Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/The Sims/Archive 3

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Sims in Simple English

The simple English Wikiproject is at Simple:User:Hereford/Wikiproject Sims Please join if your active on Simple wikipedia. HereFord 18:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The Sims 3

I will like to move The Sims 3 up to C-Class Article this will be discussed here.HereFord 00:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Mortimer Goth up for deletion

Figured I would give you notice of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mortimer Goth. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I suppose he's been here since the start then? (LadyCakeage (talk) 08:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC))

Newsletter

HereFord 20:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Sims

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Inactive Project Clean Up

WikiProject Video games is looking to clean up both inactive and limited-scope WikiProjects dealing with video games and move these into task forces of WikiProject Video games, as outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup. This message is being posted to this project to first see if this project is currently active, and if there is consensus to move this project into a task force. We ask that if this project is still active, that you determine as a project if this project should remain separate from WikiProject Video games, and let us know your intentions. Please let us know within the month; those projects that do not respond within that time will be assumed to be inactive and will be cleaned up automatically. This is not a mandatory process; we will not attempt to anything to your project if there is no consensus or consensus against moving it. However, we do urge you to consider if your project needs to remain separate from WikiProject Video games. Please let us know if you have any questions on this.Hereford 16:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

If this is moves it will be under Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/The Sims.Hereford 17:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. Unfortunately yes :( Hereford 16:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
2. Yes I would agree to making this a task force, it is not very active and the scope of the topic is not really large enough in my view for a fully independent project at this time. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

   My second choice would be move to Wikipedia:WikiProject Maxis, to increase the scope. Camaron | Chris (talk) 13:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

3. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

   PeterSymonds. You have not given a reason as to why you support the task force. This is a discussion, not a vote. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 17:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

   I explained my reasons a while ago when StewieGriffin! was working with it. It simply had too few contributors to remain a full working taskforce. Discussion seems to have stopped since then, but however unfortunate it is that there are too few contributors, I believe the project can possibly survive if it's integrated with one more active. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

   Just because you explained your reason a while ago does not in any way mean you don't have to explain your reason here. When it comes to discussions in this form, you shall explain your reason, always, without exceptions. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 12:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

4. Support. Coverage of The Sims is not large enough for a WikiProject. However, if accepted, could we make a WikiProject Maxis?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 17:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
5. Reluctant Support. I did think that this project could work, but it seems it would be better looked after and serve more of a purpose as a task force. (Out of curiosity, would you keep my logo?)--23230 ^talk 18:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
6. Very Strong Support. I reckoned when it was created that it was too small a scope, but I got pushed out, and then havent been back since my "incident". Failing a task force, i would go for Wikipedia:WikiProject Maxis, which i was very keen for a while ago. BG7even 19:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

   Now, Wikipedia:WikiProject Maxis I could support! — Supuhstar * § 03:06, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

   Well, as I said, I think it would be better there and then it also gets more scope. I'd be happy to start it as long as my changes, redesigns etc are not deleted again without me having chance to respond (i know its not the place but could the admin not see I was on a Wikibreak?!?!) BG7even 10:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

   Forgive the unsolicited comment, but if the scope is expanded while the number of active members is low, wouldn't it amount to extra work load for an already stretched group of editors? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 13:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC))

   No offence or whatever taken, your comment is completely valid! And it's a very good one. Perhaps, create as a taskforce for Maxis? That should work best I think! Thanks, BG^7even 14:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

   A Maxis task force would certainly work. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC))

Oppose

1. Somewhat Strongly Oppose: I will only agree if we can keep our graphics (such as ) and at least have a subcategorization. — Supuhstar * § 03:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

   Yes, they would all be kept I believe. It will continue to exist but as a task force of a larger more active project where it will be used more. May I ask why you want the images to be kept though? (Purely out of curiosity... i'm just thinking something through...) Thanks, BG7even 10:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Maxis

This seems popular enough... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supuhstar (talk • contribs) at 23:43, 20 October 2008

Support

1. Strong support. This way we can cover Sims, Sim City, and Spore!— Supuhstar * § 23:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
2. I love the idea. We will be able to cover more games. We'll be editing games that people haven't been getting around to editing too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irunongames (talk • contribs) 11:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
3. Strong support. Although I do support the Task Force, I think WikiProject Maxis would be a better idea. That way, we can cover all games of Maxis rather than neglecting their coverage in a WikiProject. Not to mention, I'm the first one to bring up this WikiProject in this Task Force section. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 12:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
   • You are all forgetting one thing: an expansion in scope will just make the project less active. There are not enough editors as it is, and a scope expansion will not help. A task force for Maxis is the best place to go. (And Mythdon: I bought up WP:Maxis months ago ;) ) BG^7even 17:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
     • For all we know that could increace the people who want to help. What if we just give it 1 month and see how it works?Irunongames (talk) 19:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
       • after e/cIt would be easier to start the taskforce as Maxis and move it if the amount of users warrants it. That way its less page moves and renaming: if it fails to take off, its already where it needs to be, otherwise its just more work for the users and admins alike. BG^7even 20:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
         • And you're forgetting one thing too. I did not say I was the first one to bring up WikiProject Maxis. All I said was that I was first one to bring it up in this Task Force section which this section is a subsection of. Understood?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 20:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
           • Ok, ok. No need to get snappy! Please, remain calm and civil. Thanks, BG^7even 20:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
4. Support as second choice - Would be a good idea in covering other areas neglected with the Sims project. It is my second choice however as this would actually cut coverage as well as expand it, SimCity DS and SimCity Societies are not covered by Maxis for example. Ways around it include ignoring the issue and covering these games anyway, or making it Wikipedia:WikiProject Electronic Arts, however this would expand the scope hugely and make the project less focused, but more active. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. While I support it in principle I think what we need here is more members, not a bigger scope. That will only make things more difficult. Task force for Maxis, please. (And Supuhstar: You say you dont want to lose the images: changing to WP:M would call for lots of new ones to be made ;). BG^7even 08:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
   • Ah, well. Mayby I'll submit ideas. I'll probably like ehe maxis one. I just don't want a generic videogame logo! ;) — Supuhstar * § 20:25, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
     • Actually, most of the VG task forces have their own logo. And the new task forces from recent moves kept their old logos. No need to throw out perfectly good free images. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC))
2. Oppose Maxis is defunct now. Hereford 17:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
   • What about a Maxis task force in WP:VGHereford 17:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
   • Defunct???— Supuhstar * § 19:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
   • Maxis isn't defunct. What makes you think that?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 01:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
   • You might as well make it WikiProject Electronic Arts sense Maxis is a subsidiary of EA. BW21.--BlackWatch21 22:33, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Not being a member of this project, I'd like to remain neutral in this discussion (though I am technically in favor of merging with the VG project). I would, however, like to mention a few things to help give an outside perspective.
   A little background- The Video games project's inactive clean up grew from a desire to improve the overall quality of the top-importance articles within its scope. We noticed that there were numerous projects and task forces that essentially disjointed the everyone's efforts. Since many of these were also inactive, it was decided to start merging them into the WP:VG to consolidate resources and efforts so everyone's articles could benefit.
   Every project will always have inactive members. Of the 1000+ VG members in Category:WikiProject Video games members, the talk pages and various subpages see activity from maybe 10–20% of them. Basically, a bigger scope can lead to more members, but that doesn't always equate to more activity.
   Operating as a Wikiproject has it's draw points, but so does operating as a task force. As a task force, all administrative duties would be handled by the VG project. There are already well established processes for peer reviews, assessments, style guidelines, etc. Being your own project will allow you more freedom to create and craft your own such processes. But I personally don't see the need when there are already processes you can use that can suit your needs. That's just my biased opinion though.
   If you guys want to work on the Sims series or even Maxis as a task force, that's great. We can and are happy to help. If you want to do either of those as a project, that's fine too. This is only a suggestion, and don't want to strong arm anyone. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC))

Consensus With Support/Oppose as 1 vote and Strong/Very Strong as 1.5, there are:

5.5 Remove WikiProject Sims

1 Keep WikiProject Sims

5.5 Create WikiProject Maxis

2 Don't Create WikiProject Maxis

With that info...

4.5 Total towards removing WikiProject Sims

3.5 Total towards creating WikiProject Maxis

Which means that WikiProjeect Sims should be removed and WikiProjects Maxis created in its place, therefore encompasing Sim City, MySims, and Spore as well. — Supuhstar * § 18:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

To a admittedly somewhat biased member of WP:VG, it seemed to me that there was overwhelming consensus to support the creation of a task force. And what could it hurt? You could keep your graphics (though your banners would be removed, and in place, your name would appear in ours in the vein of WikiProject Nintendo being moved into our banners; see Talk:Super Mario Galaxy for an example), receive support from the WikiProject, and still maintain your identity only with support from a larger scope above you (see the Sega task force for an example of a project that has been absorbed as a task force). There aren't really too many bad things that could come from collaboration with more contributors; I know for a fact that I would actively contribute to the project if the Sims moved under WP:VG. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 21:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

No that means that more are in favor of removing WP:Sims and making a taskforcein WP:VGHereford 22:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Aye, it does. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 22:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Category replacement

Category:WikiProject Sims participants refers to this task force as a WikiProject yet it is no longer a WikiProject. I feel we should replace the category with Category:The Sims task force participants as this is no longer a WikiProject, and is now a task force. What does everyone else think?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 00:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be a more accurate reflection of the task force, definitely. Should we just update the code in the userboxes? -- Nomader ^(Talk) 05:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

To have them use a new category referring to this task force as a task force. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 18:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, exactly. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 23:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Now done, without even noticing this thread! Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Color scheme for templates

The current color for this task force is:

#ADFF2F

The color above, I wish for it to be the primary color for all templates for The Sims task force as well as additional colors below

colors
#9DFD1F	#ADFE2F	#BDFF3F

How would this work?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 22:07, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

It works fine by me. I'm sorry if I went ahead and did that re-design without anyone in perticular's approval. Thought it worked better with the WP:VG template. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 23:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, I was trying to make a new Sims userbox, but I'm finding that the WikiProject's image stretches the box out far too much if we're going to make it look normal. Any ideas? -- Nomader ^(Talk) 00:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Important: Sims expansions

I think the main focus of this task force should be on The Sims series; the SimCity games can wait. In particular, I'm concerned with the fact that most of the original Sims' expansion packs do not have their own article, save The Sims: Hot Date and The Sims: Livin' Large (the first of which is not linked to from The Sims.

I heavily encourage all editors in the task force to create (or re-create) those articles. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 04:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

And how would this improve Wikipedia?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 01:28, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

It came up in discussion at the main project before I was this project was merged in as a task force here. These were expansion packs with notable coverage; each one was heavily reviewed and their development was extensively covered. If you disagree though, I'm more than happy to not create them and even fold them into the main article. Apologies for getting back to you so late, I had no Internet coverage in the past few days. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 02:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The articles were turned into redirects, if you look at their histories you will notice this. I personally fought for them to remain articles but I was beaten as he was correct, there was not much to add to the article. [1] Jammy (talk) 02:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yet Civilization III: Conquests has its own article? I have to disagree. The articles have tons of coverage... I dunno. How were you "beat"? -- Nomader ^(Talk) 22:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Left over pages from the move

FYI- There are currently discussions taking place on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup/Leftovers and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup that would effect pages related to the scope of your task force. Any input would be appreciated. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC))

I have taken the opportunity to finally deal with all the pages and cats left over from the move. The pages left over under Wikipedia:WikiProject Sims/* I have either moved (if substantial) or deleted under G6 (if found elsewhere or just an odd bit leftover). I have deleted lots of unused cats under Category:WikiProject Sims, and the category itself which has been replaced by Category:WikiProject Video games. I have also created Category:The Sims task force participants as it seemed needed, everything should move over automatically with the userboxes changed. I have also deleted Template:WPSIMS (old right hand navigation bar for project main page) as it was broken and no longer being used, Template:WikiProject Sims (old talk page project tag) has already been deleted. I have left Template:WPSIMSwelcome as it is advertised on the task force project page and still has a potential purpose, though it will need updating and possibly moving. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Also, I did some updates to Template:WPSIMSwelcome, mainly for name usage and old/dead links. It could probably stay where it is as WP:SIMS is still an active and accurate redirect. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC))

Thanks, yes I agree it is okay where it as a name that can be remembered and makes sense. Camaron | Chris (talk) 15:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people. Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip Ikip 02:04, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Something to add to the Goals

We should put detailed information into the The Sims Wiki. They need help too, and we could reduce the clutter. This is not illegal; The command and conquer taskforce puts stuff like that into the EVA Database. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbrittain10 (talk • contribs) 13:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Maxis WikiProject

Because no one has yet, notwithstanding a consensus (scroll) to back it up, I have created the Maxis WikiProject page as a framework for future edits. Soon enough I hope to actually have this WikiProject (the maxis one) up and running. And if not, at least the Sims Task Force more active. —Aiden 05:46, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Question about The Sims expansion packs

This is semi request for all The Sims expansion packs since there is one or two up. Is this correct since The Sims 2 and The Sims 3 expansion packs are covered and the main series should be represented with obvious changes to the games, i.e. pets in The Sims: Unleashed to Downtown in The Sims: Hot Date to Vacation in The Sims: Vacation (On Holiday in other parts of the world like UK and Ireland). Sundogs ^{Wikia UserPage} 00:23, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Expanded

Sense this project is inactive, any objections to expanding it in to a maxis project. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I am currently working on The Sims 3 Good Article review request and The Sims 3: Pets tone of not Wikipedia tone and currently looking at other The Sims titles and see if I can work on those. Since The Sims was Maxis creation, I have no objection of dual brand of Maxis takeover of The Sims Project, HOWEVER in the trend of self promotion, I think we should revisit the voting process with notice on the Task Force users talk page to, at least, make his/hers opinion heard and see what the outcome comes to. This is my professional opinion but I haven't been the model user for this task force since I joined. However, as noted moments ago, I am working towards reviving the task force by my contributions and word of mouth, via Twitter / Google+ / Facebook / Blogger / Tumblr / and Podcasts of The Sims brand that I do, and so please check in around summertime for further information on my progress of recruiting the new members of this task force and Wikipedia as well. This is not an overnight thing but it does take time and effort to do. So please hold off from merging the two unless there are no other active by July 1, 2013 at the latest. Sundogs ^{Wikia UserPage} 19:21, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Standards

As noted on my archived talk page recently, and this is notice to all The Sims Task Force members that Wikia related links are unreliable and untrustworthy to be placed on the article in question since it is fan fiction or fandom of sorts and I to agree with Wikipedia's guidelines to have N.P.O.V. and have them removed. I am going to take this under my wing and look at all The Sims related projects and remove any Wikia related links off the article(s). Also to note, The Sims do apply to My Sims, Sim Animals, and Sim Social / The Sims Online / EA Land are spinoffs to The Sims. However if we logically think, the first use of "Sim" was in Sim City as a N.P.C. so, in my professional opinion, we are technically are allowed to do Sim City and its sequels. This is open for debate but my opinion is that The Sims derived from Sim City, as mentioned in The Sims stories and makers of Sim City, so therefore the scope of The Sims should indeed cover The Sims franchise and Maxis / EA franchise branded games under this title since The Sims are the Best Selling PC Franchise of All Time. Please comment below if you feel otherwise and we can honestly debate whether or not to rebrand this project to a new name (Maxis Project or another Sim related title project. Thanks. Sundogs ^{Wikia UserPage} 19:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The Sims Task Force Rebrand?

Since this has come up before, and due to my disagreeing with this, but, since The Sims Task Force has come down to inactivity as of late. I have been recruiting to other The Sims sites to promote Wikipedia and The Sims Task Force. It has come up that Maxis Project would be best, however, in my professional opinion, we should go to Electronic Arts (EA) Project and or Portal to house more EA related games and the Maxis brand will get a major improvements with EA opposed to Maxis. So, I am notifying everyone and have another concences on this matter. The vote is this, would we re-brand as Electronic Arts Project or Portal to better serve The Sims branded franchise and also getting the Maxis and Electronic Arts franchise brands together to coheavesive unit. This includes the following:

1. The Sims (franchise)
2. SimCity (franchise)
3. All games made by Maxis company (or Maxis Branded Games)
4. All Electronic Arts Games (or EA Games) and its respective games (past to current game releases and currently to future development of games), company (divisions, licenses, and everything under the EA umbrella).

With this being a EA project, we could expand the scope ten fold to have the Maxis and EA Games under one roof and have broader scoop within EA/Maxis umbrella. Please leave comments, concerns, feedback, and vote on this issue. Sundogs ^{talk page sandbox} 02:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

EA as a task force may be too broad. I would suggest Maxis games as a suitable expansion. --Izno (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

• I vote to restrain scope to games within Sims canon. More explicitly, that is SimCity (1989), SimCity 2000, SimCity 3000, SimCity 4, SimCity Societies, SimCity (2013), The Sims, The Sims Online, The Sims 2, The Sims 3, and The Sims Social. This should also include expansion packs, stuff packs, GPL licensed derivatives, console versions, and other editions of these games. — Supuhstar * — 14:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

• I mostly agree with Suphstar, the scope should be limited to Sim/Maxis (pretty much the same thing) games. An EA taskforce might be warranted, but we shouldn't turn this into one. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Tough Supuhstar's list is missing a few Sim games such as SimCity 5 and SimCopter. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

• EA makes a lot of games. This includes FPS/TPS games, Real-Time Strategy games, and Simulation games, which we currently focus on. An EA taskforce would be too broad of a taskforce, and we would technically turn into a subproject. I agree with Supahstar's suggestion. Cbrittain10 (talk|contribs) 00:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

• Seems that we have an agreement to make this a Maxis/Sim taskforce. Probably better to call it "Maxis", "Sim" is sometimes used as a generic abbreviation of "Simulation", rather then to refer to the Sim seres specifically. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:18, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, whomever it was started the Maxis Project should be able to start the process. As noted above, this vote is concluded and all in favor of Maxis Project. Sundogs ^{talk page sandbox} 22:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Oppose wikiproject. A task force is one thing, but why a wikiproject? It falls ithin WP:VG's scope 100%.Lucia Black (talk) 22:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

• It is a Task Force than a WikiProject but it was my error to call it WikiProject but it is actually a Task Force and you (Lucia Black) after the poll has closed so your vote does not count as within the voting since I have called it in favor of Maxis Task Force. Sundogs ^{talk page sandbox} 22:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Where is this poll?Lucia Black (talk) 00:16, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

To be direct here as serious without being mean, this section is the poll. Sundogs ^{talk page sandbox} 05:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

You serious? The poll is this section? With only one person supporting for a "Maxis" wikiproject? Its an on going discussion, not a pooll. You don't get to decide when it ends. Overall why cover all Maxis? What will change?Lucia Black (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

As noted, it will be a task force and pretty much everyone in The Sims Task Force has voted. This is a discussion poll not you are alluding to a poll. I must ask you to re-read this sections comments after my initial post to get the jest of the mostly positive view for Maxis Task Force. For you, who probably wont read this section in its full version, here is a cliff notes for you. The Scope of Maxis is broaden to cover Maxis games, i.e. The Sims - The Sims 2 - The Sims 3 - The Sims 4 - Sim City - The Sims On-line - The Sims Social - and everything that Maxis has or had developed into one area where as The Sims Task Force only dealt with The Sims - The Sims 2 - The Sims 3 - The Sims 4 - The Sims On-Line - The Sims Social - My Sims - Expansion Packs - Stuff Packs - The Sims Medieval only. Please make sure you read everything on the main page and the archives BEFORE coming to a conclusion. And lastly, there has been sufficient amount of time lapsed for everyone to vote on EA Task Force or Maxis Task Force. So I am officially declaring that the discussion is over and with mostly of 20+ members of this task force, Maxis Task Force is set to begin. Sundogs ^{talk page sandbox} 12:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

You don't get to decide when to close a discussion. Especially when hardly any comments were made. You have 14 members, which 4 only responded. And of those 4, 2 of them responded to a Maxis project/taskforce, the other said it should only be about sims. Also, how is anyone going to find this? But fine. Do whatever u want.Lucia Black (talk) 17:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Maxis and the Sim series are pretty much the same thing, that point about Maxis vs Sim seres is spiting hairs. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Wait, it's the Maxis Task Force now? Darn it. Oh well, the things you miss when you take hiatuses. Zach Vega (talk to me) 19:38, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion: Main articles for each Sims title should include info about the status same-sex relationships

Since some of the Sims titles (mostly or exclusively the console releases) don't include options for same-sex relationships, should we try to elaborate upon this somewhere in their respective articles? I don't have a full list of titles that have removed same-sex relationship options, but from personal experience I know of the following:

• The Sims: Bustin' Out (GBA) - All NPCs are heterosexual toward both male and female player characters.
• The Urbz: Sims in the City (GBA and DS) - Likewise, all NPCs are heterosexual.
• The Sims 2 and The Sims 2: Pets (both GBA and DS)
• The Sims 3 (DS) - Even though The Sims 3 played more like the PC version, not even custom Sims of the same sex created by the player could romance each other.

The console versions of these same titles - including those on GameCube - all allowed same-sex romance. My best guess is that Maxis / EA feared the ESRB would slap the handheld versions of the game with a Teen rating if they featured any same-sex romantic interaction, even though none of these games featured anything sexually suggestive in the first place. (i.e. I don't believe any of them featured the option to "WooHoo") I'm not sure why the ESRB would think even the mere mention of homosexuality was sexually suggestive, though. How is it any different from the game clearly indicating that a character is heterosexual? They're equally exclusive forms of sexual orientation. Does homosexuality conjure up a more vivid images, or something?

At any rate, it would be nice to know which titles in specific suffer from this type of censorship. Could we compile a full list and work these details into their respective articles somehow? 98.86.105.99 (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Task force cleanup

I've proposed a comprehensive cleanup of WP:VG's inactive task forces (which would include marking this TF as inactive and historical, and redirecting all task force talk pages, including this one), if you'll take a look czar ♔ 02:11, 6 May 2014 (UTC)