Talk:Accolade, Inc.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Accolade (company))
Featured articleAccolade, Inc. is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 8, 2021.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 15, 2021Good article nomineeListed
April 23, 2021Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 17, 2021Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 17, 2021Peer reviewReviewed
August 7, 2021Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 7, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that because Accolade had focused their success around sports games, the packaging for the science-fiction game Star Control II accidentally included a sticker calling it the "Best Sports Game" of 1992?
Current status: Featured article

Too much focus on "developer"[edit]

Lot of mentions about developing in this article - look through the linked game articles and it seems the developer was someone else. Smells like too much development credit is going to Accolade in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.243.178.205 (talk) 21:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone?[edit]

Is it just me, or does the list of employees present when Infogrames obsorbed Accolade seem a little over the top? Does each person really need a wikilink? Is each person really important enough to justify an entire article? I think I'm probably the only person who watches this article, so I doubt I'll get any response, but I think we should either shorten it or totally delete it. Thoughts? — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to be bold and delete the whole list with the exception of the executives. I don't have any great love for any of them, but they are the ones who are most likely to have articles written for them. Alan Miller, for example, was an influential member of the young video game industry.
The entire list was full of broken links—none of the people had an article on them and it is unlikely that more than 10% would ever have an article written on them. Some appeared to have articles, but they, in fact led to different people. Only 1.5 links led to correct entries, but they really don't need to be linked to from here. No other articles do this. If you disagree please discuss here first. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
re: deleting the incomplete staff list and replacing it with executive staff seems fine: while the staff list was great for nostalgia, it was perhaps excessive (and at what point would it ever be considered comprehensive enough without being unwieldy?)

Accolade (developer)?[edit]

This article has gone through several name changes, but the last one, to "Accolade (developer)", seems inappropriate. While Accolade was a video game developer, they were primarily a publisher. Near the end of their existence, very few of their games were developed internally. Also, being labeled a developer implies that they developed games for other publishers, which they never did. Therefore, I propose that we rename this article to "Accolade (publisher)". Any objections? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha-ha, you truly are the only one with this page in watchlist. To be honest, this is exactly the kind of thing a development task force would be responsible for. Currently there are randomly assigned "(company)" "(game company)" "(game developer)" "(developer)" tags. I would argue developers-only are (game developer); publishers-only are "(game publisher)"; mix of both are "(game company)"; mix with other disciplines/industries are (company). This preserves both precision, unambiguous naming and hierarchy. H3llkn0wz  ▎talk  16:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, my comment was almost two years old. I wouldn't mind "Accolade (game company)", but the current title is just wrong. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 18:26, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I support the move. Unless you propose a move or otherwise put the discussion outside this talk page, I do not think there will much more response. H3llkn0wz  ▎talk  19:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I finally got around to moving it. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 12:41, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Accolade (company). 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Accolade (company)/GA1

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 02:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that Accolade was so well-known for publishing sports games, that the packaging for science fiction game Star Control II accidentally included a sticker calling it the "Best Sports Game" of 1992? Source: "Because Accolade had focused their success around sports games, they accidentally placed a sticker on the box of Star Control II calling it the "Best Sports Game 1992". [1] at 46:00-47:00

Improved to Good Article status by Shooterwalker (talk). Self-nominated at 22:32, 15 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • checkY Article is long enough (13583 characters), is a GA, nominated in time (became GA 15 February, nominated same day), and article is within policy
  • Question? Hook is short enough and interesting. However, the source [2] says that "Accolade put a sticker on all the SCII boxes saying "Best Sports Game of 1993.", not 1992. Shooterwalker please can you clarify whether it should be 1992 or 1993?
  • checkY QPQ exempt, as the user has 4 previous DYK nominations
  • Overall, the article looks fine, but can you please clarify the year for the hook? Joseph2302 (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just noticed that inconsistency now. Yeah, there's some conflict between the sources. If you look at this video interview at 46:15, it has an actual image of the sticker that says 1992. I feel like that makes the video interview just a little more reliable, which is why I went with that source instead of the text article. If we're being accurate, the exact phrasing would be "Best Sports Game 1992", which I tweaked. Let me know if there's anything else we need to figure out. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • All looks good to go now that year is clarified. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:39, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks a lot. Keep me posted if there's anything else I need to do. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]