StrategyWiki:Collaboration of the Month

Every month, a Collaboration of the Month will be selected by using this page. Using cooperative editing, the aim of the collaboration is to complete a major task or greatly improve an article by the end of the month. A list of former collaborations can be found in the archive.

Current Collaboration of the Month

Voting
Please feel free to vote on as many candidates as you like. The article with the most support each month is selected. Any registered user may vote for an article, as long as the account's first edit occurred before the nomination. During the case of a tie, the article which was nominated first will be selected.

How to Nominate
Anyone may nominate a collaboration. To nominate an article copy the nomination template at the bottom of this page, fill it out accordingly and the put it at the end of the list.

Example guides
Nominated December 7, 2006.

Support
 * 1) Prod (Talk) 23:40, 7 December 2006 (CST)
 * 2) Froglet 01:45, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * 3) Notmyhandle 19:07, 30 December 2006 (CST)

Oppose
 * 1)  Duke Ruckley  14:29, 22 January 2007 (CST)

Comments
 * Set up a good amount of background guides which follow the policy and are good examples of how to continue other guides. Having one main example is good, but we should probably have a few that show different aspects of what can be done. -- Prod (Talk) 23:40, 7 December 2006 (CST)
 * There are a few game guides that are very close to completion, such as the Final Fantasy VII guide. Maybe we should collaborate to complete the almost-but-not-quite completed guides?--Froglet 21:36, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * These might be good "Guide of the Month" projects. This may enable us to shed light on these guides while still having another collaboration goal.  ech elon  00:10, 15 February 2007 (CST)
 * I don't think there is enough to this to make it a collaboration of the month, although I do agree it should be done. Unless you mean that we should all work on a few specific guides which would then become the "example guides".  In that case I think we should focus on one at a time, such as Final Fantasy VII (see below).-- Duke  Ruckley  14:29, 22 January 2007 (CST)

NES Games
Nominated January 8, 2007.

Support Oppose
 * 1) Notmyhandle 18:32, 8 January 2007 (CST)
 * 2) --Shadowsithe 11:41, 22 April 2007 (CDT)
 * 3) -- Duke Ruckley  08:56, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * 4) Prod (Talk) 13:08, 13 February 2008 (CST)

Comments
 * We currently have 82 NES related articles, assuming these are all games, that's 82 out of 772 games (about 10.6%). Games ARE hard to come by, but most people who play them now rely on emulators anyways. A complete list of games exists here; those who want a good NES system should also check out the product on that website (plays NES and Famicom in one system, wireless controller abilities etc.; good review by IGN).  Lets see, with 28 days in the month of February, that's only 24 games per day.  If you take the time to go get information and write a summary, well that ranges up to about an hour if you just want a description and infobox.  If we get 6 people, that's only 3 hours a day max... Dang we need more members ahaha. --Notmyhandle 18:32, 8 January 2007 (CST)
 * As much as I enjoyed NES games back in the day (Contra was awesome!) they aren't that relevant anymore (except for Xbox Live and VC for the Wii). For now, we need guides for the most popular current games written up.  I would support this, but not right now. -- Prod (Talk) 18:49, 8 January 2007 (CST)
 * Good point. I think this should be made noticed; it's vital to keeping StrategyWiki up to date (would probably bring in more users as well). --Notmyhandle 18:57, 8 January 2007 (CST)
 * lol, I dunno how to feel now... NES is kind of my M.O. You know that I have a strictly retro focus, and I've been in the process of adding different Famicom games to StrategyWiki, but I'm doing it them mostly in chronological order (as of this comment, I'm up to Yie Ar Kung-Fu).  From the conversations that I've had with Echelon, he's in favor of any and all content, regardless of era.  I think striking a balance of current and retro is the key, as we would like to attract all kinds of viewers with all kinds of tastes in games.  Procyon 19:13, 8 January 2007 (CST)
 * I agree, any and all content is useful (which is why I didn't oppose it, it's still a good idea). Other gaming sites appeared long after some of those old retro games, but they still have tons of the old content.  If someone is interested, they should definitely be added, and they will be used and attract visitors (I know tons of retro gamers :P).  From one test* I did, newer games attract more people, though the older one got it's fair share, which is why I can't support it for now.
 * Ruby/Sapphire was Collaboration of the Month, Bully was Promising guide, Trauma Center is Promising guide
 * We have a good user base now, so I think we're ready for this now. -- Prod (Talk) 13:08, 13 February 2008 (CST)

Guide/Usage policy and/or Usage policy
Nominated May 14, 2007.

Support
 * 1) Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 21:05, 14 May 2007 (CDT)
 * 2) --Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 12:48, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * 3) Ryan SchmidtTalk - Contribs 16:18, 28 May 2007 (CDT)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose until I see this page started. I want to see what I'm voting on before I say yes to anything.  --Tathar [[Image:Tathar.jpg|32px]] (talk|contribs) 17:35, 26 November 2007 (CST)

Comments
 * Key word: Usage Policy. Isn't this like a EULA?  I mean, we give users priveledges and we also restrict the right to deny them said priveledges.  I think this needs to be laid out and then additionally presented in StrategyWiki:Usage policy where it would be made into an enforced policy.  --Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 21:05, 14 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Maybe we can add something about who created the site as well, at the moment I can't find anything.--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 12:48, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Yeah, info on Ech and Ness are hard to find. --Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Completely agree, I created the page on Echelon and Garret's taken care of the Ness Page other than these, there's barely and info on either of them :P--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 16:06, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Definitely. We should also probably put them in the wp article as well. As for the actual collab, I like Usage Policy better because all of the enforced policies are not in the guide, so why break the trend? Also, having this on the main page will draw more attention to it and hopefully enlighten contributors to the point of my enlightenment. --Ryan SchmidtTalk - Contribs 16:18, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * We do have one, Images but I think that's it.--Rocky http://media.strategywiki.org/images/thumb/7/78/Rally-X_Rock.png/25px-Rally-X_Rock.png (Talk - Contributions) 16:20, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * What will go in this? -- Prod (Talk) 13:08, 13 February 2008 (CST)
 * I was thinking user rules (how not to get banned, etc.) and stuff like that. This could be part of Wiki-etiquette but I'm not so sure... -- 20:58, 13 February 2008 (CST)

Super Mario Forever
Nominated September 4, 2007.

Support
 * 20:34, 4 September 2007 (CDT)

Oppose
 * 1) Tathar [[Image:Tathar.jpg|32px]] (talk|contribs) 12:19, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
 * 2) Prod (Talk) 13:08, 13 February 2008 (CST)

Comments
 * This game is both hardcore (I'm going to have a callous on my right ring finger by the time I finish it), fairly short (should be easy to collaborate on a full guide) and a way to get retro gamers back into the genre. By providing info about this hack/mod ROM, we can gain a lot of traffic from interested individuals inspired by YouTube videos and the like.  Additionally, noobs will be prone to needing help =) -- 20:34, 4 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I dunno if this deserves a guide of its own. If it's only one level then shouldn't it go under the regular guide? At this point, I'm more of a "delete" than "collaborate". -- Prod (Talk) 22:09, 5 September 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm in support of allowing ROM hacks, especially good ones, to be covered on SW, but I don't think this would work as a collab NMH. I mean, the walkthrough for this has to be a step-by-step set of instructions on exactly how to get through the game, and there's really only one correct solution.  And let's face it: the YouTube video of this game can do that much more easily than any amount of typing.  I can appreciate your fandom of the hack, believe me NMH.  I'm just not sure if this particular hack lends itself well to SW.  I would prefer to see more work done on Mario Adventure.
 * I'm not sure I like the idea of even having guides for ROM hacks. It all seems to be a legal gray-area to me and I don't care to test that boundary.  It's also only one level and too difficult for someone to just get into and help make the guide for it.  --Tathar [[Image:Tathar.jpg|32px]] (talk|contribs) 12:19, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
 * It's actually more than 1 level. I've only gotten like 60% through level two so I'm not sure how long it is. -- 19:03, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
 * I don't really even agree with having this guide. Regardless, there just isn't a very big audience for this, so can't be a collaboration. -- Prod (Talk) 13:08, 13 February 2008 (CST)

Super Mario Galaxy
Nominated December 2, 2007.

Support
 * 1) Procyon (Talk) 11:43, 2 December 2007 (CST)
 * 2) Prod (Talk) 12:03, 2 December 2007 (CST)
 * 14:53, 2 December 2007 (CST)
 * 14:53, 2 December 2007 (CST)

Oppose

Comments
 * Just a thought on my part, this game is hot, and I have to figure quite a few members of the community have it and can help build it up by adding guides for collecting each star. And if we choose it, it will be on the front page, so so much the better. Procyon (Talk) 11:43, 2 December 2007 (CST)
 * Great game :). -- Prod (Talk) 12:03, 2 December 2007 (CST)
 * I can support this. It's new and popular too, which is a good reason...-- Duke  Ruckley Talk 12:53, 2 December 2007 (CST)

article name
Nominated , .

Support

Oppose

Comments
 * A description of why the article should be the Good article Collaboration of the week followed by --~

(subst:CURRENT... will automatically generate the dates, you do not need to alter them)