Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup

WikiProject Video games

Main page

talk

Archives

Archive index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174

Project watchlist

• view
• talk
• edit
• changes

Talk Page Archival

The talk page became too massive, so I archived it. If you wish to continue past discussions, please continue them below. Thanks!  Dylanlip  (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject PlayStation

Alright the discussion disappeared somewhere, but is there consensus to make this project a taskforce of VG? I think it's time. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 11:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I believe the most recent discussion took place at WT:TPSP. To my knowledge, a consensus had not been reached. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC))

There is little to no activity still, I think that's more than enough proof it should be made into a taskforce. Or it should just be merged into the Video Game project. I see no group of editors even trying to make the project active. I personally don't see why consensus is needed. The last discussion in April had only a few people against the project being turned into a taskforce, while the majority was fine with it. Consensus = majority, not every person. RobJ1981 (talk) 03:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

So long as the talk and talk archives are moved to subpages of VG, I don't see anything wrong with a straight redirect. You want to handle the userboxen and such which should be changed? --Izno (talk) 04:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Task forces again

Jump starting an old discussion. There was talk of merging some together.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Super Smash Bros. merged to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Nintendo
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Silent Hill, Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Suikoden and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Castlevania merge to form a Konami task force.
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Devil May Cry and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Mega Man merge to form a Capcom task force.

A few editors agreed, and felt we should notify the task forces about the idea. Any other thoughts before I start discussions on the talk pages? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC))

• Nope, makes sense. Notify them and explain what's going on... and obviously, remain flexible if we underestimated their activity. Randomran (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Started discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Super Smash Bros.#Merge with Nintendo task force. Let's see how this one goes over. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC))

I feel it worth pointing out that as a member of the Silent Hill task force I have no knowledge or interest of Konami as a whole, and I wonder whether the Suikoden and Castlevania members do either. If you feel it's inactive then maybe just disbanding the task force would be better, as merging into a Konami task force implies that the combined member list has an interest in Konami in general when frankly I, and I'm sure many others on the list, don't. SynergyBlades (talk) 16:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Well technically, I don't see why the collective task force members couldn't decide the scope of the task force. You can all agree to focus only on Konami games and explicitly state this on the task force page. This would allow everyone to focus on their preferred series, but seek some advice from other editors in task force.

Of course, this is only a suggestion and is open to discussion. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:10, 8 April 2009 (UTC))

Update- The SSB task force now redirects to the Nintendo task force, and I moved the talk page to an archive under its talk page. There are still a few loose ends left though.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Super Smash Bros./Barnstar
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Super Smash Bros./Members
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Super Smash Bros./Userbox

I started a discussion at the Nintendo talk page. Comments would be appreciated. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC))

SSB looks to be done with. What next? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC))

WikiProject Square Enix

There has been consensus to merge WikiProject FF into WikiProject SE. Should we proceed with the merging? Megata Sanshiro (talk) 09:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I would agree, although I don't feel confident enough with moving pages to do it myself. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 10:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

FYI- For convenience, here are the merge discussions at WT:FF and WT:SE. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC))

 Done I merged the essential wikiproject pages. Now what should we do with templates like Template:User WikiProject Final Fantasy? Concerning wikiproject tags, should we ask a bot to remove them or do we have to do it by hand? Megata Sanshiro (talk) 17:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Also why isn't Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Kingdom Hearts a taskforce of SE instead of VG? Megata Sanshiro (talk) 14:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

That one should probably be MFDed... --Izno (talk) 15:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

It started out as a project, but then soon after a task force was created and the project was deleted. Given the lack of edit history and talk page, an MfD sounds reasonable.

Speaking of old pages, the Dragon Quest project was redirected to WP:VG. Perhaps it would be best to change that to WP:SE. Any thoughts?

Also, User:Anomie has a bot that has updated project tags for us before. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC))

Done and done. Though, if DQ had a talk archive somewhere, that didn't get transferred, which I think would be for the better. --Izno (talk) 04:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Complete log

I suggest that a complete log of events be created, and create a single chronological list (or better yet a table) instead of the two separate lists we have now. I.e. don't delete the prior notification logs once an action has been completed. SharkD (talk) 04:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and created the table. Everything is sortable and linked to properly. Pending (i.e. uncompleted) actions appear at the bottom of the list. SharkD (talk) 06:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I added the page view charts as well so you can see how much interest there is for the projects among visitors. I'm in the process of updating the charts with the last five months of data. (Almost done.) SharkD (talk) 06:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the work, it's certainly helpful. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 13:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed the unnecessary links. --Izno (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

New subpages report

I asked MZMcBride to task one of his bots to create us a report of new subpages under WP:VG as they are created. This should allow us to keep an eye out for new task forces that get created without discussion (and thus likely to become candidates for cleanup down the road). See WP:VG/IPC#New subpages report. –xeno^talk 05:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

As you can see, it has already identified one: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Call of Duty. –xeno^talk 05:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

A list of pages under the Talk space would be good too. They're not necessarily the same. SharkD (talk) 08:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

More inactive projects?

Wikipedia:WikiProject Koei Warriors Games, in particular, but a brief glance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Related WikiProjects makes it seem like only Pokemon, Square Enix, and maybe Halo and Xbox are the only truly active ones left. There's no time limit, just whenever you guys decide to do sweeps again. Cheers, Axem Titanium (talk) 20:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Strategy, Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Insomniac and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/PlayStation

FYI, Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Strategy, Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Insomniac and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/PlayStation have been added to the fold. There is much work to be done integrating them. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 09:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Some table stuff and inactive forces 2011

From my talk page:

I based the last edited dates on the last constructive edit, which would not include talking about how inactive the project is. What is your opinion? MrKIA11 (talk) 22:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm ambivalent. It looks like the rule is inconsistent as stands (considering main page too). Either way, I made this post here because of the number of forces which essentially haven't seen activity since before 2010. This list includes:

• Suikoden
• Destroy All Humans!
• Mortal Kombat
• Crytek
• Gears of War
• Tycoon games

I'm thinking we could MfD or redirect these to the main project. I'm not sure of which; we should go through and check page histories. Going forward for the future, I'd say a year to a year-and-a-half lag time on project activity would be an acceptable bound for internal cleanup, and maybe check activities of the task forces two or three times a year. As well, we could use a general rule about external WikiProjects; I'm thinking we give those the same bounds before MfDing/redirecting/taskforcing. Thoughts? --Izno (talk) 23:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I updated the page for the purpose of deciding what needs to be cleaned up next. Tycoon games is an interesting one, because although there is very little to no activity, it gets almost 10x more views than most of the other task forces. I think Crytek can be taken care of immediately, and the others can be asked on their talk page as to their status, and then taken to MfD. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Checking all of them:

• Tycoon games: It's not even listed in the sidebar and is linked from less than 50 pages, which leads me to believe people are hitting "Tycoon games" because of Google. This suggests that we should create a corresponding article and delete the task force, or follow my suggestion as listed in the last thread of the talk page.
• Crytek: This is also not linked in the sidebar, but I agree. I suspect those users have moved to greener pastures. Probably a full delete for this project.
• Gears of War: Could use a comment on the talk page, but even if we do see something, I'm not sure it will be more than an "Okay". Not sure if we should redirect or delete, as the pages are on the cusps of "substantial history".
• Destroy All Humans!: Much the same problem as Gears of War. You might want to look at old MfDs (if you have time) to see about revision count for deleted pages, then we can set a general-ish guideline. Maybe something like > 10 contribs should be redirected, so long as there aren't several in a row? That guideline would lead me to !vote delete on both the main page and talk page.
• Suikoden: Notice on talk page. Given the go-ahead, the main page definitely needs a redirect and the talk page would be archived.
• Mortal Kombat is well and truly dead. Nothing substantial since we last decided to move it. Redirect the main page and archive all the archives (sounds silly, but the archives should have names like "WT:VG/Mortal Kombat archive 1", etc).

Would you agree with those gists? --Izno (talk) 04:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)