Talk:Phoenix Dynasty Online

Please do not add lists of spells, skills, or characters to the article, because such lists violate WP:GAMECRUFT. Eik Corell (talk) 10:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

i quot this for you "Sometimes a concise summary is appropriate if it is essential to understanding the game or its significance in the industry." do you even know the game and so you can judge whats is appropriate or not , i appreciate your hard work watching game articles , but sometimes needs more then good knowledge of the rules to judge the content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sa7erPDO (talk • contribs) 17:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, a concise one that helps you understand the game. Your addition violated WP:GAMECRUFT and WP:GAMEGUIDE. As the guideline says, if it helps the reader understand the game, and it's concise... In this case, it does neither. Instead of that list, the gameplay section needs radical restructuring, as it doesn't actually explain the gameplay, but just some concepts within the game. Eik Corell (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

so mentioning the diff classes and their diff weapon + bonus doesnt help understanding the game play , the first question a newbie asks is what each class can do , what is your problem here , you dont even know the game and cuting other peoples work , try at least play it then tell me if setting classes is not essential for game play! i readed the WP:GAMECRUFT and i am not violating noththing , you just judging by ignorance to the matter here, not all the games are the same , play the game then talk.

This article is not for newbies; it's not a guide. It's supposed to be an encyclopedic article on what the game is, its gameplay, and within that aspect, a CONCISE summery of concepts IF they are relevant and play an important part of the gameplay. The article's not a guide on how to play it, just like an article on Amsterdam isn't supposed to be a guide on where to find the best cafes, or where to buy pot. Here's an example: "Extra attack point gained per level" - What does that contribute to the third party reader? It only helps if this was a game guide being read by a player, which it isn't. Next - "Metal restrains Wood"? Again, game guide stuff; The reader has no idea what this means, and it falls outside of the scope of Video game articles. We are dealing with WP:GAMECRUFT and WP:GAMEGUIDE material here. Last example: "got +20% dodge and hiting rates", again, GAMEGUIDE material. The article doesn't need lists. As it stands right now, it has already been deleted for notability issues once before. What this article needs is a brief and concise Gameplay section. When we don't have the basics down yet, going into such meticulous detail is a sure way to sabotage any progress on the article if it is to become a proper encyclopedic entry on a notable subject. You play this game, so my suggestion is this: The gameplay section needs to be created. Right now it really exists in name only. Eik Corell (talk) 08:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright Eric got you , no guid things , i redited it and avoided as i could the guid information , tell me if anything looks out subject so i can change it, peace. Sa7erPDO (talk) 21:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I removed a few of the things you added: "at level 10 you can choose between..." This paragraph addressed the reader directly; you should always avoid using terms like "you", "your", "you're" and so on, and replace them with "the player", "players" and other such words. Also, it was gameguide material. Under the Guild War section I moved some paragraphs together into a big one. The next thing I removed(the districts, 5 towns, etc) was essentially gamecruft. Eik Corell (talk) 22:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)