Forum:Promotional crossover content

Hello, friends!

I'm thinking about adding some articles on Fallout-related promotional content available for different games (and not only games). To be more specific, I mean:


 * Pip-Boy in Team Fortress 2 (Fallout: New Vegas promotional content)
 * Fallout Pack for Brink (Fallout: New Vegas promotional content)
 * Fallout 3-related avatar items on XBox LIVE

So, I have a few questions to you:


 * Do we really need such articles here? The content is definitely Fallout-related but it's not from any Fallout game.
 * Do we need separate articles for each item/pack or should we make an overview article only?
 * How should these articles be categorized? Of course they should go to Promotion and publishing but shouldn't we create some additional categories? How these categories should be named?

Thank you. veryblackraven 23:28, October 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * The content criteria only states that the content has to be Fallout related, it does not state that it has to appear in any Fallout game. Of course, any such additions to this wiki would require a non-canon tag. As for the rest, that is open for discussion. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 23:57, October 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * So, a new source template is needed. Is it better no make a template for promotional content, something like, or should it be something more general like  ? veryblackraven 07:43, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with ghost on this. It is Fallout related, we just need to clarify that it is not canon and it should be fine.--Kingclyde 07:37, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * And what is the proper naming? Is Promotional crossove content fine? veryblackraven 07:41, October 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think it needs a separate "source" tag. Fallout 3 promotional items doesn't have a source tag, so an article titled, eg. Fallout crossover videogame content wouldn't need it either. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 08:39, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with Tag. Sourceboxes are used to mark in-universe content as non-canon if needed; since promo items are real-life items (i.e. not in-universe), they don't need a source tag. -- Porter21 (talk) 11:31, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm with Tag and Porter on this one, it's fallout related, but not in universe, so it's not a part of the games, so it's automatically not cannon, so there is really no need ot mark it...unless of course it was a comic or somthing, but thats a different subject. ---bleep196- 18:45, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

After the following comments and observations, I would have to agree and change my mind on the need for a source template. User Avatar talk.png 20:12, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

So, this is what we have now: Do you have any comments? veryblackraven 11:25, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Pip-Boy (Team Fortress 2)
 * Fallout Pack (Brink)
 * Fallout 3 avatar items (Xbox LIVE)


 * Looks fine to me. As we keep background brief without going into much detail and have the link at the bottom, we should be good. --Kastera (talk) 13:01, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Per all, perhaps they may need a template to show it refers to real life content but beyond that they're fine. - Crazy Sam10 Talk Poll[[File:ShadowAttackSmallAni.gif]] 13:58, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * So, this template should be a part of Games template. veryblackraven 14:05, October 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with everything that has been established so far. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 21:57, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

But what about Fallout: Nuka Break series? It is, as well Fallout related. 94.253.172.224 14:00, October 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * We discussed Nuka Break some time ago. It's completely fan-made and therefore contradicts the content policy. veryblackraven 14:05, October 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * The big difference between Nuka Break and these promotional items, is that these items would have been released under some sort of license by Bethesda. So one would assume they would have had some sort of creative control over the content. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:12, October 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, do these really need articles? I like the idea of a new template, but we should just put it in the behind the scenes section with the template tag above the note. That's what I personally think. TrailerParkApe TPA 22:42, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Source template
After the majority voted for the source template, I've restored previously deleted template and added it to articles. What do you think about it? veryblackraven 06:13, October 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I like that template, making it immediately clear for the reader it's a special page. And it's not like it's used all over the place, just these three. As far as I'm concerned it can stay. Jspoel [[file:Speech Jspoel.png|10px|link=User talk:Jspoelstra]] 17:41, October 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * As I said above, source tags make little sense for real-life content in my opinion; it's not like it could have any effect on Fallout canon in the first place. I don't really see what makes these pages so special that they need to be marked via template, to be honest - we have plenty of other real-life-based pages and these are not marked either (e.g. Bethesda Softworks LLC v. Interplay Entertainment Corporation). So either we mark all out-of-universe content or none of it, but I don't like making an exception for one very specific group of RL articles. -- Porter21 (talk) 17:54, October 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I'd rather agree with you on this. But most of those who wrote here said it would be better to keep the template. Seems we need to discuss this matter in general - which pages need source templates and which don't. veryblackraven 18:24, October 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * I've been thinking about this a bit more; it might actually be a good idea to mark all real-world-based articles (RL game companies, developers etc) as such to set them apart from the in-universe content. I'd still rather not use a sourcebox for that though; I think adding a special option to Games might be a better course of action. I'll see what I can come up with. -- Porter21 (talk) 10:04, October 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * Great idea! veryblackraven 21:30, October 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * . I had hoped to be able to come up with something better, but the different placement of Games in the Wikia and Monobook skins makes it hard to come up with something which works for both. Hope this works as well. -- Porter21 (talk) 08:27, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Pretty good. So, it should be placed instead of template and also on every real-world article like developers etc. This is quite a lot of work, should be done by a bot. :) And what was the problems with Games template? Why it should be placed differently? Check the Star Wars wikia, for example the Ben Cooke page. They have Eras template, very similar to our Games. And "real" is made just as one of the eras. veryblackraven 11:18, October 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * What I meant was that I was originally planning to automatically insert some indicator outside the game icon area for real world pages (like e.g. an icon in the currently empty area to the left of the game icons). That doesn't work in Monobook though because (unlike in Oasis) the game icons there are placed in the page header rather than in the article area (and hence aforementioned empty space does not exist). Hope that's a bit clearer.
 * Adding a new icon wouldn't be a problem; I didn't do that because I wasn't sure whether that would be sufficient as an indicator (i.e. whether it was noticable enough). If people think it is sufficient, it's actually the solution I'd prefer. -- Porter21 (talk) 08:46, October 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * I have now added a new options to Games - "real" - and removed /  . -- Porter21 (talk) 11:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)