From StrategyWiki, the video game walkthrough and strategy guide wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the Community Issues forum.

September 2007 | October 2007 | November 2007

Wii Classic Controller buttons

I notice there don't seem to be any button images available for the Wii Classic Controller. These are needed both for Wii games that are Classic Controller-compatible (such as Resident Evil 4, Mortal Kombat: Armageddon, and Super Smash Bros. Brawl), and for Virtual Console games that have individual control schemes (such as Nintendo 64 games). Wanderer 22:14, 5 October 2007 (CDT)

Unfortunately, our usual graphic artist is unavailable currently. Anyone up for some artistic endeavors? -- Prod (Talk) 22:20, 5 October 2007 (CDT)

More templating

You may have noticed that I made a complete pig's ear of cleaning up the CN, FN and HN this morning; the job queue's currently up at 46000, and guides will probably look a bit shabby for the next couple of days, but that can't be helped. They all still (just about) work, and the styling for the CN, FN and HN is now all in Common.css. However, that's not the main subject of this thread. I want to get people's opinions on having a new "ToC" template, which would be put on the main page of a guide, and replace the current mess we have:

==Table of Contents==
{{:Game/Table of Contents}}

It would mean there's less to go wrong when someone messes up a guide, and would potentially allow us to do fancy stuff to the main page ToCs of all guides in the future (although I can't really think of anything which would be useful). This isn't something I think we urgently or desperately need, but it can't hurt. As such, I propose a lazy migration (if we go ahead with it), similarly to how we're transitioning the release dates. --DrBob 05:56, 7 October 2007 (CDT)

Go for it. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 09:34, 7 October 2007 (CDT)
OK. I've created it as {{ToC}}. Just put that into the main page of guides instead of the markup above, and all will be fine. It takes no parameters. --DrBob 14:55, 7 October 2007 (CDT)
Along with this change the {{Continue Nav}} no longer needs the |game parameter. User:Auto Prod Bot is working on this, but anyone who wants to can help. -- Prod (Talk) 12:09, 9 October 2007 (CDT)


I would've brought this up on the talk page for the achievements project, but nothing much seems to be happening there. Anyway, I downloaded and played Team Fortress 2 this morning, and noticed that Valve have introduced an achievements system to it. Since Valve have also just introduced the new Steam Community stuff, I'm pretty sure they'll start rolling achievements out to other games, and aggregating all the data in the Steam Community. At the moment, I believe Category:Achievements only caters for Xbox achievements, so I propose that we move all the pages in it to a new "Xbox 360 achievements" category (correct me if there's a problem here), and have that as a subcategory of Category:Achievements. We'd then introduce new categories for other achievements systems, such as that on Steam. This should increase the scope of the achievements project, and hopefully give it more to do. :-) --DrBob 11:03, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

From the description on the Category:Achievements page, it seems that we'll need cats for Category:Xbox 360 achievements, Category:Xbox Live Arcade achievements, Category:Games for Windows achievements, and Category:Steam achievements. The question is, which of these have centralized listings? -- Prod (Talk) 12:16, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
I've just played Portal, and I can confirm that it also uses Steam achievements, so it's pretty certain that more games will start using them. I think we should go ahead with this. :-) --DrBob 13:03, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
For games on multi platforms, say Xbox 360 and Windows, we would have to create two separate achievement pages? or could we just add an extra column for those points? Provided they are the same achievements.. --Laviot 20:39, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
Yeah there's no need for separate pages. At most you would just create another table on the page, then separate them with tier 2 headings for easy navigation with __TOC__ enabled. Like you said, it will probably work out to just add another column, and then maybe where you explain the achievement you can list the differences if there are any. --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 22:22, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
This has been implemented. :-) --DrBob 12:26, 12 October 2007 (CDT)

Online distribution

Speaking of Steam, it's probably about time we started differentiating between hardware systems and online distribution. I propose we have a new "Online distributors" category, which is a subcat of Category:Systems, and which contains the current online distributors (GameTap, PlayStation Network and Xbox Live Arcade), plus any new ones such as Steam. It's not really a major change, but I want to get some feedback on the naming, since I think it could probably do with improving. --DrBob 11:11, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

I think Online distrobutor sounds fine; it's better than "Video Game Portal" or something like that. What about Wii virtual console? --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 11:29, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
I don't think we need to get into detail about how the games are distributed (the |media parameter is enough). However, Wii Virtual Console is treated as a separate system from the Wii, so we could treat Steam as a system. However, that would mean that games available only through Steam (ie. not on cd/dvd) would not be in Category:Windows. -- Prod (Talk) 12:19, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Category:PC doesn't have games in it despite them being commonly known as "PC games", and Category:Windows already has a Vista disambig; it's not too much of a stretch to have Steam-exclusive releases also only in their specific category. The message could be made bigger (like Category:MS-DOS's DOSBox notice) to increase visibility. GarrettTalk 15:20, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Agreed. --DrBob 01:28, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
I've created Category:Steam, put it in Category:Systems, and populated it with the first Steam games I could find. If anyone notices a Steam game I've missed (there'll be hundreds), could they please add it? :-) --DrBob 14:53, 12 October 2007 (CDT)

Problem with category

I want to change the category in Medal of Honor: Frontline to Category:2015 (Company) but the 2015 cat is still there, Is it a template that is doing this or me?--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 12:05, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

You should be using Category:2015. Why did you create the "2015 (Company)" category? --DrBob 12:13, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
It was marked for renamiong by Prod because it will conflict with the date.--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 14:46, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
Despite the fact that problems with this will only surface in 7 years (:-P), he's right. You should name the new category "2015 (company)", though (note the lowercase "c"). Thanks. --DrBob 01:26, 10 October 2007 (CDT)

Notification of online users

Is there any way we could see if a user is or is not online? It would be nice if we could. --Myth (talk) 15:44, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

No there isn't, and I don't think it would be a good idea. If you want to see if a sysop is online, at least one of us is idling in IRC at any given moment (generally... there are a few times where it'll be completely empty). Otherwise, just leave a message on a talk page. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 19:53, 9 October 2007 (CDT)
There is a way on wikiepdia, after a bit of searching, i found ithere, can we use this here?--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 11:12, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
Possibly, but it would have to be adapted to fit in BlueCloud as well, and since it's javascript, some people will be unable to use it. As it is though, I'm still leaning towards the "bad idea anyway" side, and that isn't going to change. While it's a nice feature in forums, it isn't so much in wikis. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 15:20, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
Agreed with Ryan. --DrBob 15:46, 10 October 2007 (CDT)
Well what makes this different than a forum? I mean we talk about adding forums anyways, and it WOULD be useful. --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 15:03, 12 October 2007 (CDT)
Ok, say we do have this... how would it be implemented as a nearly accurate way of showing onlineness? The way the one works in the link Rocky gave depends entirely on user input to change the status -- not very reliable and too much work at the hands of most users (myself included, I am NOT going to be using that method to toggle my online status). So, can you come up with anything better? Also, a wiki is very different from a forum, as you've stated yourself. After all, why would we talk about implementing a forum if a forum and a wiki are pretty much the same thing already? It just makes no sense. Forums are for chatting to other people in a semi-organized fashion. Wikis are for presenting information in an organized fashion. Chatting and presenting information are two wholly separate things. Finally, please list three different reasons why adding in an online indicator would be useful. I sure can't think of three, so good luck with that. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 15:48, 12 October 2007 (CDT)
I've been curious about this subject, I just never really got around to asking about it. From what it sounds like, the online indicator from Wikipedia would be a drag to use. No one, including myself, would be willing to put that much effort into an indicator of whether you're online or not. While I would like to have some sort of indication, it wouldn't really bother me if we didn't. Lunar Knight (Talk to me + Contribs) 19:06, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
There is also a bot that will update the status based on activity, maybe we could use that or the one that's replacing it. link--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 01:44, 21 October 2007 (CDT)

Why would we do that? It's a waste of resources and energy for some people. If we're going to do it, we have to do it through code so it's automated without having it mandated by edits. Rather than waste our own efforts and focus on something like this, why don't we just make a suggestion for a mediawiki feature? --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 02:41, 21 October 2007 (CDT)

There's some extensions here, here, here here and [Extension:UserLoginLogoutLog here], most of these don't look that good really but we may be able to make some of them work.--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 03:23, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
Yeah that's what I'm talking about, except I think an actual mediawiki feature would be better (like, being able to set it in user preferences). LastLoginTime looks really good. The only problem is whether or not the use of cookies enables the time to change. If it does, then we have a decent solution. --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 03:48, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
Only thing is it isn't made by a MW developer.--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 10:30, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
Still no, those extensions look pointless (and aren't official), so I would never recommend they get installed. Plus, what is the point in this? I truly don't see a point in adding this in. If you manage to pester a MW dev to write a stable extension for this, good for you, but it's still an emphatic "no" from me. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 16:14, 21 October 2007 (CDT)

Copyvio in Okami?

All of the information on Okami/Characters is copied word-for-word out of the game's instruction manual. It even says so at the top of the page. Is this a violation of copyright? New User 20:06, 9 October 2007 (CDT)

Yes. It needs to be marked as such, and then re-written and integrated into more useful information (I haven't looked at it). If it's factual, then we can have it. If it's a story, or background, it needs to be reworded. --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 00:39, 10 October 2007 (CDT)

They say immitation is the greatest form of flattery...

...I just think it sucks. The wiki at (which is over-ridden with ad-bots) stole our fighting move icons without crediting Blendmaster at all. See this page :P Sucks... Procyon (Talk) 15:38, 11 October 2007 (CDT)

I can has GFDL violation? At least he apologized... -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 16:15, 11 October 2007 (CDT)
Until they license themselves as GFDL I'm not saying it's ok; but yeah, I hope you explained to them that they can put them back up if the wiki goes that way... --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 00:55, 12 October 2007 (CDT)
Oh yeah I keep forgetting that you don't have to be licensed that way... But if they do like Creative Commons, can they use GFDL pics if credited? It seems like they should be able too... --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 00:57, 12 October 2007 (CDT)

Settlers III

Hi! Can somebody provide fair use images for The Settlers III (of the items and buildings at least; I can make map screenshots myself, I hope) and please work a little over the things I'm writing to make it meet some quality standards? --Best thanks, Proto 20:20, 12 October 2007 (CDT)

What you've done so far looks quite good, actually. The only thing I could suggest is for the mission walkthroughs to be written in continuous prose, rather than a series of bullet points. :-) --DrBob 00:56, 16 October 2007 (CDT)
DB, they are nowhere near done. Proto: don't worry about "fair use" for the various cut out images. If you need editing done to screenshots, you can upload them to SW and then leave me a message on my talk page with the image names and what specifically needs to be cut out. I'll handle the editing, re-uploading and deletion of the full screenshots. Also, you might want to start a todo list on the discussion page for any other contributors (use {{todo|game}}). --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 04:08, 16 October 2007 (CDT)

Desperate times call for desperate measures

StrategyWiki has enjoyed a steady increase in popularity and traffic, and we are grateful for every user's support. However, the little server which once adequately met our meager needs is now hobbling along on its knees, trying to keep up with the demand. As this site is run out-of-pocket by essentially one man, the site owner, the time has come to do whatever is necessary to improve the situation and make ends meet. The site administrators (non-contributing staff) have agreed that by hosting pop-up ads for a limited amount of time, it may be possible to drum up the money for new server in a matter of weeks, at which time the ads would immediately cease. As this is a somewhat dire situation, the decision to run these ads will not be put to a discussion so as not to divide the staff in any way, and will only take effect for as long as necessary and not a day longer. The administrators wish to apologize to any users that they will potentially offend or annoy and wish to assure everyone that this would not be taking place unless it was absolutely necessary. With a new server, we will be capable of supporting a larger community, and provide our viewers with enough speed and bandwidth for the foreseeable future. Having said all of this, and with no desire to guilt anyone into using it, I'd like to point out the PayPal donation button to the left. As you may know, StrategyWiki has made it possible for fans of our site to financially support the site on a strictly voluntary basis. Your personal support of StrategyWiki can help lessen the time that we need to run the ads for, but it is in no way necessary for you to contribute unless you absolutely would like to and are able to at this time. The administrators of this site thank you whole-heartedly for your continued support during this period, and anxiously await the day when we can provide you with higher quality performance than you are currently experiencing. Procyon (Talk) 06:11, 14 October 2007 (CDT)

Ok, to me, there are three types of "popup" ads, so could you please clarify which one(s) we would be implementing? The three types (in my perspective) are:
  1. The new window type (a la Tribalfusion). I generally find these to be the least effective, as most people I know just close said window without actually looking at the ad/clicking on it, and you can set them to pop up in the background, under the active window.
  2. The in-your-face type. These (may) temporarily deactivate the rest of the page unless you click on the close thingy on them. They generally appear right in the middle of the page, hence the in-your-face. I'd judge these to be the most effective of the three, and second-most annoying.
  3. The redirect type. These use javascript to redirect the page you are currently visiting to another site. These are by far the most annoying, as hitting back will just load the same javascript again. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not implement this type.
Procyon, as for your comment about visibility, I'm thinking of making another box high-ish up on the main page explaining the situation and the cause, and telling people that by donating, the ads will get removed sooner once we actually implement these ads. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 10:55, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
Actually, a better idea just came to me. What about MediaWiki:Sitenotice? That's the message that appears on the top of every page, with a [dismiss] link for logged in users. Here's the notice I was thinking of:

Due to increased amount of popularity and traffic, StrategyWiki needs a new server. Therefore, we have implemented pop up ads for a short period of time until enough money for a new server has been raised. If you wish to get rid of the ads quicker, please donate so that funds may be raised even faster! [read more] Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 11:19, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
When Nick ran this idea by me I told him hell no. What do you think popup ads will do for the public perception of StrategyWiki? Granted, while we *need* a new server, this can't be the only way to raise approximately $1,500 - $2,500. :( echelontalk 14:26, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
Perhaps a better option is AuctionAds (Nick also introduced me to this). We could dynamically control the keywords, instead of some lame Google algorithm that gets stuff wrong 75% of the time. example echelontalk 15:09, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
Wow... I thought that when Procyon wrote this, it was already in agreement with everyone in the higher-upness, guess not :P. Anyway, I still think it would be a good idea to make use of MediaWiki:Sitenotice, with a donate link and one of those progress bars like the WikiMedia foundation has, it might get some more people to donate. As for Auction Ads, it looks good, but we really have three options to consider if we go that route, outlined below
  • Use AuctionAds
  • Stick with AdSense
  • Try out the Amazon referrals
Since we have limited sidebar space, we really can only go with one of the three (unless we make use of the left sidebar as well), so we'll need to decide which one would be best for us. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 20:51, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
I think we can support all three, to an extent. ActionAds at the bottom of each page, Adsense where it currently is, and Amazon links in the infoboxes/HNs. Popup blockers would probably render those mostly useless, those flash ones which cover your screen are extremely annoying, and the redirect ones just take people away from our content. Also, would it be possible to move that PayPal button down a bit, so that it doesn't overlap that line? Seems somewhat out of place to me. -- Prod (Talk) 21:13, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
Yeah I agree with site notice, and was going to suggest it earlier (but I had to work). The potential drawback to ads are the hardasses (most of us) that will be repelled from the site (Ech's concern). From my standpoint, I like ads because I know what they do and good ads are actually beneficial to me (for instance an ad about five years ago helped my love of metal grow even more). Therefore, I'm definitely for this (I know this topic isn't about this) and I believe it won't be detrimental in the long run (especially after getting a new server). I don't know about BlueCloud, but I assume for CrimsonNight the paypal button is located just below the line underneath Help in the left nav. From the looks of it, the button should fit between that line and the image below it... --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 21:16, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
Sorry about the confusion guys. When Nick ran it past me, he made it seem that either a) echelon had signed off on the idea or b) he had echelon's approval to implement any idea with full support. So my impression was the same as Skizzerz's (Skizzerz'z?) I asked what could I do, should I make an announcement? He said go for it, so I did. Apologies all around. Procyon (Talk) 21:26, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
Oh good lord... possessive + my nick = downright impossible >_< (to pronounce, spell it Skizzerz's I guess, so just stick w/ Ryan's or something). Anyway, I totally forgot about the donate button since I have css that hides it, but IIRC it could stand to be moved from its current position. And Procyon, don't worry about it. Tricksey little Nickses can be deceptive sometimes ;). -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 22:18, 14 October 2007 (CDT)
When this goes into effect, I think we should throw this up on the PayPal page so that people can see how far along we are and be more interested in how their money is contributing to the goal:
--Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 18:58, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
I am objected to the usage of any sort of pop-up advertisement. That would quickly get on my nerves (And I'm sure everyone else's.) As for any of the other ad options, where exactly would they go? Lunar Knight (Talk to me + Contribs) 19:12, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
Maybe we could sacrifice the content in one of the four cells on the main page (such as "most promising guide") in order to stick a non-popup ad on the main page. Then once we get the new server we can put it back. - Koweja 22:46, 15 October 2007 (CDT)
I never see ads/pop-ups 'cause I have I don't care :/. I do hope we can raise the money though. --Myth (talk) 23:12, 15 October 2007 (CDT)

Woah woah woahhh. I just saw/skimmed over this thread. Procy I told you that Brandon said no to the pop-up ads. I was joking about it too. I'm sorry about the confusion. When I talked to you I was talking in a more general "We need money, we need to test some things out" way. I don't know if you guys have discussed it but trying Auction Ads for a while to see how it would turn out or at least adjusting the Google Ads to a better placement. I'd be against Amazon stuff because it pays out so very little and they only pay out ever quarter which is ungodly slow. The fact of the matter is A. Google Ads aren't going to get clicks because they aren't targetted at all (why would I buy *gamename* walkthrough when I'm at this site?) and it's so far to the side. B. They pay out VERY little (see .01-.05) a click since the ads are so random and gaming isn't a high paying niche.

We should test by putting an adsense square or maybe a leaderboard up someplaces instead of on the side. If only for a little bit to see how it does. We should also test Auction Ads. I'm very confused as to why we aren't testing right now. It just seems like a bunch of procrastination when this could be the thing that saves this site. Otherwise it's going to keep going slow until eventually it can't handle the traffic and it will get shut down. I think the site randomly being DOWN for hours and days is a lot worse of an image than some ads that are more towards the middle of the screen. --ConfusedSoul 14:53, 16 October 2007 (CDT)

It says 10% and paid monthly. I dunno about you, but games are NOT a niche market. Ads aren't what make money, sales are (same with AuctionAds I'd assume, their site is info-lite). -- Prod (Talk) 15:45, 16 October 2007 (CDT)
The profit margin definitely sounds good. With a bit of prettying, my Amazon template is probably good to go. Many games are multi-platform, so Amazon's automated equivalent might take up too much space. GarrettTalk 16:48, 16 October 2007 (CDT)
The KEY word there is UP to 10%. A more realistic estimate is 5%. So then someone would have to come to strategywiki. Look up a guide for a game. REALIZE they don't have that game. Click the amazon link. Have an amazon account or get one. Buy game. After all that we make $1-2. We can test it, it just doesn't seem like a realistic income stream to me. But again we need to be testing this stuff to see how well it works. We can talk and talk and talk about what will or won't work, but we have NO idea until we try it. And I'm kind of getting disenchanted by how we aren't doing anything. --ConfusedSoul 23:22, 16 October 2007 (CDT)
Complaining doesn't solve anything. Until echelon registers and sets up the accounts, there nothing we can do. After that, anyone with server access can set up the page to display the ads. What we need to decide on is layout, so do you agree with my suggestions above, or have a better idea? -- Prod (Talk) 23:42, 16 October 2007 (CDT)
I think it'd make more sense for the actual game or any game related paraphenelia to show up instead of a generic banner on the side. I don't know the way Amazon has its system setup but I know there's a relatively easy way to set that up. --ConfusedSoul 01:47, 17 October 2007 (CDT)
The best part about those amazon links (I want them permanant now) is that I can shop on amazon and give SW money at the same time xD --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 02:36, 17 October 2007 (CDT)
Here's the nice thing about Amazon... It doesn't hurt us to have it. In fact, the template that Garrett created looked pretty good and wasn't obtrusive or anything. While it would probably not bring enough money to buy a new server, it might be worth it to try out anyway. Plus, does it have to be games they buy? Why not books and stuff... There are a few books out there for Starcraft, Diablo, Warcraft, Halo, etc. Maybe we can say, "Hey, if you are looking at buying a book (any book) from Amazon, do it through us! You'll be supporting your favorite place for guides!"--DukeRuckleyTalk | Contribs 07:50, 17 October 2007 (CDT)
If they click on it they'll get our cookie and so whatever they buy within some time (or unless they get someone else's cookie which overdubs ours) will give SW some commission. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ConfusedSoul (talkcontribs) .

So it sounds like a good idea, but is it legal? Are we "taking advantage" of it? Otherwise, when can we get started? Ech? --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 01:31, 18 October 2007 (CDT)

Um...yes. There's no reason why it wouldn't be legal. Echelon doesn't care he's too busy learning how to manipulate images with programming words. --ConfusedSoul 21:57, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
That was completely unnecessary CS. Echelon does care. Unfortunately he, like many of us, have more pressing problems to deal with in real life. Procyon (Talk) 09:18, 22 October 2007 (CDT)
Cut the bickering before it begins. Anyways, if you haven't read the agreement that we would be making with Amazon, then you have no certainty that they are making any rules that would affect how we deal with the links and such. I should go find that document... --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 13:04, 22 October 2007 (CDT)

Ads - Section 1

I just added AuctionAds and WidgetBucks per the suggestion of Nick. THIS IS A TEST ONLY. IT WILL BE TEMPORARY. Nick says WidgetBucks will net us 10 - 30x what AdSense does, and he also suggested testing AuctionAds. We'll see how this goes for a day. Also, let me know your thoughts about how intrusive you think these are... echelontalk 23:52, 23 October 2007 (CDT)

I don't like the way auctionads looks and they don't really preform well based on my personal tests. They may fare better on here. I KNOW widgetbucks will do better than adsense. We'll have to see. There's no reason to not test. If these work anywhere close to what I've gotten on my sites then we could put SW on a top of the line server that would last us a VERY long time. --ConfusedSoul 00:37, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
The AuctionAds box is ugly and doesn't have anything relevant to the page being looked at; Google AdSense targeting improves once the pages have been indexed by the GoogleBot, but from what I've seen of AuctionAds in the past I'm not too convinced that they have a comparable system. WidgetBucks, however, is very nice. It's nicely presented, only subtly animated, and has a nice selection of (predetermined?) deals rather than the random tripe that AuctionAds throws at visitors. $3-$6 CPM is a very good rate, too. GarrettTalk 01:39, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
Wow I didn't even notice AuctionAds until I was looking for it. I probably looked at three or four pages without even noticing it; however the right nav is like BAM. I suggested to Garrett that we move it down by like 20-50px because on pages like the watchlist, there's no toolbox items yet the toolbox header is still there; thus I thought that the ads were part of the toolbox and it just kind of confused me (considering it says stuff like Nintendo 64, etc.). --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 02:04, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I'm not certain I understand the point of having WidgetBucks advertise gaming systems to visitors to this site who, quite presumably, already have consoles and aren't on the market for one. Are we really going to end up selling an Xbox 360 to a visitor? Or a Dreamcast, N64, or GBA for that matter? Isn't there a way to make it more software oriented? Procyon (Talk) 09:23, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I agree with the above people, I like the Widget one better (although I don't think the AuctionAds is that ugly). By the way, I don't know if this was just me, but for some reason when I first saw the main page I didn't see the AuctionAds box, just a white space at the top. I can see it fine now that I've went to a different page and came back. Baejung92 13:49, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I like the Widgetbucks one better than auctionads. Not only does it present itself better with basic animation and nice, rounded corners, but the auctionads one messes up the top on top of looking absolutely ugly. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 15:52, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I'm cool with the Widgetbucks, but can't stand the auctionads. Either remove the auction ads from the top, or remove them altogether because, for some reason, they are so ugly up there they piss me off. Lunar Knight (Talk to me + Contribs) 16:04, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I think the auctionads one looks pretty awful but the one on the right seems fine - you don't really notice it tucked away over there. --RamonSalazar 18:44, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

Um, is the right end of the AuctionAds thing supposed to be cut off by the toolbox, or is it just me again? Baejung92 21:34, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

The results are in! After one day of running both AuctionAds and WidgetBucks, we have a clear winner. WidgetBucks estimates that we made $18.00 in ONE DAY. This is over three times what we make with AdSense. AuctionAds, on the other hand, requires someone actually make a purchase to earn any money--not surprisingly, we made $0.00. I think we'll put AdSense in place of AuctionAds and see how much we make with AdSense and WidgetBucks together. (Perhaps $25.00/day?) This is certainly positive... echelontalk 00:01, 25 October 2007 (CDT)
I'm on IE right now and the adsense is too big and it's making a scrollbar on the bottom appear. Also it'd look a lot better without a border. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ConfusedSoul (talkcontribs) .
Ok, the AdSense either needs to be shrunk down a bit, or moved elsewhere other than the top. Even though it looks better than the auctionads box, it's still taking up too much horizontal space (thus overflowing into the toolbox). -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 10:02, 25 October 2007 (CDT)
Well, by the time I finally turned off my Adblock Plus ad-on and saw what the ads looked like, I've gotta say the one on the right looks really good. --Myth (talk) 13:45, 5 November 2007 (CST)

QR Code

I've added the QR Image to the Main Page/WIP. What do you think? -- Prod (Talk) 13:25, 16 October 2007 (CDT)

Looks good, but it could use a "what is this?" link below the image so people who aren't familiar with QR codes can read up on them. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 15:30, 16 October 2007 (CDT)


I think we should follow wikipedia's example with this policy, especially signature templates. -- Prod (Talk) 21:46, 19 October 2007 (CDT)

And I don't. I don't see any valid points in there that really refer to us. Granted, some people are worried about the influx of images, but it doesn't cause all that much of a drain on resources for the few people that actually have them. As for templating, I'm actually more for it than making sigs take up tons of wiki code. Yes, you could say "just reduce your sig's size", but I represent my sig however I want to. As for vandalism attacks, that's why every aspect of my signature is protected (the image, the templates it uses, etc.). If any of these things become a major problem, then I'll consider placing restrictions on signatures, but it so far has not been a problem. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 16:28, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
This was one of the things the devs stepped in to say that it could affect performance, so I think it was a significant drain. You can do whatever you want, but that's what rules are for, otherwise this site would be full of vandals. Not everyone has the benefit of protecting all the required pages. Sigs don't need images anywayz, they're just there to show who you are and give access to your page. -- Prod (Talk) 16:45, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
Well, currently we don't have any guidelines/policies on signatures, so based off this debate, it might be a good time to make one. Here are the following points that I believe should be illustrated in such a policy:
  • Use of Images:
    • No more than 2 per signature
    • No animated gifs
    • No overly distracting/offensive images
    • Should have transparency
    • As an added nicety, images should be wrapped in a span class of "sigimage" so people can disable signature images in their personal CSS if they wish not to see them.
    • If they are linked (elsewhere then the image page), the link targets should be appropriate as well, and should be wrapped in a class of "plainlinks".
    • If you wish to protect images in your sig from a vandal attack, notify an admin so they may be protected.
  • Use of Templating:
    • Long signatures should be in template format or, if not possible, shortened.
    • Templates used in signatures may be reported to an admin so they may be protected from vandal attacks.
  • Other conditions:
    • Must contain a non-image link to user page
    • May contain a link to user talk page
    • All links (external and internal) must be appropriate
    • Only sign on talk pages at the end of the comment
    • Cannot contain line breaks, large images, etc. that interrupt the flow of text and indenting.
Of course, this needs polishing and input from other people, but how's that? -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 17:10, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
I'd propose the following two changes:
  • Use of images: not allowed
  • Use of Templating: not allowed
-- Prod (Talk) 17:19, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
I can see where you're going with that, and I'm just against changing so many signatures so drastically without having hard statistical evidence to back up my claims (about server stress and distractions, etc.). If echelon or Dan would be so kind as to perhaps discover how much stress these templates are causing, I'll consider removal of them (if it's a problem). As for images, I've added in a "sigimage" class to mine, so you can just put .sigimage { display: none; } in your personal css to hide it. If images start to become a problem, however, I'll support you in disallowing them. Also, if vandalising signature templates becomes a problem, I'll support disallowing those as well. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 17:35, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
As far as I can tell, Skizzerz and I are the only people who template signatures, and I think it's fine. For one thing, templating helps to keep signatures constant even as users change them--for example, if I were to change my sig to Towers (talk) in the template, every instance of my green font and t-rex head would go away and be replaced, keeping everything consistent so people aren't confused when someone switches sigs.
And as far as images go--they seem fine to me! Again, as far as I can tell, only Skizzerz and I use them at all, and they are small, classed properly (as per his guideline anyways), etc. While I concede extravagant signatures belong more on the abxy forums, I hardly think being noticeable in a cloud of blue and white is a bad thing. -- towers 16:11, 2 December 2007 (CST)
I'd really like us to disable the use of "external" images in sigs. It makes things difficult to track (what links here doesn't work) and it adds tons of markup. If you really want that image to link to your page, you can just put a #REDIRECT on the image page. However, I'd suggest checking the reasons against images. Some of those I don't really care about, but things like server performance and vandalism targets do concern me. And from what I'm looking at now, Towers, you aren't actually templating your signature (Skizzerz does). The problems with templating are similar to images and listed. Also, protecting all the images and pages is not practical (they can't change it either). -- Prod (Talk) 16:38, 2 December 2007 (CST)

Ok, fine... I made it a normal image and a new template, happy? As for protecting, they can just upload a new image if they want to change it and request the old one be deleted or something. And for protecting sig pages, just append .css to the end of the sub-page name (although I don't think it can go down more than one level, so User/sig.css would work but User/sigs/sig1.css won't, not sure about that though). Anyway, mediawiki then treats that as a user's skin css page, but it still gets parsed with normal wiki markup. Plus, strategywiki is not wikipedia. Things are overly retarded and bureaucratic over there. I'd rather not bring that here as well. --Skizzerz_Scissors.png Safety Skizzerz {{ Talk | Contribs | Spel Chek™ | VFG | RTFM }} 17:14, 2 December 2007 (CST)

Sonic Robo Blast 2, out of scope?

I'm sure that a fan game like this shouldn't be covered on StrategyWiki. It only meets one of the criteria, being the fact that it's a computer game. Same thing goes for Mario Adventure.

I'm not so sure; they're two quite popular fan-made games (I believe). While I certainly wouldn't want the site crawling in guides for every game mod under the sun, I don't see any harm in having such guides. I'll wait and see what others have to say. --DrBob (talk) 06:07, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
If they are mods to games, they should go as part of that game and shouldn't be given their own game. -- Prod (Talk) 10:07, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
That should be done for small mods, but I think total conversion mods – where the mod is a new game in its own right, and only uses the engine of the modded game – should get their own guide. --DrBob (talk) 10:16, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
I have to agree with DrBob. There are some pretty fun mods out there that are games in and of their own right. echelontalk 15:27, 28 October 2007 (CDT)

Template:Wikipedia a little strange

The link to the word 'Wikipedia' in Template:Wikipedia actually links to [1] rather than the expected [2]. Is there a particularly good reason for this? It just seems a little strange. --Pelago 15:12, 21 October 2007 (CDT)

Works as expected for me. Looks like Rocky fixed it while I wasn't looking :). -- Prod (Talk) 15:26, 21 October 2007 (CDT)
This is because we originally didn't have a Wikipedia interwiki; we did have one for Wikibooks, though, so I just routed it through that. GarrettTalk 17:27, 21 October 2007 (CDT)

Engine Cats

We have an infobox that allows the engine to be listed, but what about category pages for such engines? --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 20:15, 22 October 2007 (CDT)

What's the point? Is anyone seriously going to be looking for games based on the engine they use? --DrBob (talk) 06:42, 23 October 2007 (CDT)
Potentially, yes. If we had a cat page for them though, the page would give information on the engine and all the games that use it - which I think would be pretty nifty to be able to see. --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 17:37, 23 October 2007 (CDT)
True. I'd tentatively support this then, but I'm wary of over-categorisation. That said, I can say with 90% certainty that nobody clicks the categories at the bottom of a page, so we could add as many as we liked. :-) --DrBob (talk) 19:11, 23 October 2007 (CDT)
I think this is a cool category to add. echelontalk 23:17, 23 October 2007 (CDT)
I'll go ahead and start implementing it, since nobody's raised any objections. --DrBob (talk) 03:13, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I've created Category:Engines, and created a category for teh best engine evar. If everyone's still OK with it, I'll go ahead and add the games to it properly in a few hours. --DrBob (talk) 08:18, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

Modes and bot support

So far, we have MMOG, multiplayer and single player for modes. I propose that we add "Multiplayer with bots" and "Co-operative" to the list, and categorise games as such. Previously, I've wanted to eradicate the multiplayer category (since just about every game uses it), but I've now realised that nobody really cares how many categories a game's in, and so it's OK to keep it. What does everyone else think? --DrBob (talk) 03:12, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

I think specific types of play should be implemented, so we can break down each type more accurately into groupings. I got this idea from Wikipedia when I saw on an RTS game's infobox - one of the modes listed had something to do with campaigns or skirmishes - something different from simply "Single player" since Single player could actually mean online play, by yourself (considering originally multiplayer was defined as co-op, simultaneus, or versus on the same console). Now that example is a little messy, but maybe something like, Single player campaign, could be a "specific category" in comparison. As well, we could have something like "Turn based multiplayer" like that of Super Mario Bros.'s 2 player mode. Whatcha think boys (oh sorry Froglet)?! --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 04:33, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

PC system requirements

I've created a {{pcreq}} template for sole use in the |requirements parameter of {{infobox}}, which allows PC game requirements to be given in a pretty, graphical, and rather-more-helpful-than-before manner. It comes with all the associated baggage. Thoughts? --DrBob (talk) 09:03, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

The green on red is a little bit of an eyesore... I wonder if maybe we should change {{Progress bar}} to be different colors? It's not too bad for longer bars but for something shorter it just messes with my eyes. I personally think a light and dark blue would be good (especially because our primary color for the site is blue). Another option is to make the red and green a little more pale. What do you all think?--DukeRuckleyTalk | Contribs
I'd plump for a paler red/green combination, if someone could come up with one. We'd also need to change the text colour to make sure it's still legible if we were to change the background colours. --DrBob (talk) 10:36, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
I'm not quite sure how to go about changing it, or I'd play around with it. We could use the same colors as the {{yes}} and {{no}} templates... "90FF90" for green and "ff9090" for red. Another good green is "00FF7F" --DukeRuckleyTalk | Contribs
Remember, color coding must be done via skin CSS... Nice job again DB. --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 20:30, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
One thing, when the HDD goes over 1000 it goes into decimals for me.--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 13:42, 25 October 2007 (CDT)
Yes, because it's being displayed in GiB. You should be multiplying the original number in (GiB) by 1024 to get the value to put into the template, though, rather than multiplying by 1000. There are not 1000MiB in a GiB! --DrBob (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

Some entries (e.g. Command & Conquer: Generals) stipulate a particular version of Mac OS as the minimum, and the same goes for Windows games that won't run on earlier than Windows 2000 or whatever. Should there be an OS parameter? Since Linux doesn't really have clear version compatibility changes (to my knowledge) I guess this would only require "win" and "mac" parameters. GarrettTalk 01:45, 26 October 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, I'll add win, osx and tux parameters (there are version incompatibilities on Linux; most older proprietary Linux games are compiled for older versions of glibc, and won't run properly on Linux installations with newer versions of glibc). Rocky, did you have to go and apply it to every article before it was completely ready? I might not've said so, but by the number of articles you've left with bits of the previous requirements text remaining, I would've thought it would make sense to stop and get the template improved first. :-( Also, when you see a game requiring an "Internet connection", I think it makes sense to look at the game, and just use a net value appropriate to the game type and age. Typically, MMOGs will require broadband (net=256), and older games will require dialup (net=56).
In reply to NMH's points on the template's talk page, I don't think it makes sense to add a parameter specifically for web browsers; games requiring a web browser/specific version of a browser are few and far between, and it's just as easily put into the extra parameter. I'm also against adding a sound card parameter, since it should be taken as given that just about all games will require a sound card, and I believe the ones which give special requirements for sound cards will – on the whole – work with any sound card anyway, since it's all done through DirectX or OpenAL. If a game truly does require stupid functionality on a sound card, that too can be put into the extra parameter.
Let me make it clear now that I don't want to see any text in {{infobox}}'s requirements parameter outside of the {{pcreq}} template. Such text should either be put into the {{pcreq}} template in the proper parameter (or extra if appropriate), or just removed, since the non-concrete system requirements are fluff half of the time. --DrBob (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2007 (CDT)
It seems to have messed up with the 60GB hard drive on X-Plane.--The preceding signed comment was added by Rocky (talkcontribs). 07:33, 27 October 2007 (CDT)
Fixed. --DrBob (talk) 17:09, 27 October 2007 (CDT)

Has anyone else seen this?

It seems like a sexxier GameFaqs. A lot of it is wiki-style, but I guess everything you contribute is automatically copyrighted to the site owner. And it looks like its some subsidiary of 1UP.--ConfusedSoul 22:47, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, it's been around for a while, and it's owned by 1UP (in turn owned by Ziff Davis). All contributions become Ziff Davis' property ("You hereby grant ... to ZDH and its successors, assigns and licensees ... a fully-paid, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide right and license..."). Its presentation is confusing. They mix traditional non-editable FAQs in with "Superguides" (their equivalent of our "one game, one guide" concept). They've converted all their official guides to wiki format, but unfortunately they've also included empty guides like this one for every game in their vast database (rather than them being nonexistent until someone starts editing), which makes it fairly difficult to find a Superguide that actually has content. Since they still allow non-editable guides to be uploaded many contributors haven't made the jump yet. GarrettTalk 23:44, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

Community Meeting

Remember, meeting this Saturday at 2 pm EST. I expect you all to be there. -- Prod (Talk) 23:29, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

My apologies Prod. I spoke with Echelon the other night, and as it was my responsibility to announce the meeting in a timely manner, and failed to do so, Echelon and I thought it might be easier to move the meeting back one week and give people more time. This would be a one time exception to the "last Saturday of every month" rule. Is everyone OK with that? Or does anyone insist on the meeting being this weekend? Procyon (Talk) 09:19, 26 October 2007 (CDT)
I think it depends on who's available to come and what all do we have to discuss? Apart from a few new templates (which I don't think warrant online discussion beyond what we have here) the only change is the ads. As there really isn't much to discuss over that (we need the ads, the only real discussion is about placement, which is minor, and longevity, which we can revisit at the next meeting) I think we can have it tomorrow as planned. Are there any other topics people would like to suggest? -- Prod (Talk) 09:51, 26 October 2007 (CDT)
I can't make it there at all tomorrow, so I'd be for postponing it. -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 10:22, 26 October 2007 (CDT)
I absolutely won't be able to make it now, I have to head out and run some errands, emergency situation. I will be available next weekend if we all agree to meet then. Procyon (Talk) 12:50, 27 October 2007 (CDT)
So did the meeting happen or was it postponed? I was unavailable all weekend, so I'm a bit out of the loop right now.--DukeRuckleyTalk | Contribs 12:47, 29 October 2007 (CDT)
It was postponed until next Saturday. --DrBob (talk) 12:52, 29 October 2007 (CDT)
I might not be able to make it then either, depending on how long it lasts (I have to leave 3:30 EST), so how long is this going to take? If it'll take longer than an hour and a half, what topics are being covered so we can arrange to take care of the important ones/ones that I want to input into first? -- Skizzerz Talk · Contribs · Spel Chek™ · VFG · RTFM 16:45, 29 October 2007 (CDT)
Might as well get an Agenda started... Feel free to edit away. Procyon (Talk) 18:24, 29 October 2007 (CDT)
The meeting is underway. Please log on to the IRC if you are available. Procyon (Talk) 13:14, 3 November 2007 (CDT)


  1. Advetisements: placement, behavior, how long we keep them, etc.
  2. Template management (basically all of the work that DrBob and Prod have been up to)
  3. An update about DoubleJump

Titles: Proper versus Asthetic

So, after DB started the project for the castlevania image cleanup, I realized that categories can contain colons in their titles, and then I realized I had created several image categories (with images in them) named without colons. I did this because colons in the title are really annoying in the category titles (category:title: subtitle). Anyways, I know that we should be doing it grammatically, but what do you guys think, should we add that to the cleanup list? --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 04:05, 29 October 2007 (CDT)

If any of the categories need changing, let me know and I'll send my bot on it, just give me before and after names. I think we should just stick with the name of the game as it is on the main game page. -- Prod (Talk) 10:46, 29 October 2007 (CDT)

New Image Category?

Hey guys, I just uploaded an image that has no real place in any of the currently available categories: Image:Ijji G Symbol.png. It's used in a template that encompasses many games, and its main affiliation is with NHN; I guess I could place it in Company logos, since it's one of their symbols... Maybe Company Logos + Category:NHN images? --Notmyhandle (talk contribs) 05:07, 30 October 2007 (CDT)

Category:Artwork would do… --DrBob (talk) 12:19, 30 October 2007 (CDT)