Sad state of the PCE entry in Wikipedia

spenoza · 05/24/2011, 12:46 PM

OK, so we all know Wikipedia is a mixed bag of information, although really, they do have a lot of well-structured, detailed, and relatively informative and accurate articles. The PC Engine article, however, is a mess. As a community we have all sorts of access to information in interviews and articles, both in English and Japanese. We should take up a project to "fix" the Wikipedia article on the PC Engine and TurboGrafx 16. If we decide, as a community, to do this, we should resolve to be factual, fair and not simply fanboyish. Anyone here already have some familiarity with Wiki syntax and structure? What sources should we draw upon? If anyone has one of those giant Tokuma books which documents info on games and hardware that would be great. The one I have is too recent to include PCE releases, unfortunately.

soop · 05/24/2011, 04:54 PM

This is a good idea. I'll help, but I don't know nearly as much as Bonknuts tats, Chris, Opie, etc etc etc

OldRover · 05/24/2011, 05:47 PM

I contributed to the Wikipedia entry some years ago... but I don't remember if it was PC Engine or TurboGrafx 16 that I edited.

turbogrfxfan · 05/24/2011, 06:40 PM

yeah i think this is an awesome idea. id love to help but I think we need to have an outline on what we need to do. I feel that once we have this outline we all could add to it review it, put it together and submit it. I def agree that this has to be done and it should imo may even take a year but, once its done as a community, it would be a huge step for our lovr of pce/tg16.

for starters submit Henrys poster that he created showing the gennisis of pce/tg16

have links for ............. the bible, bros duo(very important, pcenginefx etc

show what major impacts the pce had in japan

lol i just feel that this must be done..........

and i dunno even bring up how the system still producing games and translations like Arks insanity!!!!!!!

soop · 05/24/2011, 06:49 PM

it's very tg-16-centric too

Arkhan Asylum · 05/24/2011, 08:01 PM

Some of what I submitted once was edited and de-corrected years ago.

Lets just write our own farfetched, hilarious PCE history on Wikipedia. Screw it.

and then everyone can go WAT

I mean if the shits going to be a wreck, lets make it count.

roflmao · 05/24/2011, 08:18 PM

Let's make it sound like a piece of shit system so people will stop paying a fortune for it on ebay...

Tatsujin · 05/24/2011, 08:21 PM

Even if we rewrite the whole bunch from scratch, there will be others which will do the same again and again and again again... So how can we make sure, that our final entry will be kept and preserved for the eternity?

spenoza · 05/24/2011, 09:16 PM

Well, for one, I figure we have enough access to various sources that it would be hard to justify reverting a sourced change to an unsourced original, and the article is already flagged for, among other things, formatting issues. I figure we'd want to include JPN release dates for PCE hardware and make sure it's a PCE and TG16 article rather than a wandering TG16 article that happens to reference the PCE.

And I agree. We should hammer out a draft and then dump it on the world when we've got it all sorted out.

Arkhan Asylum · 05/24/2011, 09:35 PM

We should just erase the entire thing with a link that leads to an unchangeable page of info

Opethian · 05/24/2011, 09:38 PM

Quote from: guest on 05/24/2011, 09:35 PMWe should just erase the entire thing with a link that leads to an unchangeable page of info

+1 THIS

nat · 05/24/2011, 10:01 PM

Interesting this came up, as I was thinking about this recently.

I started editing the entry, but then stopped myself after just a few edits because the the thing is so big, and just so fucked up.

A HUGE problem with the article as it stands now is that it's riddled with SPECULATIVE OPINION rather than cold, hard fact. This was what I initially wanted to try to weed out, but I realized the time involved is much more than I'd be willing to put in.

Example: "The TurboGrafx-16 was obviously inferior to its SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a second background layer."

This is an almost verbatim quote that I edited to read something more like "The TurboGrafx-16 lacked support for a second background layer in hardware, so developers were forced to come up with workarounds in software to implement parallax."

There are two major problems with the original quote, aside from the fact its just an asinine statement. First, it is more speculative opinion than it is fact. Second, the factual part of the statement isn't even 100% accurate because while it's true the console can't handle a second layer IN HARDWARE, multiple layers can be simulated in software. Just saying "The TG-16 can't do more than one background layer" is just flat-out false.

I picked this one as an example because it is one of the most polarizing topics on the console, and the original quote signifies EXACTLY what is wrong with 90% of the TurboGrafx/PC Engine wiki entry.

Arkhan Asylum · 05/24/2011, 10:21 PM

Thats because DigitPress informants edit wiki articles. They're experts on things like MSX, PC Engine, game composers, and none of the stuff I just mentioned.

roflmao · 05/24/2011, 11:04 PM

Quote from: guest on 05/24/2011, 10:21 PMThats because DigitPress informants edit wiki articles. They're experts on things like MSX, PC Engine, game composers, and none of the stuff I just mentioned.

LOL!

Tatsujin · 05/25/2011, 01:52 AM

Quote from: nat on 05/24/2011, 10:01 PMExample: "The TurboGrafx-16 was obviously inferior to its SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a second background layer."

So how about to add this on the Wiki Neo Geo site:

Example: "The Neo Geo was obviously inferior to its PCE, SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a background layer at all."

RR1980 · 05/25/2011, 02:07 AM

I have always wondered why on wiki the PC Engine never had its own page and instead it's just a sub category within the TG16 page even though the PCE was way bigger than the TG16 in terms of success back in the day, game library size and significance.

Tatsujin · 05/25/2011, 02:15 AM

Switch to an other Language, problem solved

spenoza · 05/25/2011, 10:23 AM

I feel like we should nominate a single authority figure, so long as the nominee agrees to help, here on the boards to have ultimate authority for whatever we, collectively, come up with. Do we want to do a total rewrite from scratch or do we want to copy the existing WP article and use that as a starting point? We should look at the SNES and MD articles to see if they have a consistent style which we can tap into to make our work commensurate.

turbogrfxfan · 05/25/2011, 11:21 AM

Using the original wiki article as a template is a real good idea. I mean hack the shit out of it but still. Or start an outline and use the wiki. Just as a reference. I say it shouldn't be one person. But I'd say key people should step up and help. I feel that it would fall into place.

Arkhan Asylum · 05/25/2011, 11:33 AM

Quote from: Tatsujin on 05/25/2011, 01:52 AM
Quote from: nat on 05/24/2011, 10:01 PMExample: "The TurboGrafx-16 was obviously inferior to its SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a second background layer."
So how about to add this on the Wiki Neo Geo site:

Example: "The Neo Geo was obviously inferior to its PCE, SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a background layer at all."

and then we can go to the Sega site and go

"The Sega CD was inferior to the PCE because it was a hacky frigging disaster"

oh. wait.

and having one person do the whole thing defeats the wiki concept entirely....

we could always just make a different Wiki where only PCEFXers can diddle it, and then once its done, implant it onto Wikipedia.

rag-time4 · 05/25/2011, 03:22 PM

I dont like the idea of crafting a new page first, nor do i like the idea of having an authority figure. I think the best thing for us to do is chip away at the article the way nat did.

An independent pce wiki site would definitely be worthwhile, but so is improving the wikipedia article.

soop · 05/25/2011, 05:33 PM

Hmmm... I don't know, but I'd prefer a japanese-centric edition, showing a photo of each console, and with the "card matrix" showing what can do what.

Aside from that, initially at least, I think the wiki structure is quite strict.

ccovell · 05/25/2011, 05:41 PM

If you're going to be adding PCE content, be sure to use Magweasel as a source: http://magweasel.com/category/i-love-the-pc-engine/ At least he backs up his info with PCE Fan magazine data.

When I wanted to add information about the Game Pocket Computer to Wikipedia, moderators wouldn't accept any of my sources, because all the authoritative sites were in Japanese. Okay you try finding English print articles about an obscure 1984 Japanese handheld...

soop · 05/25/2011, 06:29 PM

Quote from: ccovell on 05/25/2011, 05:41 PMIf you're going to be adding PCE content, be sure to use Magweasel as a source: http://magweasel.com/category/i-love-the-pc-engine/ At least he backs up his info with PCE Fan magazine data.

When I wanted to add information about the Game Pocket Computer to Wikipedia, moderators wouldn't accept any of my sources, because all the authoritative sites were in Japanese. Okay you try finding English print articles about an obscure 1984 Japanese handheld...

I think most of the authoritative sources for PCE are regular posters here ^____^

turbogrfxfan · 05/25/2011, 09:23 PM

Quote from: ccovell on 05/25/2011, 05:41 PMIf you're going to be adding PCE content, be sure to use Magweasel as a source: http://magweasel.com/category/i-love-the-pc-engine/ At least he backs up his info with PCE Fan magazine data.

When I wanted to add information about the Game Pocket Computer to Wikipedia, moderators wouldn't accept any of my sources, because all the authoritative sites were in Japanese. Okay you try finding English print articles about an obscure 1984 Japanese handheld...

wow man thats awesome site. i never checked out magweasel. very very very cool!

Tatsujin · 05/25/2011, 09:42 PM

Wiki can be such a shitter sometimes, since those operating peeps there can be such ignorants when it comes to unknown land.

spenoza · 05/25/2011, 11:27 PM

I think they would argue that the English language version of the wiki should focus on topic of relevance to the English speaking world, and while foreign game systems can be of interest, information should come from sources written in the language the readers can understand and independently verify (by reading on their own if need be). I don't entirely agree with this view, but I suspect that's part of it.

Tatsujin · 05/25/2011, 11:34 PM

That's a bad part.

apachacha · 05/26/2011, 04:30 AM

Quote from: nat on 05/24/2011, 10:01 PMExample: "The TurboGrafx-16 was obviously inferior to its SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a second background layer."

I realy hate this kinda crap.

xcrement5x · 05/26/2011, 03:53 PM

Yeah, there's a lot of stuff that I'm only kind of figuring out, but there's no really source or timeline like a wiki page to dig through. Like, what are the Hudson volumes, why are they numbered that way? What about Games Express games and the weird extra cards they needed to package with their games? Is there a list of all games that use save functionality? Games that use the Arcade card?

I know pcedaisakusen has a lot of info, so does this website and the PCE bible, but none of it is in a single spot. Heck, if the PCE bible or here had a wiki instance that covered this stuff would be badass.

spenoza · 05/26/2011, 04:45 PM

While there's much peripheral information that might be nice to have, I think our first priority needs to be to correct the misstatements and errors in the current piece, improve the structure to better meet Wikipedia structural standards, and start including some of the more basic information about the Japanese side of things.

nat · 05/26/2011, 05:54 PM

....and remove speculative opinion in favor of actual facts.

Arkhan Asylum · 05/26/2011, 07:44 PM

I wonder whatd happen if I try to edit the entire page to just say

THE PC-ENGINE KICKS EVERYTHINGS ASS. IF YOU DON'T AGREE, YOU'RE A TOOL.

turbogrfxfan · 06/14/2011, 11:39 PM

lol awesome!

Tatsujin · 06/14/2011, 11:53 PM

Quote from: guest on 05/26/2011, 07:44 PMI wonder whatd happen if I try to edit the entire page to just say

THE PC-ENGINE KICKS EVERYTHINGS ASS. IF YOU DON'T AGREE, YOU'RE A TOOL.

At least you would be right

FraGMarE · 06/16/2011, 07:31 PM

A couple years ago i totally redid all the Tech Spec info and have been guarding it like a hawk ever since. I also reworded a lot of the Struggles In North America section so that it was quite a bit more neutral than it was before.

elnino · 06/16/2011, 09:35 PM

I contributed to both the English and the Japanese version of the PCE page, but everything was re-edited or deleted. This made me add "Hardware section" to the list of things to implement for PCEDaisakusen II.

spenoza · 06/16/2011, 11:21 PM

Quote from: elnino on 06/16/2011, 09:35 PMI contributed to both the English and the Japanese version of the PCE page, but everything was re-edited or deleted. This made me add "Hardware section" to the list of things to implement for PCEDaisakusen II.

Do you think it was a content issue or a style issue? If the style or structure of your additions doesn't advance the page towards WIKI compliance I could see them reversing the edits, even if they were factually correct. The WP editors may take the attitude that if the page isn't going to get better structurally then content changes are pointless.