StrategyWiki talk:Requested guides
From StrategyWiki, the free strategy guide and walkthrough wiki
[edit] Deletion
Najzere, I can understand your position that it seems pointless to request a guide here since little if anything comes from doing so, but just because the page isn't serving its purpose effectively today, does not mean that it won't do so one day in the future, which is our hope. If we publicize this page properly, and gain the benefit of new contributors who are looking for some direction in what guides to work on, then hopefully they will see this page and become inspired to work on something on this list. Procyon (Talk) 14:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, no problem; it's not hurting anything to have it here (I don't think). It's funny though, because most of the requestors have their request as their only contribution to SW, and nearly all have under ten contributions and are no longer active. I'm interested to see what happens with the more recent requests from real editors. I imagine they'll end up writing the guides themselves, if anyone does. Does that make this more of a request for collaboration page than anything else? - najzere 16:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- It's also a portal for collaboration. For example, if someone requested an Apple IIGS guide, I would jump on it immediately. --Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 20:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- I agree this page may be a bit premature, and not really useful at this time... but then where would we put the image of Paws?!?!! -- Prod (Talk) 04:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- It is now the ten month anniversary of the proposed deletion, and for anyone interested, the three guides I referenced were never worked on, just like the requested guides before them and the ones that have come since – with one exception. You'll have to ask Sigma 7 whether he was influenced by this page to work on Left 4 Dead. If so, I can only say HUGE SUCCESS. (p.s. you can put Paws on Melon's userpage.) — najzereT 05:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- Today it spurred me into starting the Spelunky guide. I do agree that it hasn't had any real benefits to us except to create additional stubs that might attract visitors. But, since its existence is positive (minute, but its still there, just look harder) I don't see why we should remove it. --Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 11:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's another template, another page that users have to follow a special format, sysops have to clean up after, and serves no practical purpose. Now that we've got the New releases page starting up which should link to all the new and exciting games, I'm going to say we officially bring it up for deletion (using the term official very loosely :)). I vote that Paws moves to the New releases page. -- Prod (Talk) 04:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- I'd agree, the new releases serves as a better means to show which guides may need work; they show newly released games that need work and that do not have the full information available. For older games, there's already content that can be used for research and as such, those guides can be created more easily, and might not need a "request" to start. Since it was semi-useful in the past, it could be kept for archival purposes, history-merged or redirected, unless it's perfectly acceptable to delete. --Sigma 7 04:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's another template, another page that users have to follow a special format, sysops have to clean up after, and serves no practical purpose. Now that we've got the New releases page starting up which should link to all the new and exciting games, I'm going to say we officially bring it up for deletion (using the term official very loosely :)). I vote that Paws moves to the New releases page. -- Prod (Talk) 04:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Come to think of it, I think I worked on L4D because it was a monthly collaboration that happened to be there at the time I arrived on site. --Sigma 7 05:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
- Today it spurred me into starting the Spelunky guide. I do agree that it hasn't had any real benefits to us except to create additional stubs that might attract visitors. But, since its existence is positive (minute, but its still there, just look harder) I don't see why we should remove it. --Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 11:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- It is now the ten month anniversary of the proposed deletion, and for anyone interested, the three guides I referenced were never worked on, just like the requested guides before them and the ones that have come since – with one exception. You'll have to ask Sigma 7 whether he was influenced by this page to work on Left 4 Dead. If so, I can only say HUGE SUCCESS. (p.s. you can put Paws on Melon's userpage.) — najzereT 05:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- I agree this page may be a bit premature, and not really useful at this time... but then where would we put the image of Paws?!?!! -- Prod (Talk) 04:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's also a portal for collaboration. For example, if someone requested an Apple IIGS guide, I would jump on it immediately. --Notmyhandle (talk • contribs) 20:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I really don't think anyone should delete this. Why? Because I need it to add more games to what is requested like Command & Conquer: Red Alert (iPhone).(Noryb989 02:12, 24 November 2009 (UTC))
- Command & Conquer: Red Alert appears on the list of stubs, and Category:Guides at completion stage 0. Given the age of the game, the content for the guide would only be created if there is a person that purchased the game and adds content to it. This is also reflected by the first entry, nominated at least 1 year ago but isn't much more than a stub. FYI, it's being replaced by StrategyWiki:New releases, which should have a better effect at creating new guides; if you need to work on something that rolled off the list, you can bookmark the page in question (or use SW's search function) and update the guide from there. --Sigma 7 05:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
