WikiProject iconVideo games Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Use of Encyclopedia Gamia[edit]

Is there a reason why this template links to Encyclopedia gamia and not GamerWiki? Tim 17:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

missing date is not hidden[edit]

If the template is used without the date parameter, the category link shows up as plaintext. Ham Pastrami 01:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Removed from All video game articles requesting maintenance since cats in child cat. Rich Farmbrough, 23:24 5 September 2008 (GMT).

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. But anyone who wants to create a redirect from one or more of the suggested alternatives should feel free to do so. EdJohnston (talk) 03:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Template:Game guide → Template:Cleanup-game – Must be consistent with other templates, like template:cleanup-book. Relisted Armbrust The Homunculus 15:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 17:09, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such rule, but I still think the proposal is a good one, just without the dash, which I fail to understand. Template:Cleanup game seems fine to me. Debresser (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The last editor is correct, and I would oppose the move as proposed. But Template:Cleanup game guide would not have this problem, and I think that version gathers in it all the good points raised in this discussion. Debresser (talk) 03:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.