that we have to worry about, since there's not really a site that has sales rankings for visual novels right now. -- クラウド６６８ 16:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I have moved those 2. The other information could meet criteria as best available sources.Jinnai (talk) 18:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Looks like 32-25-03 is missing. Anyway to find this information elsewhere as it is a criticial period for the release of the visual novel.
EDIT: Does the site include info on PS2 visual novels or just PC?Jinnai (talk) 21:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The site as far as I know covers only PC releases and DVD-PG releases. And yeah, you may not be able to find all the issues that you need (the DVD version, however, is ranked here. It's really pretty sad, that the site went offline and we only have fragments of it available to be cited (not like it'd help me as I am pretty sure True Tears wouldn't last on that ranking for over an issue). On a side note should we start to have this talk page archived?-- クラウド６６８ 21:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I got the sales data on that and the other games, except the PS2 release. Not sure where I could go to find that information. I still have to check 2006 and there about when Caramelldansen became a success because of the VN. Nevermind, that was me not thinking that the game sales would only be listed then if any place kept track of used sales. Jinnai (talk) 22:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

demos

I have a link for Popotan demo for Popotan [here]. Should I use it as a refernce link for the exitance of such an item. Since demos don't violate copyright laws I know that's not an issue, but I'm not sure the policy otherwise on linking to the media itself in such cases is. Would it be considered the same as using a movie/sound clip as a source?Jinnai (talk) 21:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it's perfectly fine to source demo versions since basically it's just another version of the game. I myself have done it before too and since so far no one has said anything, I guess you should go ahead and use it. -- クラウド６６８ 23:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Should i use a secondary link to the existence of it or the primary? Since this is about verifiability rather than notability and both just link to download for the file, I'm not sure which to use here.Jinnai (talk) 03:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
If you're going to cite the demo, do it as a primary source. The only reason to source where it's hosted online is if you're going to cite its existence in the article itself.--十八 05:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Fiction guideline proposal

For those who didn't know WP:FICT is considering updating their guidelines. Particularly what constitutes a "usable" source once notability has been established could affect a lot off projects under this task force.Jinnai (talk) 18:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Popotan Peer Review

The article was recently peer reviewed by WP:ANIME and was given a B-class rating. Because of this i posted on Video Games Project request board to get it reviewed to see whether it would meet the guidelines considering the former has given it a green-light for B-class, but as of yet have not heard back.

I am also considering in a few weeks (probably after the holidays) nominating it for a GA article. I want to clean up List of Popotan characters and List of Popotan episodes since both of those seem to very close to also being granted B-class status as well.じんない 04:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Meh, I prefer to talk here instead of elsewhere :P, feel free to move it elsewhere if anyone wants to. Well first, I'd suggest you to cut down the paragraph on the gameplay in the lead to a line or two, and merge it to the first paragraph. As for the third paragraph on the name, you can do the same thing, or consider to trim it down a little bit and make it the final paragraph of the lead. You can also take a look at the feature of the first issue of the WP;VG newsletter, which also provides a pretty good layout for you (none of the stuff I've said reflects it), adaptations may be considered as reception so it's perfectly fine to leave it there.
If possible I'd suggest you to expand the development section to cover the staff, which is usually pretty easy to find a source for compared to reception. To be picky, I'd also suggest you to translate the Japanese sources. As for the PCNews references, I'd suggest you to utilize the archiveurl and archivedate fields in the citeweb template, and subsistute the now dead link to the url field. Otherwise the article looks pretty good so far (I don't have a whole lot of time here so I didn't go through the whole thing), I am surprised how far you got in just a short period of time. Now maybe I should find something and get it to GA too (Kind of hating myself here for being only interested in stuff that doesn't have much reception). -- クラウド６６８ 18:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I may copy this, as well as the other major Popotan discussion, to the main article page later for easy reference.
  • Gameplay: I went and followed Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two.'s layout for the first paragraph, modifying it per the difference in gameplay for Popotan (which forces the player to move around on a map. The second paragraph talks about a mini-game inside the main game, so i'm not sure that should be merged. The last paragraph talks about visual presentation. That perhaps could be merged with the first paragraph, but again i was following Elf's structure.
  • Name meaning: i can move it to the bottom of the lead and shorten it.
  • Development: That really is a more serious problem. I have only been able to find limited info on Akio Watanabe, and only more general information, ie that he worked on the project as character deisigner and that the artwork very much reflects another of his major anime works Nurse Witch Komugi and Netrun-mon. Part of this is perhaps due to my lack of Japanese language comprehension as i'm only first year and only a know handful of self-taught kanji. I can check the manual to see get a production staff list, but that's about it without outside help.
  • citing: can you give me an example? I've never used a cite in that manner.じんない 18:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
For the development information, I have previously used this site for staff information whenever I couldn't find any other better sources (That's been used in Ef's article too, I am not really sure if that qualifies as a reliable source but if not we should as well scrape 50% of the ANN sources). As for the cite, I have used it here for an example (that section is also an example of ripoff). Also, sources such as 11 (being fan-written walkthrough), 18 (being a message board), 43 (being a blog), 45 (being Youtube video not uploaded by copyright holder), and 46 (being Youtube, I am not really sure about this one) most likely wouldn't qualify as reliable sources, see if you can find anything to replace those. -- クラウド６６８ 23:39, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
It should qualify for WP:RS since the consensus of this project is that it does, unless WP:VN which WP:VN falls under doesn't consdier it. For fictional subjects more leway is often given. Check the current WP:FICT proposal to see what we are trying to construct.
18 i can remove. i didn't realize it. i'll have to look at to see exactly what it says. As far as i can tell 18 is an article, a short one. If you have other information i'm not aware of though, I'll change that. for 11 i also have a second independently created walkthough that could also back that info up if necessary (though better source i agree should be found). Citing the games and or the official website for the first use of #11 might suffice to bolster it. Since the former would be primary sources. I'm not sure. [For 45] i'm not sure about what policy is, but as it's a news broadcast and not the entire broadcast it could fall under fair-use, 46 is used as a visual demonstration of and uploaded or endorsed by the convention as it's linked on their site. 43 is the best there is available. I know on that list the site has been used by many as the most authoritative independent research on the subject up to this point. Everything else cites Wikipedia as a primary if, not the only, source.じんない 03:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
For 18, I really can't see how that's an article. But I'd suggest you to cite ANN instead for the station. As for the walkthrough, YouTube videos(for the first one, if the second one is uploaded by the convention I think it'd be fine, not really sure though) and the blog post, I'd really discourage you from using those, because I can see them being a problem at GAN. -- クラウド６６８ 04:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, if ANN has the info for those showings i'll replace 18. As for the video on youtube, i will check fair-use clause. If, for gameplay specifically, you think citing the visual novel itself would be preferable to an unoffical walkthrough or you can find a Japanese source, I will replace that because I really don't like it, but either. As for the blog post, again, i have to say it is considered the most reliable source sadly, unless you can scrouge up something in Japanese about the origins of the uma uma dance.じんない 06:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
The former reference 18 was removed and replaced with ANN. I looked up on the youtube video for what is fair use and it seems that this should be fine as the work here at wikipedia is non-profit, it is a news broadcast published to anyone who wanted to tune into the station in Japan (likely most of Japan) and it is not the entire broadcast and is not the best visual or audio quality and is unlikely to have any negative effects on the marketable value, in fact if anything the contrary as people will likely see the name of the company they've not heard of.じんない 07:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Well mainly what I am really concerned about is whether these sources are really reliable enough now. It also appears to be that 13 (which is the one source that you have cited the most) is what I would consider a fansite, and I would urge you to find a replacement source. I think it would be the best for you to ask the guys over at WP:V/N whether the sources are fine. I also think it would be inappropriate to put Watanabe's website in the external links section, in his article it would be perhaps, but most likely not the game's. Perhaps Juhachi would also have something to add? Given to have gone through the actual GAN process.

Out of topic, but anyone think I should get rid of this long code of signature and find something else? -- クラウド６６８ 23:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Akio Watanabe is more well known for this particular item in the English-speaking world than anything except maybe Nurse Witch Kogami. In addition, he is the most well known member of the production staff by far.
As for reviews there is no other I have been able to find that isn't on a forum, which is even worse. Part of it might be that is has been just myself looking up these sources, but also part of it is that most of the talk of this both in English and Japanese has been done on forums and blogs. The anime has gotten a lot more attention than the video game by reviewers because it's been released on the english market.
Oh and as for your sig, my only problem with it, is it's hard for me to read the katakana.じんない 23:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes well I do agree he is the most notable staff that has worked on the game, but still it's not really a sound reason in my opinion to add his site in there just because so, we don't have say, Nobuo Uematsu's website listed at Final Fantasy VII, do we? And I know, finding sources and reception, reviews in particular for visual novels are exhausting and rarely successful, but that doesn't really mean we can just stick anything we can find in there. And uhh, you know what I'll just make a new signature some time later.-- クラウド６６８ 00:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Well i guess moving the website is fine. As for sources, from what I have been gathering from working on WP:FICT, which does include one of the admins in the discussion, is that as long as the source is used for purpose of reviewing and is either notable themselves or can be shown to be unbiased, it's fine for showing notability since finding more reliable sources is harder. I have removed the one site and am probably going to remove the FAQ site once I can figure out how to cite the game itself (which is legit use for elements of WP:V.じんない 00:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it would be fine to use reviews as sources of course, but note though it says "fansites, wikis, and sites that allow users to submit reviews generally do not meet the standards of significance.", which 13 would fall under that. I know that professional reviews for visual novels are hard to come by (count 428: Fūsa Sareta Shibuya de as an exception, having to receive a 40 out of 40 from Famitsu), but that's life. As well, I see that you have sources with titles as simply "Download". I'd suggest you to rename them to something like, say, "Download page at Petit Ferret's website". As for an example for how to cite a game, *points at Final Fantasy VII's article*. -- クラウド６６８ 00:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I thought I renamed that one, ie the "Download" one when i redid the archival sites per your suggestion...although maybe I didn't. As for the reviews, per the line right after that "n general, if the exclusion of the viewpoint presented in a given review would not pose a problem in terms of neutral point of view, the source is probably not important enough to provide any indication of notability." that in some cases the removal could affect neutrality. I will still look for better sources, but also not that the line above that does say "generally do not meet" not "never meet". That's the problem with fictional topics.じんない 01:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like according to WP:V/N that the video by FNN would be okay as a question on a similar matter said a NBC report was fine, so that clears up at least one of them you have a question about with an outside opinion. The difference was that the footage there could be ordered "free". Here it must be paid for and in larger section and higher quality, thereby the fair use clause comes in.じんない 01:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm just gonna leave the review issue aside, though I do believe only reliable sources should be used (in other words, gone through an editorial etc.). As for the video however, it is noted in that discussion that if it's uploaded by NBC (what would be FNN in this case), but not if it's by a fan. Someone else has also noted "Uploader Joe is not NASA, and so cannot have the credibility of a NASA video. Find the original." Looking at the video, I don't really think FNN uploaded it, and as YouTube does not have an editorial to go through its videos, I don't think it would qualify as a reliable source. -- クラウド６６８ 02:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
It's not so clear cut for FNN though. One, it still fails on the part that it can be freely gotten elsewhere. NASA video clearly could be. FNN doesn't keep their videos up for long and you have to pay for footage. It's also lower quality and not the entire thing. That's also a key issue here when dealing with WP:Fair use. It's possible another non-youtube version exists, but it would take time to track down.
As for reviews, as I said, I can use help, so if you can find reviews for it that can replace it, that would solve the issue.じんない 02:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually, looking at what is cited by it, most of it is character and story info, which is more a problem of WP:V and can at the worst i can use the primary source of the game for WP:V. There 2 exceptions, one of which is covered by other sources and other which is an important fact i would need to find another source on, the hotfix. The archived main site or it's pages might have that info, but maybe not if it doesn't go back that far.じんない 03:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, the problem is, the article right now is sort of badly sourced. I don't think GAN reviewers would be sympathetic because that you can't find verifiable and reliable sources. I myself can't really find any reliable sources with these not taken into account (that said I would've helped you with reviews if I can, but there's just virtually none), but that doesn't mean I should use these as references. It's a bitch, but if you can't really source it with a reliable source, the more critical statements needs to be removed.-- クラウド６６８ 04:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Well for plot and gameplay (and only those sections) I may rewrite and cite parts of it that are not subjective (such as category) using primary source when the secondary source fails since I've gotten some feedback saying for fictional works that is fine elsewhere. That doesn't mean I won't remove WP:RS if they help though.じんない 15:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, using primary sources is perfectly fine for plot and gameplay. Well, if you can't really find any better sources, why don't you try to cite both the game and keep the references? That gives two sort of depreciated source, but that would work better than just one, and only remove them when GAN reviewers say anything. -- クラウド６６８ 16:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Wondering if i rephrased the Uma Uma dance origins to "believed to be the origiinal" would that suffice considering the site, along with probably anything else I'd find, would be WP:QS combined with citing the dance in video itself?じんない 16:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
That sounds like a weasel word. While it is mentioned it would be fine to use them as long as you can cite it, I don't really think it is a good idea if the sources are questionable. -- クラウド６６８ 17:00, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Well even under WP:RS the use of quoting normally questionable level does state quite clearly they can be used for quoting on what they think themselves. Thus I can use them quite clearly to say that others believe it is the original. Is it a weasel word? Maybe depending upon how you look at it, but on another end, it could be seen as wording that can be supported best by WP:RS.じんない 20:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Well to be honest I am not really sure, so I guess you should just go ahead and word it the way you think it sounds best, and only change the wording if the reviewers at GAN say anything. -- クラウド６６８ 22:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Category:Non-H visual novels available in English + Fan translations

Some time ago, a similiar discussion occurred with the Category English-translated H-games, but either the discussion never reached a conclusion or I am just unable to find the rest of the discussion, which is spread out over way too many Wikipedia pages. Anyways, the discussion was about whether or not (unofficially) fan-translated games also count as translated games for the category. At the moment of writing, Tsukihime, a fan translated game, still has the English-translated H-games category. Chaos;Head's fan translation is almost finished; would it be okay to add it to the category 'Non-H visual novels available in English' once it's done? VDZ (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

It all comes down first whether Wikipedia level reliable sources can be used to verify that the game is available in English through a patch and what the meaning of the world "available" means.じんない 20:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Well I'd say no as that's fancruft. Unless we can find a reliable source that shows the translation patch is notable, it's not something to be kept. Also, H-game sounds to be sort of like gaming jargon, perhaps a renaming would render it better. -- クラウド６６８ 22:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree that as long as there's no reliably verifiable sources to point to an official translation in the article's body (or a notable fan translation that has gained notoriety from well-known reliable sources [of which none have done so far]), then placing it in the category for a fan translation is no better. Only official English translations should be placed in that category. Maybe we should rename it to Category:Official English-translated visual novels instead to encompass the eroge and bishōjo games?--十八 01:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Stating their is a patch, that I believe would fall under WP:V, not WP:N, but inclusion in the list would constitute a level of notability about the patch. However renaming the category to what Juhachi said or Category:Visual novels officially translated to English. The latter is slightly more wordy, but also less ambiguous since someone reading the former could read it as English visual novels translated into other languages.
Edit, although reading that, maybe that would exclude titles like Brave Soul? and include non-eroge titles like Eve Burst Error?じんない 04:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay then, let's break it down. All of these games are bishōjo games, right? Not all bishōjo games are eroge, nor are they all visual novels. So how about (keeping with the same wording as in Category:English-translated H games) Category:Official English-translated bishōjo games? Barring that, we could just have two categories: Category:Official English-translated eroge and Category:Official English-translated bishōjo games where the former is a sub-category of the latter. Not to mention that Category:H games needs a desperate rename to Category:Eroge to conform with eroge; same goes for Category:3D H games.--十八 04:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
True, not all bishōjo games are eroge or VNs, but all of those lists would include non-eroge titles as well. Currently that list does not have any eroge titles. I suggest Category:Official English-translated eroge bishōjo games.じんない 04:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
No, I don't agree since all eroge must be bishōjo games, but not all bishōjo games are eroge, thus the reason why I suggested two categories and not just one.--十八 05:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Not all eroge are bishōjo games, since there are yaoi games. _dk (talk) 05:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, why don't we just have three categories for this matter, Category:Official English-translated otome games, Category:Official English-translated bishōjo games, and Category:Official English-translated eroge. -- クラウド６６８ 06:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Are their enough such games out to warrant such divisions?じんない 06:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
You do have a point, but the division seems like a logical one. The point is, one category doesn't work.--十八 06:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I am concerned whether there will be enough to make up three different categories too, but there's really no other ways to settle it. -- クラウド６６８ 07:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Maybe this should be brought to WP:VG and/or WP:ANIME (to direct back to here so we can keep the discussion in one place...in theory)?じんない 23:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'll make it even more complicated. Not all visual novels are ren'ai games. In fact, the title mentioned in my first post here, Chaos;Head, can hardly be called a bishoujo game. It features cute girls, but it hardly focuses on them. An even better example would be Remember11, which, to my knowledge, does not have any focus on the appeal of the female characters, just the story itself and its mystery, weird psychological stuff, etc. If Remember11's translation becomes notable, I'd want it to be listed in a category with the other notable translated visual novels. VDZ (talk) 01:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually I think Chaos;Head would qualify as a bishōjo game. It was even featured (or more precisely previewed, although it was already released) in the June 2008 issue of Dengeki G's Magazine, which is a bishōjo magazine. I think other than the categories, maybe we should also define some rules as for what qualifies as a bishōjo game. -- クラウド６６８ 02:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I would say at a base, if either the gameplay, reviews or advertising focuses on the "pretty girl" aspect it should qualify, assuming for the latter their is nothing to the contrary.じんない 02:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I've always felt that a bishōjo game was one that featured pretty girls, who are usually the focus of such a game, but don't have to be, as in the above cited case Remember11 (which I've never played, so I'll take your word for it). I suppose we could also have a Category:Official English-translated visual novels for such cases, and write a note on that category's page that if the game is an otome game, bishōjo game, or eroge, that it should go in their respective (proposed) categories, but this is already getting a bit out of hand. And I'm not sure if we should bring this up at WP:VG or WP:ANIME since it's definitely not something WP:ANIME should be involved with (hence why this taskforce exists), and WP:VG is already too focused on games that aren't visual novels I think to care about an issue like this.--十八 05:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
So that would bring four categories. Wouldn't that be a little excessive? Perhaps we should scrape the distinction between eroge and non-eroge for this matter?
Also, since I have never seen it written, is bishōjo game part of our scope (although I am expecting it being a yes). -- クラウド６６８ 07:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't see why bishōjo game wouldn't be apart of this taskforce. If we scrapped eroge/non-eroge, then we'd still need at least three cats, right?--十八 07:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I expected that would be the answer, but since it's never really written down, I wanted to make that clear (I guess otome game would also fall under the scope too?). And, yes, there would still be three categories, but that would be as far as we could minimize it to, unless for some reason there's a new, "notable" term coined that represents otome game, bishōjo game, and visual novel altogether. -- クラウド６６８ 07:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I think I found what you were looking for. :P--十八 07:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I found another term that includes that too :P. I guess that's not happening, huh? (That reminds me, how did visual novel ends up to represent all Japanese "adventure games" again?) -- クラウド６６８ 07:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
According to the Japanese visual novel article, the term arose from Leaf where they used the term to describe Shizuku, Kizuato, and To Heart together as the "Leaf Visual Novel Series" (リーフビジュアルノベルシリーズ). It goes on to say that the term "sound novel" had been in use before to describe these types of games, but since this was a trademarked term, and because these games were becoming more "visual"-centered rather than "sound"-centered, the transition to visual novel became popular. Pretty interesting if it's true.--十八 09:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I think we could go with Category:Official English-translated otome games and Category:Official English-translated bishōjo games. There is no reason to sub-divide those categories into eroge or non-eroge because technically they both could be. Rather if we wanted to make a classification for eroge visual novels we should make another category Category:Officially English-translated eroge which would encompass everything not covered by those 2 plus some overlap.じんない 17:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but the problem we have now is, there are visual novels that are not eroge, bishōjo game, nor otome game, leaving us no choice but to add in yet another category, making it four. That would be too many now, wouldn't it? To make our lives easier, we should reconsider whether to really have a distinction between eroge and non-eroge, unless someone coins a term that defines otome game, bishōjo game, and visual novels (and no, Juhachi, I don't mean video games), which is most unlikely (if I am again proved wrong I will fall into the state of orz). -- クラウド６６８ 17:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
It is unlikely to happen because we are likely looking at classifying items that are in different core genres, and as such, you cannot coin a term for core genres without being entirely so vague as to use such terms as video games.じんない 17:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that's exactly my point. So in other words in order to condense the amount of the categories we are making, one way (wait, is there any other way?) to do it is to get rid of the distinction between eroge and non-eroge. -- クラウド６６８ 17:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

That's one. The other would be to remove the classification of VN; a lot of games that classify themselves as VN also classify themselves as otome or bishōjo games as well.じんない 17:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Or how about just Category:Official English-translated visual novels? There are bishoujo games other than visual novels, but we can put them in their genres' categories (such as Category:Dating sims). VDZ (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Depending on whether we could agree to remove the distinction between otome and bishōjo games, that may or may not work. -- クラウド６６８ 22:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
While we could arbitrarily do so, I don't think it is in the long-term best interest of Wikipedia to entirely remove such classifications. Otome and bishōjo games represent to sides of the same coin. The former represents games centered around female going after males and the latter male going after females (in the general sense of the idea). Thus, while Category:Offically English-translated visual novels might be okay, those games should still have the classification Category:Bishōjo games or Category:Otome games.じんない 22:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Funny aside, but I just realized that we classify bishōjo games by their content (pretty girls) and otome games by their userbase (girls). It'd make more sense if it was bishōjo/bishōnen games, or otaku/otome games. I'm not suggesting a rename or anything. As for the cats, having one for visual novels, and then bishōjo/otome games as sub-cats I think works well enough unless we find a better solution.--十八 22:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Well no one ever said humanity was logical. Classifications usually are, but they follow what humans classify them as. As for otome/bishōjo, those should be seperate classifications since as mentioned, not all of those type of games fall under the VN banner. I have mentioned a few already. Thus a game like Brave Soul would be under Category:Bishōjo games and a game like Season of the Sakura would be under both Category:Bishōjo games Category:Officially English-translated visual novels and a game like Air (visual novel) would be only under Category:Bishōjo games.じんない 23:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

To Heart

Since everyone is here, I suppose this would be a good time to ask. I have been thinking of working the articles in the To Heart franchise for sometime now (I will start on it once I get a plot section for Memories Off written, which I am watching/playing). But seeing there's an excessive amount of articles, even separate articles for the anime, I am wondering if this would be a good candidate to merge, perhaps into three articles (the three "main" games) aside the character lists. -- クラウド６６８ 07:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Definitely; I was considering the same thing last week, thinking that it's one of the more well-known visual novel series out there. Actually, practically everything by Leaf is in shambles at the present moment, so I guess this'd be a good place to start, and don't forget that White Album is getting an anime next month; it'd probably be good to think about working on that one as well. Back to To Heart: The media lists can be shortened and merged into their respective main articles that deserve massive overhauls. The anime pages, likewise, can be easily merged and the episode lists split off as per usual, and the two series articles can be merged with their game articles. Multi's Going Out could be given an aside on the To Heart page, and if anything it doesn't deserve it's own article. When you said three "main" games, were you including Another Days? Is that game different enough from To Heart 2 to warrant another article?--十八 07:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Another Days would perhaps be more similar to what Da Capo: After Seasons, or in other words, a collection of after stories. I guess depending on how you define it, it may or may not warrent a separate article. I do have it, but since I haven't even touched it yet, I wouldn't know how it plays out for the matter. I also am planning to expand on Tears to Tiara (perhaps the PS3 version's article should be merged into it too) and White Album. I suppose I will work on the latter one first since the anime for that is due out next month, and the former one when I import the PS3 version of the game when US dollar's worth is back at 110 yen, or when the anime's due out, whichever comes first, which I am expecting the latter. -- クラウド６６８ 07:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
In that case, I'd say give Another Days its own article (if you think it really needs one); from what I've heard of it, it covers mainly the scenarios of side characters from To Heart 2, though I could easily be wrong about that. Still, something in me is saying perhaps Another Days doesn't necessarily need it's own article, especially if the only major difference between the two is the scenario. When you think about it, the setting and characters are going to be same and similar, with a change in the story. The staff that produced To Heart 2 probably worked on XRATED and Another Days as well, and then Another Days did get an OVA series, but that could be easily summarized in the anime section of the (to be revamped) To Heart 2. I realize that it's not as clear cut a similarity as perhaps Little Busters! and Ecstasy, but if we did agree on the recent merger of Memories Off Pure into Memories Off, then I have my misgivings about giving Another Days it's own article unless there's more of a reason for me to think otherwise. And I had no idea someone made a PS3 article for TtT; it's against standard convention at WP:VG to create separate articles on ports, so that should be merged immediately.--十八 09:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I think I'd reconsider the matter and merge that into To Heart 2 seeing that's how the Japanese version is done (and considering the Memories Off Pure example that you have given, which didn't come to mind at all). I suppose I will merge Tears to Tiara sometime later and expand on it while so. I guess someone just created it because there's an article in Japanese, doesn't mean we should have one in English. -- クラウド６６８ 16:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
True, just because a separate Wikipedia has it as a seperate page means it might be more notable to them. That said, be shouldn't hastily delete an article that might have potential.じんない 18:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
The fact remains that an article on a port is never going to be as, or more notable, than the original release, even if it's been updated or enhanced. See Final Fantasy III#Nintendo DS remake. And I'll be happy to help with the To Heart overhaul starting next week (got finals this week).--十八 21:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Coincidentally, I have finals next week. I guess I will work on it in a few days while you are taking yours, and you can work on it while I am surrounded by the tremendous amount of knowledge that I need to recall. -- クラウド６６８ 21:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Little Busters!

While going through tag reviewing for WP:ANIME, I came across this one. It seems the gameplay and plot sections are rather long considering the relative simplicity of the gameplay (as a visual novel is not that complicated) and per WP:PLOT it may not be that consise. Before putting it up for a GAR i thought I'd post here since I think it could be easily addressed by tightening up the prose by someone familiar with the game.じんない 02:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The gameplay (if you read it) is actually more complex than the typical visual novel what with the minigames and battle sequences in addition to the main prose and the final arc Refrain, plus the additions with Little Busters! Ecstasy including three new heroines and story. The plot is four paragraphs long and covers generally the main whole overarching story in a concise manor, but I guess I could try to shorten both sections some. Also, why would you put the article up for GAR if only the gameplay and plot sections are long? What with your recent trout worthy FLR of List of True Tears episodes, I don't really think you understand the formal processes of Wikipedia enough to be doing such things. Not to mention that WP:PLOT is an essay, and not even a guideline or policy. I think you meant something like WP:PLOTSUM.--十八 03:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
That was not entirely my fault. I had been told wrongly by another major contributor to Smallville (Season 1) as a way to base episode lists on. No one seems to realize that and treat me like I should have known better, even after I tried explaining.
Regardless I wasn't planning on doing it until I posted here and since you seem to be willing to retake a look at it, I don't have to. And I know that for GAR it would be an individual review on my part, not a community one. There was nothing like that in FAR. And, yes I did mean to link to PLOTSUM. It was a quick mistake since I know essays are not meant to be used as guidelines or policy.じんない 04:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Regardless of what someone else told you, you still leaped before you looked, jumping right into an FLR before even considering the major reasons why the tons of FLs on the project don't have reception sections. If you were curious as to why that was, a simple note at WT:ANIME would have been sufficient, or you could have also asked an administrator (such as User:Nihonjoe or User:Sephiroth BCR) or asking involved contributors to the project (User:Collectonian).
Anyway, I tried to shorten as much as I could with the plot and still be concise; the gameplay is still rather complex, so it's hard to shorten it too much and still cover the important points with the fighting games and statistics attributed to the main characters.--十八 04:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Well I realize the gameplay is a bit more complex. I am more concerned about the plot though because of recent development with Chrono Trigger, which is also probably just as complex a game in its own way, has had it's plot reduced a lot. Too be honest, I wasn't expecting it to be reduced as much as it had, but it seems like perhaps the article's plot might not meet FA standards depending on how things go (though this isn't as much of a blow-by-blow account as the previous Chrono Trigger one was).じんない 04:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Mass GA nomation?

Remurmur (SeizureDog) has, for some reason, nominated quite a few visual novel articles to GAN. Namely, incomplete articles such as Summer Days, Suika, Memories Off (these two lack plot sections), and True Tears (heh, not even close with its reception and some other things). I am concerned whether these articles would actually pass the WP:GAC, and whether nominating all these articles would actually mean any good. -- クラウド６６８ 16:33, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Have you asked why he thinks those are GA-worthy VNs? I mean if all, or most, end up qualifiying it makes me wonder if the GA level has slipped since we have B-rated articles and in some cases C-rated articles higher quality.じんない 17:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
No, but Sephiroth and me (ironically, Cloud), have replied to him at Juhachi's talk page. -- クラウド６６８ 17:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I have asked him at his talk page to remove all the nominations per the reasons Sephiroth and Cloud (heh, didn't even realize the irony until you said it) have given, and if he refuses, then I'll remove them myself per actions leading to disrupting the editing process, and put Shuffle! up for WP:GAR (which he was the major contributor).--十八 01:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
That reminds me, should we merge Shuffle! Prologue and the character pages into the list of episodes and characters? -- クラウド６６８ 01:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, most definately. Shuffle! in its entirety needs an overhaul, though I'd suggest leaving a note at the main article, and asking Remurmur for help (citing MOSs and example articles), him being the major Shuffle! contributor. Personally, I'd rather not go through GAR, and instead just overhaul the main article myself, since I believe it wouldn't take much work to make it look something along the lines of Air.--十八 02:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
The information in that article is quite outdated too, as I believe there's going to be a new game coming out with new characters and all that (as said by Dengeki G's Magazine a few months back, don't know why I never bothered to add it in). I guess if you can come to an agreement on the organization with him, he wouldn't have much of a problem with an overhaul. Though, I believe that has been discussed before. -- クラウド６６８ 02:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Per the fact that Remurmur apparently has chosen to ignore my request, as he has continued editing articles and yet has done nothing to respond to me, and seeing as how this is already making a turn for the worse, I'm removing the articles on the basis of disruptive editing.--十八 07:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Moegaku

Does this game fall under our task force or not? It's unclear what it means in the description by "adventure game".じんない 05:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, there's evidence of visual novel attributes.--十八 07:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Bishōjo Awards

I decided to go check out Kara no Shojo's official site out of the blue just now and noticed that they'd won some stuff from Bishōjo Game Awards 2008. Naturally, I was quick to run some scans over the page to see whether Chaos;Head won anything but it seems like nothing happened in that department. I guess this may or may not be related to the fact that it isn't an eroge. Oh well, my quest to find more reception-related information for the game continues. Anyway, I thought it'd be worth bringing these awards up here so that articles like G Senjō no Maō could have their reception sections updated. --Remy Suen (talk) 00:49, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I thought we know that already. Never mind, that was on my talk page instead of here. But yeah, that can be used for reception sections for a limited amount of articles, depending on whether the game wins an award or not. -- クラウド６６８ 01:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Visual_novels/2008&oldid=1202760544"