Talk:List of Nintendo Switch games: Difference between revisions

Mention

I couldn't think of a particular title for this topic but there's something minor about the main list. When I edit the main page, the page like, has this white space off to the right, like how you scroll your finger to the left and right to read text, it does this to the main page, but not the M-Z page. Anybody have this problem? It didn't go like this a month ago, just a few weeks ago it started happening. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 16:53, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Clarify on including information about Japanese releases in the lead paragraphs

According to @Stefvanschie:, he claims that a Japanese release date for the game needs to put on said wikipage to be accurate for inclusion on list, however, we have discussed numerous times (this discussion being another one) and that we should not list it until we list it on the wikipage itself. I believe that I have seen this similar discussion somewhere else, but I don't remember actually going through with it, I just list the Japanese source in the edit summary and I believe that is acceptable? Or should we list an insert about a release date for Japan on any respective page if Japan gets the game? @Sergecross73:, @Dissident93:, Wanted to see if you guys understand what's going on. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 07:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

As a clarification, I want it to be stated on the wikipage or here on this page, but since we're against putting references for blue-linked games on this page I said on the wikipage itself. I'd personally prefer the reference to be on this page, but at this point I'm already happy if it's at the very least stated on the wikipage. I'm personally against only linking the source in the edit summary itself: when doing that it becomes completely impossible to find that reference back, especially for people that only read and don't necessarily contribute to Wikipedia themselves. Stefvanschie (talk) 11:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Citations should always be added on the page. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:56, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. It doesn’t do much good to add the source in the edit summary. It quickly falls deep into the page history, making it hard to find or associate with the edit made down the line. Sergecross73 msg me 21:31, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Alright. I guess I'll do that then on the various pages that games was released in Japan. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro

Page Protection

Somebody added this title to list, with no edit summary or a reliable source on the page itself. This is just a rumour about a Paper Mario game listed as leaked as coming this year. But we have nothing to assume that these games are coming. @Sergecross73:, could you either talk with this user, or instead of just randomly allowing these edits to happen, provide page protection against these. Cause these pages aren't going to fix themselves if I'm not here. Thank you. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 19:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't think page protection is really necessary in this case. Sometimes people add unsourced information now and then, but it doesn't really happen on a very frequent basis, nor is it any kind of severe vandalism (in my experience every page gets unsourced content added to it every once in a while), so I don't think page protection is necessary. Stefvanschie (talk) 19:26, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Redirect additions, getting rid of words like '#', 'The', and 'A'

I want to discuss a few more additions going into 2020.

Is there a possibility that we could improve:

1. Sorting, such as getting rid of words in games like 'The' Legend of Zelda, 'The' Stanley Parable, 'The' Touryst, and other games that have 'The', 'A' and the symbol #. Making sorting much easier. However, we can leave stuff like The Walking Dead (video game) alone, but the other The Walking Dead title can have 'The' out.

2. More Redirects. Same goes with the first part, if pages contain 'The' in the title and it is linked, removing those provides a redlink, or those are already redirected.

I know there will be backlash against this, but we (or I, in this case) would love an update on pages like this to have these changes implemented regardless. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 00:35, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Ignoring my personal objections to this, are you really sure you’d want this? You don’t seem to like it when people don’t follow counter-intuitive rules. This is counter-intuitive and would require constant maintenance to enforce. Sergecross73 msg me 00:46, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Well this is just my approach in adding change to the page. I'm already in the process of reference cleaning, like what I've done with the updates provided by Nintendo Life's Nintendo Download info. However, I actually firmly believe that this is starting to look like a catalog if games continue to trickle on with the required references being put in for inclusion. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 08:29, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I’m just saying, I can already see you getting mad at people for adding the full name of a game when a new game is announced and added to the list. Every time Nintendo announces a game called something like “The Yoshis”, people are going to add it as The Yoshis, not Yoshis. They’ll likely keep re-adding it or reverting you in it too, insisting that it’s the correct name. It would be a constant battle, whether we all agree on this talk page or not, because most people don’t check talk pages before editing, and most people wouldn’t think to omit a “The” from a title. Sergecross73 msg me 15:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

But if The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild is already listed as Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (as a redirect) and the other games are too. Obviously I created those cause who cares. But everytime I open my mouth, it always end in either a warning or block. This never seems to fail. And apparently the sequel is titled as Breath of the Wild without the main title listed for whatever reason. I know that game is under development, but why list it just as Breath of the Wild? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 06:53, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

You asked for input, and I answered. Look, you’re a very good editor when it comes to maintaining a list. But you seem to struggle when it come to bigger picture things like policy and guidelines. Your proposals are often shortsighted, and you can’t seem to understand page protection policy. Which is why I’m telling you that I think this proposal would not work out like you seem to think it would. Feel free to wait for other opinions. Perhaps others will weigh in. Sergecross73 msg me 14:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Zacharyalejandro, I linked the sequel that way for space reasons. It's obviously not the official name, and will most likely not be BOTW 2 judging by previous series examples anyway. Because of that, it should not be brought up as an example for your proposal. But back on topic, I also don't support this as it would require a large amount of maintenance for minimal gain, and would ideally also be done on every other games list for consistency if we did decide to do this. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:22, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Maybe we could do something like "Legend of Zelda, The", "Stanley Parable, The", "Touryst, The"? That way we still have the full game title, but when sorting, those "The"s and "A"s don't cause the games to appear in a spot, you wouldn't expect them in. Stefvanschie (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Stefvanschie, I've personally never liked that sorting style. What does the MOS say about it? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

MOS will say to set a sortkey. -- ferret (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Ferret, that's what I assumed. It shouldn't just be listed in plaintext. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

I didn't know that sort keys are a thing, but if that's possible then I'm all for that over what I suggested. Stefvanschie (talk) 16:08, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

So we are just going to ignore redirects around here I guess? Why can't we list these as redirects? What has you guys being against every single redirect available?? We don't need to change the actual title of a wikipage. But let me ask. Are you guys really against redirects for everything now? I don't really care about this issue now, because more backlash is a thing against me changing simple things here, for lists, not articles. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Exactly what are you talking about? No one has said redirects are bad or should be removed. However, full titles should be used in the list. If you need to change the sort due to articles like A, An, The, then put a sortkey in front of it. -- ferret (talk) 16:47, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

How are you reading this discussion and coming away with that conclusion? Just because people are against your proposal mean that they’re against redirects. We’re just against your counter-intuitive proposal. I mean seriously, let’s say we implemented your proposal. What would make you think that other editors wouldn’t come in and undo your changes all the time? Why wouldn’t a newbie editor come in and say “Hey you forgot the ‘The’ at the beginning of ‘The Legend of Zelda’, so I added it for you.” It’s not about hating redirects. It’s about being against counter-intuitive proposals and not using games most commonly used names. Sergecross73 msg me 20:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

It's whatever I guess. I really don't care. Whatever I'm doing, I do it. I think I've now had quite enough of these discussions not taking my way. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 15:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro

If you aren't gonna follow the consensus of the discussion, what was the point of starting the discussion in the first place? Stefvanschie (talk) 09:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I demand this be issued. Does Wikipedia seem to have lawyers, hm? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 19:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Please be aware that I've blocked Zachary for 2 weeks for disruptive proceeding against the consensus of this discussion and created "The-less" redirects and editing the list to suit. He was warned previously not to do this. -- ferret (talk) 20:54, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Seems like he did it again today (on just a single game). However, this shows that he is not willing to follow consensus and continues to be disruptive even after a 2 week block. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:03, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Warned. -- ferret (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Weighing in here as I don't see much justification for doing this, but it looks like it's already been done to the entire list. E.g. Count Lucanor vs The Count Lucanor; End is Nigh vs The End is Nigh; Escapists / Escapists 2; Jackbox Party Pack (up to 6); etc. The actual game titles set by vendors have "The" in them; wouldn't accuracy of titles outrank being able to sort nicely? I haven't used sortkeys but sounds like that might be a better solution. Don't really understand why this was asked and then done without consensus. Plus, it's inconsistent with others lists, e.g. PS4 games. JamminBen (talk) 11:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

If you see older entries that are not correct, feel free to fix. This discussion happened long after many of those titles had been added. -- ferret (talk) 12:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

JamminBen, because Zacharyalejandro goes against consensus anytime he doesn't like the result (which happens often). I've fixed some, but haven't had the time to go through the entire list. I would usually just revert to an older version, but that would need every new game added to the list since re-added manually. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:10, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks both - I've updated a few too, will try to do some more as I get time. JamminBen (talk) 07:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Overwatch 2 and Shin Megami Tensei V

Zachary recently attempted to remove major titles like this. This is not appropriate. I know we occasionally trim minor shovelware stuff that go for a while without release, but we should not be removing higher profile titles like this unless there is confirmation of cancellation. This is an exceedingly bad judgement call. Sergecross73 msg me 02:22, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

The maximum should be two years without an official announcement of a release date. There have been dates pushed back due to the ongoing pandemic till further notice or a further date. But Metroid Prime 4 has been in development since E3 2017, maybe even before that. So I don't know why this needs to be considered. Do we leave games vaporware for 10+ years on that list? I think not. I would assume we wait on further info. Am not saying anything more on the matter. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 03:29, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

1) At no point has there been any consensus on a “2 years standard”. You can’t just go and make up rules as you go. 2) Overwatch 2 was announced on November 2019. That’s barely 1/2 year ago, so even that doesn’t comply with this standard you just made up. Feel free to not comment further, but such an action forfeits any right to make any further edits of this type, as you have no WP:CONSENSUS and would not be following through with the WP:BRD process. Sergecross73 msg me 03:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree, we should only remove a game if we have evidence that the game was cancelled and in the case of SMTV we had confirmation in November 2019 that the game was still being worked on https://www.thegamer.com/shin-megami-tensei-v-hasnt-been-cancelled-confirms-atlus/. It shouldn’t be removed.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 06:11, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

I managed to restore removals of Bayonetta 3 and The Legend of Heroes: Trails of Cold Steel IV (which was announced last month so I have no idea how their two year timeline justifies that one).--69.157.252.96 (talk) 06:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Please note those removals were from before this discussion started.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 06:24, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

We don't even need to set a standard for this. 95% of the games announced for the Switch (and basically any other platform) will eventually release, that remaining 5% (or whatever it actually is) can just be removed on a case-by-case basis like we've always done. According to his logic, we might as well just not allow any game whose release date exceeds today's. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 09:26, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Completely agree. Not needed at all. And right now, even terms like “indefinitely delayed” has changed in meaning lately. Before, that would often mean a game was cancelled or pushed way out into the future. But recently, The Last of Us 2 was “delayed indefinitely“ only to be pushed back less than a month. There’s so much uncertainty with releases right now with Coronavirus that, even if we wanted to go down this path, it would be a terrible time to start trying to make calls like this. Sergecross73 msg me 12:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

References.

Okay. Apparently nobody is listening to directions on this topic. I want to enforce this subject. For page limitations, we need to not list references in the list or any other list out there. Anybody who reads this, please watch this page. I feel like this has taken no effort to enforce this subject in users who are editing all willy-nilly whenever they want and don't care about such rules here. This includes to references for blue-linked articles, like how hard is it for anyone to just move the reference into the respective articles? It's simple to do. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 17:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

As I’ve told you before, I don’t think that it’s people don’t understand, it’s that they don’t know. And they don’t even know that they should be looking for this info to learn, because it’s not a common situation. If you see someone doing it wrong, feel free to politely inform them. But not every passerby editor checks the talk page before adding, so there’s bound to be people who don’t follow it because they didn’t know. Sergecross73 msg me 18:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Makes sense. I'll just fix it and move on. It's all I can do without making a huge fuss about it. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro

Physical or eShop Column

I think it would be a good addition to the list to see if a game is or was made on cartridge. That could be down with a cartridge icon or with a 'yes' in a physical column. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himmelsfeger (talk • contribs) 09:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Please search the archives for "physical", this column has been repeatedly discussed and consensus is that it violated WP:NOTCATALOG, a core Wikipedia policy. -- ferret (talk) 11:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

The search has no results Himmelsfeger (talk) 13:25, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Search using this, the page was moved a while ago and I guess the old archives weren't linked here. L ke (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

It’s been discussed a ton. It’s been repeatedly decided that it’s not appropriate. Per WP:NOTCATALOGUE, and the fact that it’s rather difficult to find sources for every entry when there’s thousands of games on the platform, many minor and obscure. Sergecross73 msg me 13:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Island Saver

I noticed Island Saver was missing. I don't know the exact release dates, but it was released this year. Kidburla (talk) 19:03, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I've added Island Saver to the list. (Was released on 13 May apparently.) Stefvanschie (talk) 10:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposal to improve table spacing

Instead of reducing font size, I propose adopting a shorter date table sorting template for release dates {{dts|2020|Jan|23}} similar to List of PlayStation 4 games and List of Xbox One games. MOS:DATEFORMAT says abbreviated dts is a perfectly viable format "where brevity is helpful" (e.g. refs, tables, infoboxes) providing the style remains consistent throughout. A shorter date format creates more space for the first four columns and improves table readability for visitors with small or standard monitors that cannot output at high resolutions. If editors approve, the conversion can be made with ease (example of how the new page will appear).

From

September 27, 2014

September 27, 2014

September 27, 2014

to

Sep 27, 2014

Sep 27, 2014

Sep 27, 2014

You can comment on the proposal here. — Niche-gamer 18:39, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Support as long as it remains consistent with the other lists. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Nintendo is a completely different company and should go with the list it already supports. If we did go this route, we would have to go through every Nintendo-specific list to apply the changes. So however, I strongly disagree with this change. However, I fully agree splitting the pages again to decrease page consistency. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 07:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

It is seriously time to consider pruning this list

While splitting the list is reasonable for the size, we are well beyond what NOTCATALOG recommends. Digital download capabilities here changes what makes it reasonable to document compared to physical releases (which had more cost associated with them and thus served as a barrier to publishing), and a list of 2000+ games for a system is beyond reasonable. This is basically like documenting all the games on Steam. And yes, this would apply to PS4/Xbox One and pending PS5/Xbox Series X lists, so I'm not calling out this specific list only.

We need criteria that the game needs to be notable (standalone article) or part of a notable series. Simply being documented by the switch shop or twitter or even just announced on a Nintendo Direct does not cut it anymore. Even the Nintendo Life listings should not be considered sufficient. Yes, this will make it a partial list, but it will be more in line with what we expect an encyclopedia list should be. --Masem (t) 04:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Masem, this would apply to all other lists too, right? I'm all for it (Steam comparison kind of convinced me) but we'd have to be more vigilant in maintaining it and any other lists that follows it, which I guess sounds worse on paper than it would in practice. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I proposed this on the WT:VG as well. --Masem (t) 19:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

It’s here, FYI. We really shouldn’t have two concurrent discussions going on this. At the very least link people to the discussion... Sergecross73 msg me 00:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect titles for the "99" games

Specifically 99Moves, 99Seconds, 99Vidas. They have all been renamed to have a space after the 99, e.g. 99 Moves. Minor issue, but I googled all three games and they are named without a space. Couldn't find which edit did this, and it's an easy fix, except with 99Vidas the article also has a space. A while back, "The" was removed from lots of titles. Thought I'd ask if this was being changed due to an editor's preference rather than what the games are actually named. We should go for the actual titles, right? JamminBen (talk) 08:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Apparently no one is no longer paying attention to the pages now not even the admins. I think we should change that to have a space. So my definitive answer would be no. This is Wikipedia so literally anything can be changed. If you don't like it, leave it be or move onto something else. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro

Zachary, do you just WANT blocked? 99Vidas is clearly the actual article name and sourcing does not agree with there being spaces. I'm sorry us Admins didn't notice when you first added the unnecessary space. Clearly, we've been trying to trust you not to make disruptive edits, but maybe we can't?

Jammin: Fixed the 99 games, which was done in this edit. Game titles should be complete, including articles like "The" and "An". They should however been properly sorted with articles ignored, i.e. "The Legend of Zelda" goes under "L". Zachary's personal preferences should be ignored and reverted. -- ferret (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Seconded, on every point. Sergecross73 msg me 17:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Agreed on all fronts. JamminBen (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

OH! I'm sorry, did I stutter about this?? Listen, I've now had quite the long excuses about this adminship over pages. God, I wish pages like these...I swear to God of Wikipedia! But apparently you guys don't really care in the world of Wikipedia. I'm so DONE! Indefinite block me! I've had ENOUGHZacharyalejandro (talk) 03:02, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Zacharyalejandro