Misplaced Pages

Talk:Sega Genesis: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:07, 29 March 2014 editRed Phoenix (talk | contribs)Administrators21,595 edits Semi-protected edit request on 22 March 2014: re← Previous edit Revision as of 07:04, 1 April 2014 edit undo77.97.151.145 (talk) Semi-protected edit request on 22 March 2014Next edit →
Line 92: Line 92:
::Thank you. I apologize that in my earlier frustration I forgot to re-sign my post. Sincerely, OP ] (]) 19:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC) ::Thank you. I apologize that in my earlier frustration I forgot to re-sign my post. Sincerely, OP ] (]) 19:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
:::I've gone ahead and pulled it entirely for now. That's not normally the solution to a dead link, but what was being cited was a video that is no longer available and less likely to be so in the future, and in this case the material being cited is already cited by at least three or four other sources, so we ought to be good in this case. Given that this is a FA, I would very much like to keep it that way and prevent any tagable issues from coming up. ] ] 23:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC) :::I've gone ahead and pulled it entirely for now. That's not normally the solution to a dead link, but what was being cited was a video that is no longer available and less likely to be so in the future, and in this case the material being cited is already cited by at least three or four other sources, so we ought to be good in this case. Given that this is a FA, I would very much like to keep it that way and prevent any tagable issues from coming up. ] ] 23:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured Article? more like Fucked Article.
Rename to Mega Drive, You retarded yank cunt,
Also kill your self for the betterment of humanity ] (]) 07:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:04, 1 April 2014

Featured topic candidate starSega Genesis is the main article of the "Sega Genesis" series, a current featured topic candidate. A featured topic should exemplify Misplaced Pages's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet several criteria. Please feel free to leave comments.
Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sega Genesis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find video game sources: "Sega Genesis" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about the article's name. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting on that topic.
Featured articleSega Genesis is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 5, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
March 2, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
March 22, 2008Good article reassessmentNot listed
April 17, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
April 22, 2008Good article nomineeListed
July 5, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
October 11, 2013Good article nomineeListed
December 15, 2013Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject iconVideo games: Sega FA‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on the project's quality scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
[REDACTED]
This article is supported by the Sega task force.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks
AfDs Merge discussions Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates Good article nominations DYK nominations Reviews and reassessments
Articles that need...
? view · edit Frequently asked questions
  1. What is the naming history of this article?
    • This article was started on November 30, 2001 under the name "Sega Genesis".
      Originally, the article covered only the North American console using the Genesis name.
      Coverage of the Mega Drive brand was added on February 17, 2002.
    • The article was split in 2003 into two separate articles: "Sega Megadrive" and "Sega Genesis".
      "Sega Megadrive" was created from a redirect, then renamed to "Sega Mega Drive" on August 21, 2004.
    • The two articles were later merged back into one in 2005, under the compound name "Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis".
      A set of editors discovered in 2006 that this title did not comply with Misplaced Pages guidelines regarding how titles should be formatted.
      At the time, a consensus decision was reached favoring "Mega Drive" over "Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis", largely due to it being the console's name at its initial launch in Japan.
    • The title "Mega Drive" was frequently contested between 2006 and 2011, resulting in numerous debates and discussions. Most of these discussions have resulted in approximately half of the editors favoring some form of "Mega Drive", and the other half favoring some form of "Sega Genesis".
    • In 2011, editors reached a compromise with the compound name "Sega Genesis and Mega Drive", in an attempt to give equal weight to both console names.
      Another discussion immediately followed this decision, in which a broad cross-section of WikiProject Video Games editors and editors with expertise in WP:TITLE policy expressed concern that this compound name was inconsistent with naming policy, guidelines and conventions.
      A straw poll was held in which several alternative names were considered. The two most-favored names at this time were "Sega Genesis" and "Mega Drive", with a majority favoring the Genesis title.
      This led to a new proposal to move the article to "Sega Genesis".
    • The article was renamed to "Sega Genesis" after the proposal succeeded , and has remained that way since.
  2. Why is the article's original, non-stub title important?
    Because of the following title policy statement at WP:TITLECHANGES:
    " has been unstable for a long time, and no consensus can be reached on what the title should be, default to the title used by the first major contributor after the article ceased to be a stub."
    That is, when two titles are both well-supported by relevant policies, guidelines and usage, we should favor the original title as a "tie-breaker".
  3. The title was "Mega Drive" for around five years. Doesn't that mean it was stable there?
    Yes and no. The article could be considered "stable", in that its name didn't actually change during that period. But the title was frequently contested, resulting in at least three major discussions and proposals on the matter. Many editors take this as a sign of instability.
    It's important to note that most of these discussions failed to reach a clear consensus either way - while there was no clear consensus to move to "Sega Genesis" or any other title at the time, there was also no clear consensus to remain at "Mega Drive". In fact, opinions were split approximately 50/50 between the two names throughout virtually all of the discussions during this period. By default, no action was taken.
  4. So why change it to "Sega Genesis and Mega Drive" (the compound name)?
    This name came about as an attempt to compromise with both sides of the ongoing dispute. In particular, the name was intended to give equal weight to both variants of the console, and was proposed in the hopes of drawing the dispute to a close.
    The editors participating in this discussion at the time comprised a relatively small group compared to the scope of previous discussions. Seeing little opposition to the proposal, the group changed the article's name.
  5. So then, why did the title change to "Sega Genesis" and not back to "Mega Drive"?
    As explained above, the discussion to move away from the compound name resulted first in a straw poll to decide on and narrow down the list of alternatives (which at the time showed "Sega Genesis" as the clear favorite), then a formal proposal for that name. "Mega Drive" was considered but ultimately rejected.
  6. So that means "Sega Genesis" is the current consensus, correct?
    That is correct. It stands as the most recent title to have been decided upon via a consensus discussion.
    There was another RM discussion in June 2013, which was closed as no consensus to move.
  7. Is the new title stable?
    Yes. Although the title is occasionally challenged, no serious policy-based arguments for a change that garner significant support have thus far been made.
  8. What are the main reasons editors have mentioned for favoring "Sega Genesis" over "Mega Drive"? (Note: These reflect the primary arguments made and are not necessarily true or verified.)
    • "Sega Genesis" was the original title of the article (see the timeline above). (WP:TITLECHANGES)
    • "Genesis" was the first name given to the console in English-speaking markets. (Naturalness criterion)
    • "Sega Genesis" is more "natural" and "recognizable" than "Mega Drive" in English-speaking markets. (WP:COMMONNAME)
    • Of all the consoles sold worldwide, roughly half of them were sold in North America under the Genesis name.
      • It is important to note that no firm sales figures have been established, and that this particular argument is heavily disputed.
    • The Genesis received more press coverage in North America than the Mega Drive did in any other part of the world. (WP:N, WP:RS)
    • The Genesis has particular notability over the Mega Drive due to: (WP:N)
      • The heated advertising war between Sega and Nintendo in the North American market; and
      • U.S. Congressional hearings into violent video games, with particular attention given to the Genesis release of Mortal Kombat and the Sega CD game Night Trap.
    • While "Mega Drive" was the original name of the console outside North America, it was used mostly in countries where English is not the primary language.
      • The vast majority of English-speaking users of the console are in North America, where the console was marketed with the "Genesis" name. (WP:ENGVAR)
  9. What are the main reasons editors have mentioned for favoring "Mega Drive" over "Sega Genesis"? (Again, these are editors' arguments and are not necessarily statements of fact.)
    • "Mega Drive" was the title of the console when it was first introduced in Japan.
    • "Mega Drive" is the name of the console in every geographic market except North America. (WP:COMMON)
      • The name "Genesis" was only given to the console in North America, and should be considered an exception.
    • Articles such as "Variations of the Mega Drive" exist that cover a broad range of topics related to the console's identity in regions outside North America.
      • To keep things consistent, those articles would also need to reflect the Sega Genesis name, which would make them inconsistent with their topics.
    • "Sega Genesis" puts undue weight on the North American version of the console. (WP:WEIGHT)
      • Sales figures are or should be irrelevant in discussions on a console's notability. (WP:N)
    • As of 2013, the title "Mega Drive" was used for the longest contiguous period of time (5 years). (Stability argument).
  10. Isn't it true that both "Mega Drive and "Sega Genesis" are perfectly acceptable titles for this article?
    Per Misplaced Pages's various policies, both of these titles are acceptable. The community generally agrees that both names for the console have roughly equal weight and notability for different reasons, but nevertheless the consensus favors "Sega Genesis" as the title for a number of reasons.
    "Sega Genesis" was favored in November 2011, though it was also generally recognized that the title "Mega Drive" would not be wrong.
  11. Why not consider periodically switching between the two titles?
    This idea was discussed and rejected in the 2011 discussions for a variety of reasons, including:
    Having the title change periodically would likely be confusing;
    This article is not unusual in that it covers a topic with two acceptable titles. (See Nintendo Entertainment System and TurboGrafx-16, two similar articles in which the console in question has multiple names in different markets.)
  12. Why would it be a waste of time to debate this topic again?
    Over the lifespan of this article, there have been at least six major debates over its title. The applicable policies and the availability of reliable sources haven't changed significantly over that time, so many of the debates end up coming down to the same general arguments, usually with no clear movement either direction.
    Per consensus policy, consensus decisions are not generally changed unless there is a compelling reason to do so (eg. when the name conflicts with other uses in Misplaced Pages, or when compelling arguments are made that actually result in a new consensus). Past history has shown that discussions on this topic in particular generally result in a stalemate.
    Many editors involved in these discussions, regardless of which side of the debate they're on, agree that the title of the article is not of great importance when compared to, among other things, the accuracy of the information in the article itself.
  13. Isn't this FAQ designed to shut down open discussion and debate on this topic? What if I have something new to say?
    The intent of this FAQ is to explain the history of this article's title, to give context to the surrounding controversy, and to explain (in a nutshell) how the community arrived at various decisions along the way. It is intended to explain what has already been discussed and debated so that future discussions don't have to repeat it unnecessarily.
    Editors who have participated in multiple instances of this debate have seen many of the same arguments brought up each time, usually verbatim from prior instances, and usually with the same results. Most of the WikiProject Video Games community would prefer to avoid seeing history repeat itself again.
    That said, if you do have something truly new to bring to the table, you are welcome to do so. But please cite relevant Misplaced Pages policies and reliable sources and be sure the issue is not already covered in this FAQ.
    In June of 2013 a near-unanimous consensus of participating editors agreed that, after a good-faith review of this FAQ, discussing the title issue without raising something new would be considered disruptive.
Notes
  1. While the compound title Hellmann's and Best Foods would seem to set a precedent for a compound title, it must be noted that those two products had truly distinct histories, while the Genesis and Mega Drive do not.
  2. P. Konrad Budziszewski, "Sega Genesis/Sega Mega Drive," in Mark J. P. Wolf, Encyclopedia of Video Games: The Culture, Technology, and Art of Gaming, ABC-CLIO, 2012, p. 559:
    • "The SEGA Mega Drive was a fourth-generation video game console. It was released in Japan on October 29, 1988; in North America (as SEGA Genesis) on August 14, 1989; and in Europe on November 30, 1990." The author thereafter refers to it as the "Genesis/Mega Drive."
This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:

Archiving icon
Archives

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



This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Rename to Mega Drive

I removed these comments, based on the sentence at the top of the discussion page, Q13 of the FAQ, and that the IP making the comments is wp:duck the same one as the disruptive IP editor before. Chaheel Riens (talk) 13:47, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Amazing how the jingoism is still so prevalent in all of this. It's pretty ridiculous and a shame some people just won't understand that the legitimate points of each have all been considered several times, including WP:WORLDVIEW and national bias, and the community has decided there's no consensus to say the article title should be changed. Red Phoenix remember the past... 21:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I put the {{round in circles}} template on this talk page for that very reason, and I would support the reverting of any new threads started by IPs or unconfirmed editors on the FAQ topics as disruptive. By the way, congratulations to all those involved in getting it to FA status. Ritchie333 09:42, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, it was a pretty hard fight. Red Phoenix remember the past... 03:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Hay, some of us IP's are quite helpful - I don't register because I fully believe in the "Anyone can edit" Mantra. How about changing "any new threads started by IPs or unconfirmed editors" to "any disruptive threads started by IPs or unconfirmed editors" I had nothing to add to the FAQ, but I'd like the ability to without people prejudicing against my registration choice. 188.39.82.139 (talk) 11:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Fair point - the comment is only that of an editor. The actual FAQ states "In June of 2013 a near-unanimous consensus of participating editors agreed that, after a good-faith review of this FAQ, discussing the title issue without raising something new would be considered disruptive." There is no mention of the editors status - it applies to all editors, whether IP, newly confirmed, or veteran. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

The Good, the Bad, and the Bogus

I interlibrary loaned this (apparently scarce) book, The good, the bad, and the bogus: Nathan Lockard's complete guide to video games. It covers SNES, Genesis, and Sega CD reviews, if you'd like a lookup for an obscure title on your to-do list. The linked Google Books page lets you do a search for the book's contents. I'll have it for the next week or so, so let me know if you can use a ref or two. czar  22:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Is it any good? I enjoyed Game Over, despite its obvious slant. Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
It isn't. The book is mostly short reviews of games in a book form, replete with ratings for whether adults and kids would enjoy each game. Very 90s. czar  13:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Ha! Cheers for that - I'll not bother. Although given your description, it could be useful as you say to source reviews of some games. I would venture that it would be helpful with games at either end of the scale - the exceptionally good, and catastrophically bad. Maybe List of video games notable for negative reception for a start? Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't go out of my way to add it to an article, but wanted to announce that I had it, if someone was interested for one of the articles they're working on. I'm sure it had its use in its day, but I only picked it up because it was one of the few Google Books "Menacer" hits. czar  00:56, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I want to remove "however"'s! 71.59.200.171 (talk) 16:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Wow. I'm counting 13 "however"s. I can reword them myself, unless one of the original editors wants to give it a go. czar  17:45, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what's so wrong with it, personally. Granted there may be a few grammatical instances that aren't quite up to snuff, but I've always used "however" as a transitional word to improve sentence fluency and make text less choppy to read. Is there an issue here? Red Phoenix check out the Sega task force 14:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
It's somewhat distracting and isn't necessary in much of its current usage. Not that it's normally a rule, but I'd restrict the word to something like once a paragraph. czar  15:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 Done I've removed 10 which seemed unnecessary, leaving 3, which seem pertinent. Arjayay (talk) 15:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 March 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Reference #54 is broken as videogames.yahoo no longer exists. EDIT: I made this edit request a week ago, then found out I had to add the edit request tag, and only THEN was I informed what needs to be put in edit request, so here I am editing this yet again. I know of no other suitable reference for this information so I officially propose that we replace reference 54, "Yahoo Playback. "Yahoo Playback #94". Yahoo, Inc. Retrieved 2009-12-13." and the newline character that follows it with the blank string "". The in the text of the article should then also be replaced with an empty string. Time and dedication permitting, the following references should have their reference numbers decremented by one to maintain the contiguous nature of the array of references. Is this description sufficient now?

  • Done For now, I've tagged it with {{Dead link}}, as the site itself says "The site that used to be located at "videogames.yahoo.com" has been turned off for the time being." which suggests that it will be turned back on or relocated at some point. — {{U|Technical 13}} 18:15, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I apologize that in my earlier frustration I forgot to re-sign my post. Sincerely, OP KhazWolf (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and pulled it entirely for now. That's not normally the solution to a dead link, but what was being cited was a video that is no longer available and less likely to be so in the future, and in this case the material being cited is already cited by at least three or four other sources, so we ought to be good in this case. Given that this is a FA, I would very much like to keep it that way and prevent any tagable issues from coming up. Red Phoenix 23:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured Article? more like Fucked Article. Rename to Mega Drive, You retarded yank cunt, Also kill your self for the betterment of humanity 77.97.151.145 (talk) 07:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:Sega Genesis: Difference between revisions Add topic