Sad state of the PCE entry in Wikipedia

[spenoza]

OK, so we all know Wikipedia is a mixed bag of information, although really, they do have a lot of well-structured, detailed, and relatively informative and accurate articles. The PC Engine article, however, is a mess. As a community we have all sorts of access to information in interviews and articles, both in English and Japanese. We should take up a project to "fix" the Wikipedia article on the PC Engine and TurboGrafx 16. If we decide, as a community, to do this, we should resolve to be factual, fair and not simply fanboyish. Anyone here already have some familiarity with Wiki syntax and structure? What sources should we draw upon? If anyone has one of those giant Tokuma books which documents info on games and hardware that would be great. The one I have is too recent to include PCE releases, unfortunately.

[soop]

This is a good idea.  I'll help, but I don't know nearly as much as Bonknuts tats, Chris, Opie, etc etc etc

[nodtveidt]

I contributed to the Wikipedia entry some years ago... but I don't remember if it was PC Engine or TurboGrafx 16 that I edited.

[turbogrfxfan]

yeah i think this is an awesome idea.  id love to help but I think we need to have an outline on what we need to do.  I feel that once we have this outline we all could add to it review it, put it together and submit it.  I def agree that this has to be done and it should imo may even take a year but, once its done as a community, it would be a huge step for our lovr of pce/tg16.

for starters submit Henrys poster that he created showing the gennisis of pce/tg16

have links for ............. the bible, bros duo(very important, pcenginefx etc

show what major impacts the pce had in japan

lol i just feel that this must be done.......... 

and i dunno even bring up how the system still producing games and translations like Arks insanity!!!!!!!

[soop]

it's very tg-16-centric too

[Arkhan]

Some of what I submitted once was edited and de-corrected years ago. 

Lets just write our own farfetched, hilarious PCE history on Wikipedia.  Screw it.

and then everyone can go WAT

I mean if the shits going to be a wreck, lets make it count.

[roflmao]

Let's make it sound like a piece of shit system so people will stop paying a fortune for it on ebay...

[Tatsujin]

Even if we rewrite the whole bunch from scratch, there will be others which will do the same again and again and again again... So how can we make sure, that our final entry will be kept and preserved for the eternity?

[spenoza]

Well, for one, I figure we have enough access to various sources that it would be hard to justify reverting a sourced change to an unsourced original, and the article is already flagged for, among other things, formatting issues. I figure we'd want to include JPN release dates for PCE hardware and make sure it's a PCE and TG16 article rather than a wandering TG16 article that happens to reference the PCE.

And I agree. We should hammer out a draft and then dump it on the world when we've got it all sorted out.

[Arkhan]

We should just erase the entire thing with a link that leads to an unchangeable page of info

[Opethian]

We should just erase the entire thing with a link that leads to an unchangeable page of info

+1 THIS

[nat]

Interesting this came up, as I was thinking about this recently.

I started editing the entry, but then stopped myself after just a few edits because the the thing is so big, and just so f*cked up.

A HUGE problem with the article as it stands now is that it's riddled with SPECULATIVE OPINION rather than cold, hard fact. This was what I initially wanted to try to weed out, but I realized the time involved is much more than I'd be willing to put in.

Example: "The TurboGrafx-16 was obviously inferior to its SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a second background layer."

This is an almost verbatim quote that I edited to read something more like "The TurboGrafx-16 lacked support for a second background layer in hardware, so developers were forced to come up with workarounds in software to implement parallax."

There are two major problems with the original quote, aside from the fact its just an asinine statement. First, it is more speculative opinion than it is fact. Second, the factual part of the statement isn't even 100% accurate because while it's true the console can't handle a second layer IN HARDWARE, multiple layers can be simulated in software. Just saying "The TG-16 can't do more than one background layer" is just flat-out false.

I picked this one as an example because it is one of the most polarizing topics on the console, and the original quote signifies EXACTLY what is wrong with 90% of the TurboGrafx/PC Engine wiki entry.

[Arkhan]

Thats because DigitPress informants edit wiki articles.  They're experts on things like MSX, PC Engine, game composers, and none of the stuff I just mentioned.

[roflmao]

Thats because DigitPress informants edit wiki articles.  They're experts on things like MSX, PC Engine, game composers, and none of the stuff I just mentioned.

LOL!

[Tatsujin]

Example: "The TurboGrafx-16 was obviously inferior to its SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a second background layer."

So how about to add this on the Wiki Neo Geo site:

Example: "The Neo Geo was obviously inferior to its PCE, SNES and Genesis competitors as it was lacking a background layer at all."