Template talk:Nav-bw - Revision history

Khajidha: /* Video games */

2010-10-23T21:58:56Z

Video games

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:58, 23 October 2010
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:::::Point taken. However, the Movie-verse games you point out have the 2007 or ROTF movie logos on them and as such are labeled as being from those universes. Also, the G1 characters are merely bonus features and do not actually figure into the storyline of the games (At least this is the case for the 2007 movie games. I may well be wrong in regards to the ROTF games). By contrast, the GBC game has characters from all three franchises involved in the story and is labeled using just the Beast Wars Japan logo. My main justification for a reorganization is that the toylines for Neo and BWII also used the Beast Wars Japan logo rather than their franchises' logo. The Metals toyline changed that pattern, but it seems to imply that Takara may have seen BWII, Neo and Metals as subsections of an overall Beast Wars franchise. I'm not entirely sure myself if reorganization is the way to go, but I do see this as a possible justification for it. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 17:12, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:::::Point taken. However, the Movie-verse games you point out have the 2007 or ROTF movie logos on them and as such are labeled as being from those universes. Also, the G1 characters are merely bonus features and do not actually figure into the storyline of the games (At least this is the case for the 2007 movie games. I may well be wrong in regards to the ROTF games). By contrast, the GBC game has characters from all three franchises involved in the story and is labeled using just the Beast Wars Japan logo. My main justification for a reorganization is that the toylines for Neo and BWII also used the Beast Wars Japan logo rather than their franchises' logo. The Metals toyline changed that pattern, but it seems to imply that Takara may have seen BWII, Neo and Metals as subsections of an overall Beast Wars franchise. I'm not entirely sure myself if reorganization is the way to go, but I do see this as a possible justification for it. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 17:12, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			::::::For right now it doesn't really matter. If we go with the hub idea, they are all in one section anyways. We can link all relevant franchises to that section. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 17:58, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

Tigerpaw28 at 21:12, 23 October 2010

2010-10-23T21:12:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 23 October 2010
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			:::::Point taken. However, the Movie-verse games you point out have the 2007 or ROTF movie logos on them and as such are labeled as being from those universes. Also, the G1 characters are merely bonus features and do not actually figure into the storyline of the games (At least this is the case for the 2007 movie games. I may well be wrong in regards to the ROTF games). By contrast, the GBC game has characters from all three franchises involved in the story and is labeled using just the Beast Wars Japan logo. My main justification for a reorganization is that the toylines for Neo and BWII also used the Beast Wars Japan logo rather than their franchises' logo. The Metals toyline changed that pattern, but it seems to imply that Takara may have seen BWII, Neo and Metals as subsections of an overall Beast Wars franchise. I'm not entirely sure myself if reorganization is the way to go, but I do see this as a possible justification for it. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 17:12, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha at 19:40, 23 October 2010

2010-10-23T19:40:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:40, 23 October 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Video games ==		== Video games ==

	Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video ~~game~~]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video games]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

Tigerpaw28 at 19:28, 23 October 2010

2010-10-23T19:28:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:28, 23 October 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:
	:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha: /* Video games */

2010-10-23T16:32:38Z

Video games

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 23 October 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video game]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video game]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

Tigerpaw28: /* Video games */

2010-10-23T16:21:46Z

Video games

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:21, 23 October 2010
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video game]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video game]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

Khajidha: Video games

2010-10-23T15:13:48Z

Video games

New page

== Video games ==

Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video game]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:58, 23 October 2010
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:::::Point taken. However, the Movie-verse games you point out have the 2007 or ROTF movie logos on them and as such are labeled as being from those universes. Also, the G1 characters are merely bonus features and do not actually figure into the storyline of the games (At least this is the case for the 2007 movie games. I may well be wrong in regards to the ROTF games). By contrast, the GBC game has characters from all three franchises involved in the story and is labeled using just the Beast Wars Japan logo. My main justification for a reorganization is that the toylines for Neo and BWII also used the Beast Wars Japan logo rather than their franchises' logo. The Metals toyline changed that pattern, but it seems to imply that Takara may have seen BWII, Neo and Metals as subsections of an overall Beast Wars franchise. I'm not entirely sure myself if reorganization is the way to go, but I do see this as a possible justification for it. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 17:12, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:::::Point taken. However, the Movie-verse games you point out have the 2007 or ROTF movie logos on them and as such are labeled as being from those universes. Also, the G1 characters are merely bonus features and do not actually figure into the storyline of the games (At least this is the case for the 2007 movie games. I may well be wrong in regards to the ROTF games). By contrast, the GBC game has characters from all three franchises involved in the story and is labeled using just the Beast Wars Japan logo. My main justification for a reorganization is that the toylines for Neo and BWII also used the Beast Wars Japan logo rather than their franchises' logo. The Metals toyline changed that pattern, but it seems to imply that Takara may have seen BWII, Neo and Metals as subsections of an overall Beast Wars franchise. I'm not entirely sure myself if reorganization is the way to go, but I do see this as a possible justification for it. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 17:12, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			::::::For right now it doesn't really matter. If we go with the hub idea, they are all in one section anyways. We can link all relevant franchises to that section. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 17:58, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 23 October 2010
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			:::::Point taken. However, the Movie-verse games you point out have the 2007 or ROTF movie logos on them and as such are labeled as being from those universes. Also, the G1 characters are merely bonus features and do not actually figure into the storyline of the games (At least this is the case for the 2007 movie games. I may well be wrong in regards to the ROTF games). By contrast, the GBC game has characters from all three franchises involved in the story and is labeled using just the Beast Wars Japan logo. My main justification for a reorganization is that the toylines for Neo and BWII also used the Beast Wars Japan logo rather than their franchises' logo. The Metals toyline changed that pattern, but it seems to imply that Takara may have seen BWII, Neo and Metals as subsections of an overall Beast Wars franchise. I'm not entirely sure myself if reorganization is the way to go, but I do see this as a possible justification for it. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 17:12, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:40, 23 October 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Video games ==		== Video games ==

	Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video ~~game~~]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		Do we want to leave each video game separately linked in the nav box or should we link to the BW section of the [[video games]] page as a sort of hub for those articles? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 11:13, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			::::I'm not sure about such a wholesale reorganization. I was going with the idea that the game was released in the Neo era as that was the source of the newest characters in it. It is somewhat like how having G1 characters playable in Movie-verse video games does not remove those games from their franchise of origin. --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 15:40, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:28, 23 October 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:
	:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		:I was already thinking of pulling the Gameboy Color game out of the nav template, since it isn't actually a part of the American BW franchise. I would go along with the hub idea. We don't list the games separately in other nav templates, IIRC. So this would be more consistent and would help streamline the template a bit. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 12:21, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
	::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)		::And I just added this nav template to the GBC game page. Should have paid more attention. Should it be a Neo franchise thing? --[[User:Khajidha\|Khajidha]] 12:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)
			:::Well, it includes characters from BW Japan, BWII, and Neo and is currently linked to all three of those franchises' templates. Putting all three templates in is probably too much. But putting just one in would be misleading. So I think we'd have to leave the page template-less unless we reorganize the Japanese Beast Wars pages to make BWII, Neo and Metals sub-franchises of the main Beast Wars Japan franchise. And there's something to be said for doing that, given that it seems to be a more accurate description of the relationship between the franchises. --[[User:Tigerpaw28\|Tigerpaw28]] 15:28, 23 October 2010 (EDT)