So what's the site's opinion on taking info from other sites?

[foxhack]

So I was adding a few things to my collection when I saw http://vgcollect.com/item/11189 - which had a description that sounded horribly familiar. I realized that the text was taken from http://www.mobygames.com/game/snk-arcade-classics-vol-1 - an entry I helped to create.

When the MobyGames admins find out that users of this site are taking the descriptions from them, they are not going to be happy. And now that they're owned by GameFly, they have access to loads and loads of lawsuit-happy laywers.

You might want to make a point of not using their written descriptions in entries. (Though they don't really mind people using their release dates since they're a reference site.)

[scott]

Not cool.

As far as all around, generic, info: like release dates, item numbers, Pub/ Dev, unwatermarked box art images,  etc... that's fine, but plagiarizing descriptions isn't cool.

Actually, I've always said, and it's in the style guide, that "The Description should be, if anything, a brief description of the game. Or notes about the games packaging variants/ pack ins/ collector's edition details." Like trivia about the game, such as if it's a launch title, or if it's the last game released for a system. If it had a variant, you can explain the variation, If it had a bonus cd packed in with it or something.

If you notice any more of these, feel free to edit them out. I've been trying to catch them as I see them.

Thanks for pointing it out Fox

[tpugmire]

I've noticed this as well.  I only add descriptions if it's some oddball thing like the NES 3 and 5 screw variants.  A new user was editing NES descriptions the other day and it was obvious that they were copied from somewhere else.  Currently we can't reject edits, only accept them.

[scott]

Currently we can't reject edits, only accept them.

This is definitely a big peeve of mine. That needs to be fixed asap.

[tpugmire]

The watermarked images bother me too, perhaps I should start another list...

[scott]

Agreed, of course anything related to blatantly lifting something from someone else annoys the hell out of me. If you can't scan the box art/ disc images yourself, there are plenty of sources for art, why be lazy and use a watermarked version.

[amauriel]

Yeah, I've tried to be really careful on my art...and I've got a few things that I couldn't find good art on, giving me another reason to get my camera out and actually photograph MY collection. Hopefully you don't catch any of mine! (And please, please, let me know with a PM if you do. I don't want to be the cause.)

[foxhack]

Not cool.

Exactly the kind of answer I was hoping for. Most other sites would just go "Eh, who cares."

Guess I'm staying onboard now.

[scott]

Not cool.

Exactly the kind of answer I was hoping for. Most other sites would just go "Eh, who cares."

Guess I'm staying onboard now.

Welcome back on board.

[scott]

Updated the style guide to reflect this.

[tpugmire]

What about descriptions taken from wikipedia?  Someone has been doing this, but they have been giving credit to wikipedia.  Personally I'm not a big fan of wikipedia, because I've found it to be inaccurate a lot of the time.

[scott]

I'd say, just ditch any descriptions of the game and only list misc trivia, pack-ins, variations that are related to the game itself.

[foxhack]

I've been adding some GOG descriptions to their entries, like in this case: -- http://vgcollect.com/item/16695

Includes the original POSTAL 2, POSTAL 2 Share the Pain multiplayer expansion and POSTAL 2 Apocalypse Weekend expansion.

It's basically box text, so.

[scott]

Ya that's no problem. I just have big issues with straight hijacking of descriptions from other reference sites.

[jonathonstriker]

If we are going to get info from another site, we should at least get it from a useful and legit site like gamefaqs.com Wikipedia isn't often as accurate as Gamefaqs, which has probably the largest database of video games info and cheats. Allowing the user to edit details is nice for some of us, but there needs to be a way to reject those that don't follow the style format, and to close those that have all of the information filled out (properly).