From StrategyWiki, the video game walkthrough and strategy guide wiki
(Redirected from SW:STAFF)
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Welcome to all users! This page is where you can ask StrategyWiki-related questions to the staff and senior community figures, and they will do their best to answer. New issues are entered here, with the most recent at the bottom of the page. If your question does not pertain to editing StrategyWiki (e.g. asking for hints or game-specific information), please ask on the guide's talk page or on the forums.

Please review the Table of Contents to see if your issue has already been raised; also check the archives (to the right) in case it was discussed some time ago.

To facilitate ease of browsing and replying, please:

  1. Place your question at the bottom of the list.
  2. Title the question (by placing the title between equals signs: ==Title==).
  3. Sign your name and date (by adding four tildes: ~~~~).

Adding external links without being logged in is broken[edit]

First time I click save page, and the page reloads asking for a reCAPTCHA. After filling out the reCAPTCHA, the page reloads telling me I'm adding to many links in rapid succession and asks me to click save once more if I'm adding something serious. Clicking save once more reloads the page asking for yet another reCAPTCHA, and after that it reloads with the "adding too many links" message again. It continously goes back and forth between the two, and never actually gets to the point where it's saving my contribution. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

Rename games that conflict with Genres[edit]

The following games have names that match genres, and it means every time we refer to them we have to disambiguate . As these games are very old, and rarely accessed, it makes more sense for the genres to get the names for their redirects.

  1. Artillery -> Artillery (Commodore PET)
  2. Baseball -> Baseball (NES)
  3. Basketball -> Basketball (Atari 2600)
  4. Bowling -> Bowling (Atari 2600)
  5. Boxing -> Boxing (Atari 2600)
  6. Golf -> Golf (NES)
  7. Pinball -> Pinball (NES)
  8. Racing -> Racing (PlayStation)
  9. Skiing -> Skiing (Atari 2600)
  10. Soccer -> Soccer (NES)
  11. Stealth -> Stealth (Commodore 64/128)
  12. Tennis -> Tennis (NES)
  13. Volleyball -> Volleyball (NES)

I propose we move these pages to Racing (game) so that we can have set up the regular redirect for Racing

It's an unfortunate problem, but yeah, I think this is the best way to approach the problem. The headache of trying to leave those links the way they are, and the havoc it creates when trying to link the categories isn't worth preserving the original guide names, so I'm in favor of this change. Procyon 02:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
( 🤔 ) O o ⴰ 😃 👍 I concur. ~ Sean.43L (talk) 06:53, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
When renaming them, I think it would be better to have the system in parentheses instead of just (game) -BrownDerby (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
That does match our policies better. I've put some proposals above. -- Prod (talk) 17:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Maybe it should just be Volleyball (NES), like Ice Hockey (NES) which was also on FDS first. -BrownDerby (talk) 05:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Updated above, and some all moves complete. -- Prod (talk) 00:24, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Stop categorizing series by developers and publishers[edit]

Should we drop categorizing Series by their developers and publishers as detailed here? It seems redundant to me. For example, Focus Multimedia is a developer for Dogz and Catz (Ubisoft). In the subcategories section, it shows the series; but below in the pages section, it also shows all the games they were involved in, which is much more accurate. The two cases I see a minor benefit is:

  1. Focus Multimedia shows that there are multiple Petz style series', which wouldn't be as obvious from just the game listing. This is a very rare occurrence and would be obvious by going through the series pages.
  2. Ludia and Magic Pockets (company) are listed under Popeye, but since there's no guide for the game they worked on, they only have the series under their name. This will eventually be accurate, and there's not much point of having a company page with no games listed.

As companies are categorized by their parent and child companies, having these series cats also makes it harder to find the company relations to each other, which I feel is more important that a full series listing (which is already covered in the text or categorized guides). -- Prod (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I'd be fine with that since some series have a lot of variation in developers/publishers. Would make more sense if one company developed all games in the series, but that could always change with companies passing off old IPs to work on new projects. -- WarioTalk 17:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I kind of feel like Publisher is useless for the reasons that Wario mentioned above, but I feel differently about developer. If it's an original IP (like Mario or Zelda), it makes sense to list the developer, since it's either consistent throughout the series, or it occasionally passes off from one developer to another, depending on who has the license. If it's not an original IP (like Disney or Popeye), then it makes a little less sense to include developer since that's just a function of who bid the most to make anf market a game for a while. So I dunno, developer feels like a relevant field in some cases, and less relevant in others. Procyon 00:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
At best I see it the other way. For a series with many games developed by the same company, they will all show up in that developer's category. Listing the series doesn't add anything. For a series with games developed by multiple different companies, you'd only see one game in the developer's category, so having the series cat would make it easier to find other games in the series. But that's still just a click away already. -- Prod (talk) 15:52, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Would LaserTank be within the scope?[edit]

Would the game LaserTank be appropriate to add here? 09:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a tough one. It falls under the non-commercial section, but most of the links on wikipedia are from the website itself or just discussions. The journal article is kinda interesting as an independent article, but a bit odd as it's not gaming related. Regarding alternatives, I found,, and The first one seems to already have a lot of information about the game, so I'm not sure if it's a good idea to split the community. -- Prod (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2020 (UTC)