Advanced Style Guide update and feedback thread

[tripredacus]

Its ok. This thread is specifically for the Adv guide, such as something missing or there is an error, etc. Regular questions can still go into the VGDB section and it is better for them to be in there for visibility.

I answered your question (I hope) in the thread you made there.

In general, the name should match the name on GameFAQs for that specific release but we have no rule for releases that are not there. Other than you can get the name from some other site, which is to then open it up to Mobygames or some other wiki. Or as I like to think of it "I get to name a thing" instead.

For alt-name, it is primarily for searching, as our search will look into there too. As such, actual text formatting is not that important, as long as the terms are present. You can put in Disney and/or Pixar into there if you want, english name, some other language name (for that release) or common translation (as is the case for some Japanese exclusive games based on anime that was released in other areas outside of Japan. Just whatever you can think that would help someone find a thing if they didn't know the language.

EDIT: Arcade section done for now. Was going to work on the next section (Sega Genesis/Mega Drive), however there is a change required in the forum before it can be started. So if you saw that topic for a short time, that is why it was removed. I will take a break from working on new sections in there until that has been resolved.

[tripredacus]

Added rules regarding nudity to the Item Images post.

This determination was made by red admin/site owner many years ago but I do not think was ever put into the Style Guide before.

[ignition365]

Added rules regarding nudity to the Item Images post.

This determination was made by red admin/site owner many years ago but I do not think was ever put into the Style Guide before.

Is there a reason we opt for no image over blurring/black bars?

[tripredacus]

From the Style Guide:

Do not add fan-made, fake, photoshopped, or replacement artwork

Where "photoshopped" could be read as "altered" thus this would prevent the use of such images.

[ignition365]

From the Style Guide:

Do not add fan-made, fake, photoshopped, or replacement artwork

Where "photoshopped" could be read as "altered" thus this would prevent the use of such images.

Okay.

Seems like a situation that could be an exception, but I get where that gets murky.

[tripredacus]

I believe it would be possible to get a resolution if users were to ask for a poll about it. We still could not allow the unaltered images in any case.

[ignition365]

I believe it would be possible to get a resolution if users were to ask for a poll about it. We still could not allow the unaltered images in any case.

Oh, absolutely, unaltered images in this case are non-negotiable, but it seems like a situation where an exception to the photoshop rule would be handy to prevent unnecessary instances of entries with no images.

[telly]

I would rather have photoshopped images than no images. But then again I will never search for nor add any of those games to my collection so it doesn't really matter to me either way.

[pzeke]

From the Style Guide:

Do not add fan-made, fake, photoshopped, or replacement artwork

Where "photoshopped" could be read as "altered" thus this would prevent the use of such images.

But that just doesn't make sense, it's almost backwards thinking. This could easily be an exception to the rule given the context. An even better solution would be to have a specific image for nude covers that says something along the lines of "Oops! This cover/image is NSFW." or something along those lines.

[dhaabi]

Personally, some sort of censorship to which a user could then agree to bypass (perhaps providing input of age?) would be the most ideal set-up. However, this seems like far too much work to be invested in for a group of just a few items.

Edit: Also, as a huge aside, I see that users can remove their own posts made in the News section unlike in every other one. Is this an oversight?

[tripredacus]

From the Style Guide:

Do not add fan-made, fake, photoshopped, or replacement artwork

Where "photoshopped" could be read as "altered" thus this would prevent the use of such images.

But that just doesn't make sense, it's almost backwards thinking. This could easily be an exception to the rule given the context. An even better solution would be to have a specific image for nude covers that says something along the lines of "Oops! This cover/image is NSFW." or something along those lines.

It could be, but that rule is already in effect from years ago. As is the directive from ownership regarding the use of nudity in images. So as it stands, currently, it is the only way it can exist. Fortunately, nearly anything is possible to get changed with a community vote in regards to things in the Style Guide.

The use of a placeholder image was something we used to have, but they all got removed AFAIK. The problem is that people just used whatever, so there were black bars, there were blurred images, and then various NSFW images from all around the internet. I think that specifying a specific placeholder image to use isn't going to work out because it wouldn't change anything since people would still have to use it.  An automated process such as a checkmark on an entry that would specify it to contain nudity and then the site uses a built-in placeholder that is different than No Art, would be ideal. The issue there is that is something red Admins would need to work out.

dhaabi, it is a built-in option for the forum. Changing it is more effort than it is worth.

[tripredacus]

Removed box content variant text from description post. Old text:

non box/cart variant info
For items, we generally will focus on box and cart differences for variants, and we do not create entries for variants with different components such as manuals or posters. This additional variant info is put into the description instead.
The Adventure of Bayou Billy on NES has in the description that some boxes have a different number printed on the tab and these boxes come with different components. Also that the game, when sold in Canada, came with different inserts as well. Since the Canadian release and the one with the different number on the tab are not visible from a closed (or even sealed) release, and that the cart is the same between all three releases, there is only one entry.

What this means is that non-box/cart variant entries are now allowed. This ruling can be overturned by a request for community vote.

[pzeke]

It could be, but that rule is already in effect from years ago. As is the directive from ownership regarding the use of nudity in images. So as it stands, currently, it is the only way it can exist. Fortunately, nearly anything is possible to get changed with a community vote in regards to things in the Style Guide.

The use of a placeholder image was something we used to have, but they all got removed AFAIK. The problem is that people just used whatever, so there were black bars, there were blurred images, and then various NSFW images from all around the internet. I think that specifying a specific placeholder image to use isn't going to work out because it wouldn't change anything since people would still have to use it.  An automated process such as a checkmark on an entry that would specify it to contain nudity and then the site uses a built-in placeholder that is different than No Art, would be ideal. The issue there is that is something red Admins would need to work out.

We could decide on what image to use as a community. Said image could serve to warn about any nude pictures or whatever else an entry may have. Furthermore, the user could be given the option of clicking on this image to see the NSFW content.

In all honesty, this doesn't affect me in the slightest, but I think as a community we should get together and decide how to handle this since it's still something that's relevant to the website. Also, not for nothing, but I think the current "No art" image is rather boring; I think it could be spruced up a bit to make it our own.

[tripredacus]

Furthermore, the user could be given the option of clicking on this image to see the NSFW content.

Community has no choice in this. This can only be granted by site owner.

[pzeke]

Such a prude.

Then in that case, like I said, we as a community should be able to decide what image could be used to cover up lewd art. I mean, I hate bringing other websites similar to this one as an example, but VGMdb figured this stuff out eons ago: they have a box that you tick for NSFW content that replaces any naughty pictures with one of their own. Like I mentioned once before, this place would really benefit from borrowing a page or two from them.