As of 2008-06-04, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

There were 203 new articles in May 2008

Current proposals and discussions

• Well, gee, thanks 1up!
  1UP.com has recently changed their rating scale. A list of affected articles can be found here. See discussion for details.
  • About 28% of the articles on the list have been checked and updated.
• Inactive project cleanup
  Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • WikiProject Dragon Quest has been redirected to WP:VG.
  • WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games Guild Wars task force has been deleted.

Interested in a specific video game series or company? Check out some of our task forces to help improve the related articles.

Writing about Development

Development content is very important to include in an encyclopedic video game article. It provides a history of how the game came to be and provides real world information needed for an article to claim comprehensiveness. However, writing this section can be difficult because the amount and type of information available will vary for each game. One of the best sources for such information is a developer interview. These can provide insight into the thought process of the designers and give examples of influences and obstacles encountered. Previews can also be helpful by giving a snap shot of the game before it was released and may mention development issues that were still being addressed.

When writing about development, common sense should be used to organize content to maintain a sense of flow for the reader. Most times, it is best to give the information in a somewhat chronological order—though information can also be grouped by topics like audio, promotion, graphics, etc. If one such topic gets large enough, it can be split off into its own subsection or regular section. For example, Kingdom Hearts#Audio is a separate section from the rest of the development information because it focuses on the game's musical score and voice acting. Portal (video game)#Soundtrack, however, does not have as much content and is a subsection of the main development section.

What to include about development

• Who are the developers? Which company or studio developed the game, and are there any prominent designers involved?
• When did development begin?
• When and where was the game first announced? (e.g. Tokyo Game Show, E3 Media and Business Summit, etc.)
• What influenced the game's story, characters, music, and/or gameplay ? (e.g. past games, movies, books, etc.)
• Were there any delays?
• Was anything excluded because of time or technological constraints? (e.g. extra levels, game modes, characters, story arcs, etc.)

Things to remember

• Avoid proseline. Though maintaining a sense to chronology is important, this section should not read like an ordered list of events.
• Images in this section should be relevant to the information given and should add on to it.
• Source everything to avoid information being tagged as original research.

As of 2008-07-08, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

There were 236 new articles in June 2008

Current proposals and discussions

• Well, gee, thanks 1up!
  1UP.com has recently changed their rating scale. A list of affected articles can be found here. See discussion for details.
  • About 32% of the articles on the list have been checked and updated.
• Inactive project cleanup
  Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games redirected to WP:VG. See MfD.
    • MU* taskforce moved to page under WP:VG. See new MU* task force page.
    • Neopets and RuneScape taskforces deleted. See MfD.
    • All talk pages moved to archives under WT:VG
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Dynasty Warriors deleted.

In many video game articles, the Reception section is the last main section of prose. As its name suggests, within the section you should summarize the critical reaction to the game. The section should provide a high-level overview of what the critics liked and didn’t like about the game; it is a summary, not a repetition of what publications thought. Therefore, don’t put in excessive, long winded quotes or have a paragraph detailing IGN’s thoughts on the game. To prevent cluttering of the prose with scores, reviews table such as {{VG Reviews}} can be used to organize this kind of information.

A good way to lead off the section is a by-the-numbers or at a glance snapshot of the game’s reception; you can use aggregate scores to suggest an overall critical response to the game, and can provide sales figures (if you have them) for the game’s release. Commonly, the rest of the reception is broken into positive and negative paragraphs. Entirely separate ‘Praise’ and ‘Controversy’ or ‘Negative comments’ or the like are strongly discouraged as troll magnets. If the game has won any awards, then listing them at the bottom of the reception section is an option.

Other things to remember:

• Don’t list every single review in the reviews table; likewise, don’t mention every award the game has ever gotten.
• Generally, talk about what the reviewers say rather than speaking for them; for example, “Reviewer X of Publication Y took issue with elements of the game such as X, Y, and Z” instead of “Review X said that “I took issue with elements of the game such as X, Y, and Z.” If a reviewer has a good comment which sums up the positive/negative/overall reaction, or a particular sentiment common in many reviews, it might be more appropriate to use.
• If adding sales data, make sure to provide context; did it sell those 4.2 million units within three months of release or three years? If possible, break down the sales by region; did the Japanese like the game, but Americans not buy it?
• Use reviews whose scores are outliers from the average ratings to find key points that were liked or disliked about a game. If all reviews except for one average around a 9 out of 10, and the one is a 7 out of 10, there is probably some clear negative points to be found in it; the same works with very positive reviews.
• Perhaps most importantly, give proper weight and keep a neutral point of view. If the game received mostly negative scores, having three paragraphs on positive aspects and glossing over the bad parts in a sentence or two conveys the wrong impression to readers.

As of July 2008, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

• There were 304 new articles in July 2008
• Well, gee, thanks 1up!
  1UP.com recently changed their rating scale. See discussion for details.
  • The list of almost 700 articles has been checked and updated. Special thanks to MrKIA11, Dukeruckley, JFlav, FMF, and several other editors for checking the large number of articles.
• Inactive project cleanup
  Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Tales of deleted.
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Indie Game Developers deleted.
  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Arcade games moved to page under WP:VG. See new Arcade task force page.

A common issue with writing video games articles is that it's often natural for editors to turn to the internet for all their information. However, using only online sources can be problematic, especially if editors are not familiar with Wikipedia's sources guidelines. First off, for every notable, reliable web site about gaming that exists on the web, there are twenty-five fan sites or personal blogs. As per Wikipedia's, content guideline about reliable sources, a proper source that should be used in an article must meet the following criteria:

• Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.

How do you determine if website X meets the criteria? Look around for information on who owns the website or if the website has a staff and established editorial processes; if the site doesn't have information posted online, send an email to the webmaster or editor. It can be hard to definitely prove the a website has a "reputation" for accuracy. Thus, it's probably easier to go with established sites to begin with, such as IGN or GameSpot. If you use a source with borderline qualifications, be prepared to justify the site at content review or to other editors. WikiProject Video Games has a partially-complete listing of vetted sources in print or online at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources, as well as more detailed information on what constitutes a reliable source.

To find sources on the internet, checking Google News as well as simple web searches can help spot references you might have missed. Often, however, older news articles are locked behind pay gates or subscription services. A workaround is using a service like ProQuest or LexisNexis, although unless you have access to these through a college or education institution it will likely cost you money regardless. Libraries can have old newspapers and copies of magazines; to assist in finding print sources online, WikiProject Video Games has a Magazines Department where you can contact users to get copies of certain reviews, previews, or features from old magazines. If you have gaming magazines of your own, add yourself to the list!

As of August 2008, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

• Special note: The naming convention for the newsletter has altered. Instead of being labeled the month it is delivered, it is now labeled the month the content applies to. See discussion.
• There were 204 new articles in August 2008
• Inactive project cleanup
  Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • The following Wikiprojects are candidates to be turned into task forces.
    • Nintendo Project: See discussion.
    • Castlevania Project: See discussion.
    • Pro Gaming Project: See discussion.
• The first video game genre article has reached Featured article status—4X. Special thanks to Randomran for pushing the article up the quality scale.

Assessment Department: This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's video games articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the WP:1.0 program, and more specifically in the Video games essential articles page.

Two new quality ratings have been implemented into the Assessment Department's scale. The new Wikipedia-wide C-Class rating (see category) has been added to the scale between Start-Class and B-Class. Because of this, the criteria of the B-Class has been tweaked to better illustrate the difference between a B-Class and C-Class article. An older rating, List-Class (see category), has been added to the scale as well. It is mainly used on pages that have very little prose and are primarily tables and lists of information.

Editors are encouraged to submit articles for assessment if they feel an article has made significant progress up the assessment scale or has gained importance within video game articles. Assessed articles generally receive some feedback to further improve the article. Experienced editors are also encouraged to help with assessment of articles when the number of requests gets too large.

Peer Review Department: The Peer review process for WikiProject Video games exposes video-game-related articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a Featured article candidate. It is not a academic peer review by a group of experts in a particular subject, and articles that undergo this process should not be assumed to have greater authority than any other.

Editors are encouraged to use the Video game peer review process, as well as the regular Wikipedia-wide process, to improve the quality of articles. While a peer review can be done at any time, it strongly suggested to use this process before an article goes up for Good article nomination and Featured article or Feature list candidacy as articles cannot be a candidate for GA or FA while at peer review.

Editors are also encouraged to leave feedback for articles undergoing peer review. A process such as this will not work if editors do not give as well as take. Feedback can range from brief comments after skimming through a page to a full blown dissection of grammar, structure, and references. Either way, every bit helps.

As of September 2008, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

• There were 192 new articles in September 2008
• Inactive project cleanup
  Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • Wikiproject Red Faction has been deleted.
  • WikiProject Nintendo moved to page under WP:VG See new Nintendo task force page.
  • Two Nintendo task forces have become Video game task forces: Mega Man task force and Super Smash Bros. task force
  • WikiProject Castlevania moved to page under WP:VG See new Castlevania task force page.
  • WikiProject Kingdom Hearts has been deleted.
• VG Wikipedia 0.7 workshop
  Workshop page to coordinate preparation of articles to be included in Wikipedia 0.7.
  • 39 of 393 articles have been prepared and submitted.
    Come help us prepare more at the workshop page.

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of articles taken from the English version of Wikipedia, compiled by the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is designed for a DVD release, and the selection was put together using a Selection Bot, based on the quality and importance assigned by WikiProjects.

The Video games Project and its daughter projects have multiple articles among the selection and are currently working on cleaning up the articles to improve their presentation. A workshop page has been set up that is designed to assist and coordinate the effort. The status of and recommendations for articles is listed on the table. Discussion about which articles should be kept and removed from the list have been taking place on the talk page.

If you have assisted in working on and improving a current Featured article, Good article, or A-Class article, please check the workshop page to see if the article is recommended for inclusion.

Articles will need an id version submitted to ensure it is included. They will also need to be cleaned up if maintenance tags and other issues are present. Participation is not restricted, and if you can assist with the preparation effort, it would be greatly appreciated.

Things to remember for preparation

• The workshop page has a notes section for each article. Clean up suggestions have been left for some articles.
• Do a light sweep of the article to address any vandalism andclean up tags: citation needed, more references, lengthy plot, etc.
• If you need help with an article, post on the talk page.
• Because some articles were promoted over a year ago, they may need to undergo Featured article review or Good article review.
• Be sure to list the oldid on the workshop page and User:SelectionBot/0.7/V-3.
• Articles need to be prepared by October 20.
• Articles that do not have an id submitted may not be included in the release.

See original notification on WT:VG for more details.

As of October 2008, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

• There were 284 new articles in October 2008
• Inactive project cleanup
  Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • Miscellaneous Warcraft pages cleaned up: Two old redirects deleted and others tagged as historical.
  • WikiProject Mortal Kombat and most of its subpages have been moved to page under WP:VG. See new Mortal Kombat task force page.
  • WikiProject Pro Gaming has been moved to page under WP:VG. See new Pro gamin task force page.

For some time now, the Video games project and the Military history project have been cross listing their articles undergoing peer review in an effort to improve the quality of articles, as well as the copy editing skills of editors. The idea was first proposed by User:Krator as a way to better prepare articles for Featured article candidacy. After being approved by both projects, the idea was implemented under a trial period, and eventually approved as a standard practice.

New, cross listed military history articles are announced on the Video games project talk page, and listed on the Video games Peer review page under a special section. Video game editors are encouraged to leave any type of comments that come to mind. If you don't know anything about military history, that's perfectly fine because that's the point. An editor lacking knowledge about the particular topic can provide a helpful point of view as a general reader—the intended audience.

If you have a video game article undergoing peer review that you think would benefit from an outside view, post the following boilerplate at WT:MILHIST: {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/Partner peer review notice|Name of article|Raw link to review|Video games}} ~~~~

Things to remember

• A peer review process such as this will not work if editors do not give as well as take.
• Peer reviews are meant to examine not just the prose, but the sources and images used in the article.
• Feedback can range from brief comments after skimming through a page to a full blown dissection of grammar, structure, and references. Either way, every bit helps.
• Reviewing another editor's article can help sharpen your writing skills, which in turn can improve the articles you write.

See past discussions for details: VG discussion and MilHist discussion

As of November 2008, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good articles, lists, and topics

News

• There were 275 new articles in November 2008
• Inactive project cleanup: Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • WikiProject Test Drive has been deleted
  • WikiProject Sega has been moved to a page under WP:VG. See the new Sega task force page.
  • A Sega task force has become a Video game task force: Sonic task force.
  • WikiProject Sims has been moved to a page under WP:VG. See the new The Sims task force page.

Article importance is an assessment of a topic's importance in understanding a specific higher level topic. Assessments are maintained by WikiProjects and reflect the project's view of what is essential to understanding their scope. In the VG Project's case, all importance scales are in terms of understanding video games.

A video game article's importance is listed and set in the {{WikiProject Video games}} template on its talk page. An assessment of importance can be done by the Assessment Department by submitting a request.

Recent discussions at the VG Project's talk page have called for revisions to the practice of assigning article importance. The discussion began in mid-November with the goal of clarifying what level of importance should be assigned to certain type of articles. It eventually expanded to creating a standardized table of importance to serve as a guide for current and future editors.

The discussion has focused on and shifted to several topics including flaws of previous practices, new ways to view assessment, other project practices to emulate, and specific articles which are exceptions to proposed guidelines. A brief pole and discussion determined most editors felt that the bulk of some topics—specifically individual video game, series, and character articles—were not essential to understanding video games, making them ineligible for top importance. The discussion then shifted to tweaking the wording and layout of the table.

The current proposed table is being discussed on the project's talk page, and the issue of whether some topics—specifically character articles—should be allowed to be rated importance has also been brought up. As always, member are encouraged to voice their opinions and engage in discussion to determine consensus so the new assessment scale can be implemented.

See past newsletter feature for more information about the Assessment Department.

As of December 2008, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good content

News

• There were 182 new articles in December 2008
• Inactive project cleanup: Proposal to consolidate inactive projects and taskforces. Project page can be found here.
  • WikiProject Sports video games has been deleted.
  • WikiProject The Legend of Zelda series has been merged into the VG project's Nintendo task force.
• Importance scale has been added to Assessment page.
• A search bar has been added to the archive box on the VG project talk page. Searching the discussion archives is now much easier.

Video game related articles fall under niche categories on Wikipedia: "Culture and the arts" and "Everyday life". Because of this, they are often required to demonstrate notability more than other topics. Wikipedia defines notability as "worthy of notice", and considers it distinct from fame, importance, and popularity. Though it is acknowledge to be related to fame and the like, it is important understand that being famous, important, or popular does not mean a video game article should be on Wikipedia.

Being notable means that a topic has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Wikipedia's policy also stipulates that this only presumes to "satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." This means that though an article may meet the criteria on paper, it is up to the community to decide if a topic truly is notable and/or violates other policies such as WP:NOT. In short, just because a video game, character, or related topic exists, does not mean it should also exist as a Wikipedia article.

Dealing with non-notable topics

Articles that do not meet the criteria are either deleted or merged into a relevant topic.

• WP:Articles for deletion (AfD) handles the deletion of non-notable articles, among other types, and has an established process to begin discussions about reasons for deletion.
• If an article is a subarticle of a larger topic, merging it into the larger topic article is a more desirable action. For example, the main character of a video may not be notable, but has received some mentions in reviews. It would benefit both topics, the character and its video game, to include the content into the article of the video game; essentially using a small, weaker article to strengthen a larger more notable article.

Things to remember

• The best way to show notability is to provide reliable sources about the topic.
• Notability is less about keeping articles out of Wikipedia and more about making sure readers are provided articles about significant, quality topics.
• While you may think a topic is notable, others may disagree. Try to keep a clear perspective when assessing notability so discussions can reach a consensus.
• AfD is more of a last resort and is not always the best course of action to take.
• Consider starting a merger discussion first, as some editors may not fully understand why an article they started is not suitable for Wikipedia.

As of January 2009, the project has:

Changes to Featured and Good content