Jump to content

Talk:Twitch Plays Pokémon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My draft

[edit]

Before I saw this article I wrote a draft (Draft:Twitch Plays Pokemon). I'll look at merging it in to here later. Samwalton9 (talk) 15:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't actually have time to do this at the moment; if someone else wants to, feel free. Samwalton9 (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on Merging it now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harraseda (talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]

I don't have time to look for one now, but I can say that for an NFCC image, a picture of the stream while they were stuck in the Rocket base (with all the one-way panels) is perfect for this, as we can document the fact that the game was stuck there for a day due to the randomness (from the ars tech article [1] explains that the democracy mode was added due to that point. --MASEM (t) 19:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this needs an image. Make sure that the player commands are visible, though. Tezero (talk) 21:28, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's critical to show how this looked to the end user. --MASEM (t) 21:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Video

[edit]

There really needs to be some kind of video footage of the stream. The screenshot is nice, but it doesn't show the chaos and the sheer number of commands being sent every second. A 30-60 second video would make it much clearer. CodeCat (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if it is needed. Saying that commands were given at a rate of X per minute would give the reader an idea of how fast that screen was scrolling. One might be able appreciate it better but I don't think we can justify using video for that purpose. --MASEM (t) 21:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agree I agree to CodeCat. A video footage or a 30-sec GIF would be nice to demonstrate how chaotic it is.  [ Derek Leung | LM ] 22:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and made a 20 sec-ish gif around the rocket base, that should be good to show the mess going on. --MASEM (t) 20:44, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Except that this animation is 6.5MB. Per WP:IUP/ANIM, animated gifs "should be used sparingly; a static image with a link to the animation is preferred unless the animation has a very small file size" - a huge video gif is of little use to a user on a slow connection, and zero use to someone reading a printout.
It looks like the original screenshot was deleted under fair use when it stopped being used here - I've taken another arbitrary one to replace it. --McGeddon (talk) 10:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't have to be a GIF. A proper video, with sound included, is probably better. CodeCat (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The sound is absolutely not needed and that would reduce the non-free taking. It can still be a video but w/o sound. --MASEM (t) 17:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There was a GIF on here the other day (yesterday?) when I was on, but it's gone now and nobody's saying anything in the history. Did that violate Fair Use somehow? Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 18:41, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The concern as noted, was that it was too big, file size-wise. It should have been shorter, or at least better-optimized. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay. We definitely need some kind of video per CodeCat's first suggestion, tho, even if it's really short. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 19:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Found a nice, tight (280k) GIF that is sufficient to show the chaos going on. --MASEM (t) 19:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually under 80k as a thumbnail, so the thumbnail size could be increased a bit if we thought it needed it. Good work! --McGeddon (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one compared it to XKCD comic Time yet?

[edit]
  • Nobody knows what will happen
  • New "religions" start immediately (may be because of the first item)
  • It may take ages
  • It went viral within days

Joepnl (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I'm aware of and we'll need other sources to make the connection (eg even finding one for infinite monkey theorem took a couple days). --MASEM (t) 21:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Viewership #s

[edit]

Please don't update the viewership or player numbers based on the stats reported at Twitch, as with the numbers still changing those numbers are unreliable. It is better to cite a fixed source (eg like this CNN article [2] that gives the number about 10.6 m as of today) that we update. Ideally when the experiment is over, we'll have a total view count we can report from some source. --MASEM (t) 23:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The number of total viewers is never going to go down, is it? I'd consider Twitch to be a reliable source for it, because we can always update the numbers as they rise. CodeCat (talk) 23:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Twitch would be a primary source. ViperSnake151  Talk  04:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Does it matter if it's reliable enough for Wikipedia's purposes? CodeCat (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently the primary/secondary distinction is incredibly mind-bogglingly super-important. I was once told that in editing the article about a poem, I was not allowed to use the poem itself as a source. ~ CZeke (talk) 03:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A few primary sources are fine, but the majority need to be secondary.Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 18:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The idea with being careful on viewership numbers is that we want secondary sources to point out how big the numbers - during the event - were, as to show this is "important". So while we may only be able to source, say, 10M viewers on day 4-5 (like from the CNN or BBC articles) that's sufficient for that point. We can then, at the end of the event site the viewership number Twitch has (if not provided by other sources). What is a waste of time is daily-updating the number since we know it's going to keep going up until the event is completed, unless its a new viewer country from a secondary source. --MASEM (t) 03:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infinite Monkeys

[edit]

"The game has been an example of infinite monkey theorem, that effectively random input to a game still ultimately comes out with forward progress in the game"

I'm pretty sure this game is nothing like the infinite monkey theorem: The input is not entirely random (or quite frankly, even close to random). Its an analogy I see used in many of the commentaries, but they are not exactly experts on the Infinite Monkey Theorem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StarDolph (talk • contribs) 02:06, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been mentioned in associate with that, and while it is not exactly the infinite monkey analogy (since input is not random) it is a related concept. We can reword to say "compared with" though to make it not seem like a true example. --MASEM (t) 02:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It has been changed to Contrasted, which I find acceptable StarDolph (talk) 00:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What about: An Infinite Number Of Monkeys Typing On a Single Typewriter? xnamkcor (talk) 18:28, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That might be more comparable to what it is, but we can't mention that as it is original research. --MASEM (t) 18:31, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Everything about something new is Original Research. I had no plans on including it in the article. This is an encyclopedia, not an English Essay. xnamkcor (talk) 23:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Important Pokemon

[edit]

Shouldn't Pidgeot, Drowzee, and Dux the Farfetch'd be mentioned since they're been on the journey the longest? Mrmoustache14 (talk) 03:15, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be less about the specifics of the game and the larger attention it has gotten. The fact those two released pokemon have created memes is notable; the ones still involved in the game are not. --MASEM (t) 03:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Pidgeot has become a meme where they refer to it as "bird jesus" since its about 20 levels higher than the rest of the team and wins most of the battles. Drowzee has also been called the keeper of the helix fossil. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We need sources to report on these memes. The Helix Fossil and Jay Leno stuff has been reported in the existing reports on the game, but while I'm aware about things like Bird Jesus from following the general internet trends, we'd need other sources to point those out. --MASEM (t) 17:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I found a credible source for it... I guess you can undo my addition if the source isn't good. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 17:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We're not a source of indiscriminate information. I added the Jesus Bird stuff to the section on memes. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Might I suggest trying to group all the meme aspects into the reception section in one paragraph (including the bits presently in the first section?) You should still mention there about accidentally releasing some of the pokemon, and the over-use of otherwise-useless inventory items there, but come to the specifics in the memes section in the reception. --MASEM (t) 21:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I kept an allusion to the Helix Fossil thing there because it was the most cited example of that particular issue (they didn't just go into the inventory a lot, they had a fixation with that one item). I also kept Abby/Jay Leno up there as an inferred reference to another oddity; the nonsensical nicknames (I'm quite surprised they even managed to get "DUX" correctly) ViperSnake151  Talk  22:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about how Flareon is treated as a villain and The Keeper (Drowzee) ? They've been mentioned in memes more than Abby and Jay Leno were. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 05:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From a standpoint of an encyclopedia, we aren't a fan guide, we have to report on what secondary reliable sources talk about, and that's the larger thing of this being an interesting social experiment and less about some runthrough of Pokemon. --MASEM (t) 05:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is Dorkly credible? http://www.dorkly.com/article/59332/there-are-thousands-of-people-trying-to-play-the-same-game-of-pokemon
Also I thought in most articles on Wikipedia, a mentioning of the cast/characters was important. I'm not saying we need go into any sort of depth on them, but if the sources exist, wouldn't a cast/characters list (like ones in movie and video game articles) help show the extent of how big this has gotten? Mrmoustache14 (talk) 05:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If this was a game article (say, the actual game of "Pokemon Red", we'd probably mention the characters involved as part of the plot. Here , this is a social event, and it not necessary to understand all the pokemon collected to understand the event. Moreso, there's a problem in that much of this is crowd-driven; while that is what makes the event notable, the mass of details coming from the crowd are not. Hence why only briefly touching on the memes and more on the larger impact. --MASEM (t) 05:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In a way, I feel the memes ARE the larger impact. Without the memes, this wouldn't have gotten nearly as much attention. In the chat itself (on the actual Twtich game) everyone is constantly talking about The Helix Fossil, Bird Jesus, and The Keeper, and various other memes that actually make people emotionally invested. Cheezeburger, Reddit, YouTube, and everywhere similar seems to be focusing on what the fan's have turned it into almost more than the social experiment itself. The Pokemon in a way have become characters playing out a story making it one of most remarkable fan-fictions since its controlled by thousands of people trying to play one game. I just think a little mention of what the fans have turned those Pokemon into (in depth characters with specific personalities and its own story) is notable on the basis that it shows how far human creativity can go. They could have just played Twitch Plays Pokemon and focus on beating it, but instead thousands of people decided to give it more depth.Mrmoustache14 (talk) 05:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Understand that we're looking at the impact that the fact that the stream got such an impact on social media for this. Yes, there were tons of memes, reddit threads, etc. etc.. That's just a sign of popularity. It's the attention that popularity got from more traditional and reliable sources that makes up the reception of this article and why we can have it. If it was just a 80,000-player MMO that got no media attention but all the reddit/youtube/Twitch views, we likely wouldn't have this article. It was the attention in sources like CNN and other major newspapers that make this notable. --MASEM (t) 06:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

XKCD

[edit]

And now XKCD has made a webcomic that references the experiment. Its rollover is hilarious though. [3] GamerPro64 14:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually about to add it but surprised he changed he licensing terms to CC-BY-NC (not free license compatible). --MASEM (t) 14:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He's always licensed his stuff as non-free. It's only the rare comic, like the [citation needed] comic, that he has released under CC by SA. --Izno (talk) 16:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, I thought it was the other way around. (Mind you, he's the type of person one can probably approach to ask to CC-BY it for us, but I don't think it's super critical to include. --MASEM (t) 17:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly with the amount of media attention this has gotten from places like CNN, XKCD is faaaaaar back in the list of things that should be on this page. To be honest I'd wager TPP is far more popular than XKCD ever was even at its highest.76.98.53.123 (talk) 22:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would be rather surprised by that. XKCD is probably one of the best known webcomics out there. CodeCat (talk) 01:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
XKCD did something remotely similar (see a few paragraphs up), AND is commenting on this as well. That is definitely more interesting than the fact that some bored editor at CNN picks up a topic from reddit to fill his 2 minutes. CNN is not known for having in-depth knowledge about scientific things, XKCD is a comic and much more reliable at the same time.Joepnl (talk) 02:59, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This argument wouldn't fly at WP:RS. The XKCD creator is by no means an established expert in any field outside of knowing how to write geek-ery webcomics. CNN's article is more an appropriate RS for this. But we also have people from Polygon and Ars Technica and other tech-savvy sites that know exactly the importance of this event and that's what we're building on. The only thing interesting is that if we could have gotten the XKCD comic as a free image it would have been interesting to add to this. --MASEM (t) 03:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Could we maybe get something from the "Explain XKCD" page about this? There's plenty of well-explained stuff on that, like the whole Airplane on the Treadmill issue. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 18:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article Deletion

[edit]

Really, this website is hardly "Know Your Meme", this is purely a flash-in-the-pan attention grabber that will inevitable slowly fizzle away into obscurity in a few months, is this really the type of information we need polluting up wikipedia? Keep this sort of stuff to the niche websites that cater to the internet subcultre in all it's transitory glory. 109.151.20.9 (talk) 19:47, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So all the news coverage this received, and the many sources commenting that this is a groundbreaking new thing and hence notable... doesn't exist? CodeCat (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, notability is not temporary. NFLisAwesome (ZappaOMati's alternate account) 20:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that a deletion request would be successful just due to several factors. However, a Merge request to either the Red/Blue article or the Twitch article might be more successful, though I think anything action within a month after the stream ends will fail. --Super Goku V (talk) 20:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Studies

[edit]

This seems like the type of thing that mathematicians and scientists would take an interest in to study probability and human psychology. Does anyone know if any scientists or mathematicians are doing some kind of study on this and have reliable sources for it? 176.254.130.133 (talk) 21:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would not be surprised if we get some after the fact but only 9 days in , I doubt there's any practical result yet. --MASEM (t) 21:38, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Potential references to use

[edit]

Parentheticals

[edit]

From my talk page:

So why did you just remove a whole bunch of content only because it was inside brackets? ViperSnake151  Talk  05:37, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: I removed it for two reasons:

  1. If it's inside parentheticals, its importance is clearly in question, regardless of its usefulness. People add parentheticals because either they know the information is of questionable pertinence to the topic or because they don't know whether it is. Either way, a parenthetical is not a positive assertion that the information is important. Either we should come out and actually state the information inside the parentheses as part of the paragraph proper, or we should remove it.
  2. Keeping #1 in mind, much of the information inside the parentheticals currently fails WP:VGSCOPE. Most of it is overly specific or otherwise unnecessary to the topic at hand.

--Izno (talk) 13:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed them for an entirely different reason; it was fancruft. Using Wikipedia to encourage Helix worship is ridiculously dumb. --216.165.254.97 (talk) 08:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vipersnake reverted my edits without explanation. I rather not start an edit war. What's the best course of action?--207.233.31.37 (talk) 18:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the memes are a bit important to mention; the nicknames are, mainly because it also shows that the erratic control scheme also gave their Pokemon erratic nicknames. I also did have to point out that the Tetris one was controlled using the TPP inputs, as this is an example of meta humor. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"the nicknames are, mainly because it also shows that the erratic control scheme also gave their Pokemon erratic nicknames" This is WP:OR. If you don't have a citation for it, then the information needs to go. And if it can be cited, the information needs to be made part of the article proper. I will re-remove the information unless the situation improves. You now have two editors contesting the content.

"Tetris one was controlled using the TPP inputs, as this is an example of meta humor" Needs more citation, less WP:OR.

Fundamentally, not only is it trivial, but the reason it seems to be in the article is original research. We need to stick to the facts as commented on by reliable sources. --Izno (talk) 02:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article needs more citations. Many parts of the article are just editors reporting on the stream, thus it contitutes WP:OR. Permafrost46 (talk) 14:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No it's reported from articles. It's these other editors who are doing that in violation. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not everything is reported from articles. For instance I have flagged a passage that says "After the new [democracy] system was panned..." because I could not find anything in inline citations that supported the claim that the new system was "panned". Permafrost46 (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh now I see the problem. I think I actually forgot to put the ref there (I used the ref that mentioned that, but forgot to put an instance of it there too). It's fixed now. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Which reference do you think fixed it? I can't see that either of the ones you added this afternoon uses the word "panned", or says anything like it. Both of them frame the "start9" spamming as a response to the imposition of the anarchy/democracy system, rather than a protest against the previous, basic voting system. (You can and should put references in the middle of paragraphs if it makes it clearer which reference is being used for which statement.) --McGeddon (talk) 20:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question, why did you tag it instead of just fixing it? ViperSnake151  Talk  22:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because the editor who twice re-added "panned" was claiming that the sourcing problems were "fixed now", and I didn't have the time to read all four sources and judge whether it was a fair summary. Seemed better to continue the talk page discussion than blunder in and try to rewrite it after only having skimmed the sources. Are you saying it isn't fixed after all? --McGeddon (talk) 08:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the names have been re-added to the article. I still contest this on the grounds that it is extraneous/trivial/fancruft. Just to verify, though, is Kotaku (the source used) considered a reliable source? I'm not trying to belittle the point, but I was under the impression that it was a tabloid/gossip blog. Either way, this will be my final message concerning this issue. --216.165.254.97 (talk) 05:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to invite WP:VG to give feedback on this issue, as I still have the same concerns.

As for Kotaku, it's on the reliable sources list at WP:VG with a caution against using it for certain types of information. --Izno (talk) 14:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did some rewriting as to remove unnecessary parenthetical but keeping the appropriate information. We should be approaching this article not as a video game but as almost like the results of a sports game, that the actual specifics of what happened in the Pokemon game is less important than the specifics of how the chat/game interaction when. Where we have to discuss the specifics of Pokemon, which is specifically discussing a few memes that came from it, then a brief intro is appropriate and I moved those into the reception section about the memes that came out of this. --MASEM (t) 15:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Social experiment"

[edit]

I don't want to end up in an edit war, so I was wondering if the community could reach consensus on mentioning in the intro that "Twitch Plays Pokemon is a social experiment." Do you believe this is pertinent or no? Thanks, Bananasoldier (talk) 07:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I remember reading that the creator said they put it up just to see what would happen? So that would make it an experiment of some sort. CodeCat (talk) 13:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite sure it was intended as a "social" experiment. I believe this term was coined later by the community and not the stream creator. Permafrost46 (talk) 13:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The term should not be used as the lead sentence but is a term attributed to this project after the fact and should be mentioned in terms of its reception. --MASEM (t) 14:37, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What about "It was created as an experiment to test the viability of this format, the way people interact with the input system and the way they interact socially with each other"? --http://www.twitch.tv/twitchplayspokemon Bananasoldier (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Missed that completely! Permafrost46 (talk) 15:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would still think that it is better to leave out "social experiment" from the first lede sentence, but it can be mentioned later in the lead; it might not have started out as much of a social experiment at the onset, but certainly has evolved to one now. --MASEM (t) 16:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC) pun not intended[reply]
Do we know if that description ("It was created as an experiment to test the viability of this format...") was there from the onset? The stream creator also added details about the democracy mode later on. Permafrost46 (talk) 19:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think we need to be clear that it was a technical demostration to start, and then has been called a social experiment with the size of players growing. --MASEM (t) 06:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And therefore remove "social experiment" from the lead. I think it is the best course of action. Permafrost46 (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The cited Kotaku article and the "seventh gym"

[edit]

The cited Kotaku article states that the Twitch community is still searching for the Secret Key in order to face Blaine, which is the seventh gym, but the corresponding Wikipedia section says they've already defeated it for some reason. 172.9.77.235 (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it sounds like they made it past the 8th now, so we just need a new ref to update it. ViperSnake151  Talk  22:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As of February 28

[edit]

The stream defeated the Elite Four. Lance's Dragonite was taken down by the team's Venomoth. This needs to be added ASAP. --Matt723star (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the chat has already nicknamed the Venomoth "Dragonslayer". --Matt723star (talk) 21:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We're not writing this article to track the progress of the game, though we'll likely note when they are fully completed as taking X days. --MASEM (t) 21:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quick update

[edit]

They finished this thing about half an hour ago. Just sayin' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.55.220 (talk) 09:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Number of concurrent players

[edit]

It could be noted, that the amount of players, who were actually participating, was never displayed next to the stream. In order to find out how many were playing, you had to either connect to the chat via IRC, or look it up in the API [4]. However, since the Description/FAQ stated that the controlling chat moved from a "production" to an "event" server, I'm unsure whether the API method yields a correct result.

Furthermore I'm not sure whether the chat displayed next to the stream (on the website) was also the controlling chat on the event server, or in fact still the production server. --185.23.224.18 (talk) 12:36, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am pretty sure they were going by the number of people that Twitch shows watching the stream at the same time (which may mean they were not all "players") at the time. --MASEM (t) 14:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Future

[edit]

Given that it sounds like another game will be starting tomorrow, I think it is important to stress that this article should be less about the specifics of the game that is being being played and more on the overall phenomena and things that fall out from it. This will apply to the second (and any subsequent) games that occur. --MASEM (t) 17:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A section for the Notable pokemon used?

[edit]

I feel that the article needs a section for the pokemon in the final party, and how they got there. I bet everyone wants to know how we got zapdos, and how Omanyte (helix god) got into the party. Probably not the highest priority, but the more info, the better, I say! 75.71.70.14 (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No - we're not writing about the details of the pokemon game played - save for how that influenced the meme nature (eg bird jesus and helix fossil). This is particularly true if this is going to be a continuing thing with other Pokemon games. --MASEM (t) 19:53, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

another source

[edit]

BBC article - http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26417482. Might be good to add some description of what "democracy" mode actually does. Chris857 (talk) 16:16, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

[edit]

Okay, I had used DMY dates mainly because the "project" has ties (i.e. the author is from) to Australia, but would it matter if we used MDY instead, since it's not really "tied" to a particular country? ViperSnake151  Talk  02:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at WP:RETAIN, I think DMY is fine enough. ZappaOMati 03:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Italics?

[edit]

Shouldn’t “Pokémon”, as the title of a game, be italicized in the title of the stream? Shouldn’t we use “Twitch Plays Pokémon”? I’m pretty sure that’s consistent with our MOS and with the practice in similar titles-within-titles throughout Wikipedia, so I’ll just make that fix. —173.199.215.5 (talk) 05:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had italicized the whole thing at first because I viewed it as a title, but then someone changed it. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The full name of the channel shouldn't be italized; it's comparable to a name like Game Grumps or the like. But we should present it as "Twitch Plays Pokémon" since the game is still italizied. I'll go ahead and fix that with DISPLAYTITLE. --MASEM (t) 16:13, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Game Grumps is actually italicised, and a skim of Category:YouTube series suggests that all such media are. MOS:ITALIC leaves it as case-by-case, but this project seems as if it falls somewhere between "television series", "computer game" and "named exhibition", all of which by themselves would be italicised, and is not (now that it's started on a different game) an "individual episode" which would merit quotemarks instead of italics. --McGeddon (talk) 11:24, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Arguably, there's the channel name, and the show name. Game Grumps is hard because it is used for both. (alternatively "Steam Train is a series of videos on the Game Grumps channel..." is better). Here it is the same situation - name of show and channel, so could be either, but I think it looks better with the title unitalicized but with Pokemon marked as such. --MASEM (t) 14:53, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firered

[edit]

There is a countdown on the twitch stream itself couting down to Pokémon firered. Is that a valid Source – It probably is because it is a primary source where everything else bases their news stories, but I just wanted to check first before I added it--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 09:35, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Currently on Black 2

[edit]

Can someone please add that they are on Black 2? (They started 19 minutes ago) Thanks 107.130.160.242 (talk) 04:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kasparov vs. the World

[edit]
For the discussion on Kasparov versus the World talk page please see Talk:Kasparov versus the World#Twitch Plays Pokemon

A while ago, I added TPP to the See also section in KvtW. It was reverted quickly, and when I brought it up on the talk page, a strong consensus formed that the two articles were not sufficiently related. Thus, I removed KvtW from the See also section here for symmetry, but that edit too was reverted. What does everyone think? Tezero (talk) 19:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the consensus is there, I think it should be removed also. SilentDan (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I think both articles should link to each other, but the community overall does not. This is just about consistency. Tezero (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, I was the person who originally added KvtW to the See also section. I think it should be included on TPP, but not the inverse; people reading about TPP are interested in the social phenomenon while people reading about KvtW are interested in the actual game (as you can tell by the article's layout). Thus, readers of TPP would likely be interested in KvtW, but readers of KvtW would not likely be interested in TPP. I think it's a good, interesting addition. Will wait a couple days before reverting to see if anyone has input. 216.14.144.147 (talk) 09:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dorkly?

[edit]

This was mentioned up above, but no one seems to have said anything about it, so worth bringing up again: How reliable is Dorkly? There's nothing about it on WP:VG/RS, and it seems to be good, but I'd like to make sure. We've got http://www.dorkly.com/post/59332/there-are-thousands-of-people-trying-to-play-the-same-game-of-pokemon (the one from above), which has assorted updates but was originally written two days into the stream, and http://www.dorkly.com/post/59505/the-majesty-of-twitch-plays-pokemon, which is a timeline of the whole thing. They would both be valuable sources, but that's dependent upon their reliability. Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 02:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dorkly is a humor site, sort of in the vein of Cracked.com. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources:

[edit]

--Coin945 (talk) 23:55, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update

[edit]

Would it be possible to create a separate section detailing the fan community and what viral works and proceedings spawned from the stream, as it was a large part of what made the phenomenon so entertaining and involved? Merrinote (talk) 06:16, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If there are reliable sources that document it, sure. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 06:48, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Twitch Plays Pokémon. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Twitch Plays Pokémon. 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:

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) 03:26, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Twitch_Plays_Pokémon&oldid=1211087183"