Talk:Project Sylpheed

I just finished playing the demo, and came to see what WP had to say about it...and sadly, that was almost nothing, so I've at least added some information to it, but I don't even know where to begin making this thing look halfway decent. A start is better than nothing, though. Tenraixtreme 11:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

The most likely reason this article is so shore is because the PS site is completely in japanese...somebody should really translate it.

I found an english version of the PS site at http://www.microsoft.com/xbox/projectsylpheed/ but I neither know html nor know how to edit in a links section...could someone put in a link to it on the page?

Okay...guess i dont need to know html...but still i dont know how to edit in a new section...

I've added the link as an external link on the bottom of the page, thanks. Don't forget to sign with four tildes in a row when you post guys (the ~ symbol), makes it a lot easier to see who's saying what :D If you want more details on crafting game articles then try this: WP:CVG/GL, the videogame article guidelines. Apart from that, if you want to see what symbols do what etc, hit 'edit this page' on the article itself and just scroll up and down, observing how its been done already in the article, copy any voodoo that seems useful and hit 'back'. I know, it's all overwhelming for a start, but if I can do it I'm damn sure anyone else can :) Thanks for your work. QuagmireDog 22:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I tacked a gameplay section on. It's still a stub, but at least there is something now. - Derek "open_sketchbook" Chappell

Thanks! QuagmireDog 22:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've gone and overhauled the plot and character sections, and amended the gameplay section. I removed all redundant links for VAs (we've got a nice table for those anyway) as well as adding a spoiler warning. At least our rampant spoilers are now organised and marked.

Still pending: Information about the DLC, some elaboration on the points system for the Weapons Arsenal would be nice, and I still have no clue what to do about a source. The source is the game. How do we "cite" it?

Finally, I've gotta clear up the technicalities of what divisions EXACTLY the Squadron is divided into. All eight of them form the White Griffons or 931st Squadron. That's divided into two (???)s called Rhino Flight and Bird Flight, each divided into two (???)s called 1st Flight and 2nd Flight, each of which is made up of two fighters. Can someone fill in the blanks?

Oh, and Wikilinks, would be nice.

Fedùle 06:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Since the overhaul, I've upgraded the article's rating class to "start". Once someone finds some information about the game's development and such (or determines that there's nothing of value to say) then it may be worthy of a B grade. Fedùle 03:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am planning to overhaul the article to conform with Wikipedia's guidelines. There are lots of information out there to make this a good Wiki-article on Project Sylpheed.

What I plan to do is to structure an article around the standard -

• Lead-in
• Gameplay
• Plot and setting
  • Characters
  • Story
• Development
• Reception

That would also mean pruning out a lot of the minute details in the current Plot section. The voice actors will be wroked into the Development or Reception section and the full cast referenced through an external link to IMdb's site. The project's development since its surprise announcement at TGS2006, and the reason why it is on the Xbox360 will be chronicled in Development. Reviews and critiques (good and bad) will be written in Reception. Screenshots for the article should also be possible.

The objective is of course to provide a minimum B-grade clear, concise article which will introduce Sylpheed as a video game to the common reader. Help and comments are appreciated. Jappalang 06:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

  Done for the first edition. Jappalang 21:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Why do so many people seem to think that Microsoft are involved in publishing this game? The Microsoft Game Studios logo does not appear anywhere in game, on any version... Fedùle 05:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Check the press releases by Microsoft. They are in the citations. Jappalang 06:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations on getting this from Start-Class to B! And I'd say it's a very strong B, but there are a couple of things which need doing before you pack this article's bags and send it off to WP:GAC:

• Citations are the main problem here. Where you have them, they're great, reliable and well-formatted, but there are gaps. The Gameplay and Plot sections are the ones which need the most work, but there's the odd unsourced statement here and there throughout the entire article.

    Done I have tried to insert some more citations from the cut scenes from the game. I believe some of the in-game "radio broadcasts" can be used as well for some of the Plot sections, but that might take some more time for me to try to get and implement them in. Jappalang 07:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

  I believe I have added citations to all the statements where there is a possible need for. Please do point out any more if any. Jappalang 15:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Lead needs expansion per WP:LS.

    Done Thank you for the suggestions. Jappalang 07:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hope this helps, Una Laguna^Talk 16:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fairly well-written, broad in coverage, appropriately sourced, fair use images properly justified. One thing you might want to do is replace the reviews table with the {{Scores VG}} template. Good editing, David Fuchs ^(talk) 16:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could this article be nominated for FA? Kariteh (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm not certain. I have very little experience with the FA-process. Perhaps this should be brought up in Wikiproject: Video Games? Jappalang (talk) 08:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've nominated the article for peer review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Project Sylpheed to see what remains to be done. Kariteh (talk) 19:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

The game was released in Australia, but I don't know who was the publisher. The Australian Xbox 360 site says Square Enix, but the US Xbox 360 site says Square Enix too instead of Microsoft Game Studios... Kariteh (talk) 13:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 51#Music credits being added to Designer, the purpose of the Infobox is not for full listing of the staff. The concensus is for mentions of the notable crew. Please stop adding non-notable personel. Jappalang (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am requesting for an assessment of this article against A-class requirements; the aim is also to succor for review on whether this article could be an FAC Jappalang (talk) 01:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

• Comment While the article mostly looks FA material, the only problem I see is this dead link in the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

  Fixed: it was not a dead link (the library proxy redirected it back to the main page), the link now points directly to the ProQuest resource; a ProQuest account is still needed to access the page (or search for the document ID after accessing ProQuest through an authorised library proxy). Jappalang (talk) 01:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, I guess there's nothing left to do but support. GamerPro64 (talk) 02:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I also support A-Class after a rundown. Well done. (promoting to A-Class) --Teancum (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

The reception sections doesn't make a ton of sense at least for the first paragraph. I believe talks about the original sylpheed instead of this game. It says that interest in the genre was thought to be wanning in the 1990's in favor of 3D graphics and " Projecy Sylpheed" (should be Silpheed?) made people wonder if the game's release would rejuvinate the genre. If it isn't an error, it's more of a history section. The reference for that part leads to a dead page also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.43.90 (talk) 02:40, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Project Sylpheed. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080510161532/http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/13846/Project-Sylpheed-Briefing-Engagement/ to http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/13846/Project-Sylpheed-Briefing-Engagement/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070922191143/http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/14002/Project-Sylpheed-Briefing-Weapons/ to http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/14002/Project-Sylpheed-Briefing-Weapons/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.playmagazine.com/index.php?fuseaction=SiteMain.showGamePage&Game_ID=637

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Project Sylpheed. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161537
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3161489
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071003010239/http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1353/Project-Sylpheed/p1/ to http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1353/Project-Sylpheed/p1/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070917212901/http://previews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1655/Project-Sylpheed/p1/ to http://previews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1655/Project-Sylpheed/p1/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)Reply