Talk:Street Fighter Alpha

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Street Fighter Alpha article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: Imagic Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks Merge: Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

[edit] Every game in the series should have it's own page

'nuff said...--RockyMM 21:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• No, I disagree, so not 'nuff said. There's not enough unique information per page to merit new articles for each one. Danny Lilithborne 23:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Well I have to agree they deserve it, while keeping this page for less detailed information. they are all seperate games, not like different versions of the same game a la street fighter 2 Owwmykneecap 01:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I've been hesitant to do this myself because it's hard to write a sentence like "Alpha 2 introduced custom combos" without feeling like I'm writing gamecruft, but I'll give it a shot. Danny Lilithborne 02:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Scratch that, I'm not going to give it a shot, at least not today... I looked the article over in the attempt to split it down and I don't see a reason to do it. It's fine as it is. Danny Lilithborne 02:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• ill get the Shend on it if he wants Owwmykneecap 20:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I regret starting this :( I think that this article is fine as it is right now. The split would result in few rather small articles with little to no info.--RockyMM 17:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

This Article is ok at best a littlethin but for a round up thats ok, not a very encyclopaedic style but im not one of those that f ucks around changing that as it does not bother me. However they are all seperate games and Alpah 3 is Quite different in play style etc and the storyline could do with being laid out, i might start the pages in a few weeks when i have more timeOwwmykneecap 18:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• My two cents: If Super Street Fighter II is distinct enough from Street Fighter II (it isn't really, but that's besides the point) to warrant having a separate article, then so do each Alpha game. Unlike Super, which was basically a graphical enhancement of Street Fighter II, the three Alpha games are completely different from each other that they could be covered individually, with only minor deviations like Alpha 2 Gold and Alpha 3 MAX being covered in their specific articles. However, this article needs a good clean-up before anything else. Jonny2x4 16:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gameplay section

I have not deleted Gameplay section, I have just moved it to a more appropriate place. I have moved it just below Series progression section. Gameplay has nothing to do with series progression throughout the years, so it should be separate section.
Also I have placed Trivia section for SFA2 as subsection of SFA2 section. By looking just by contenst of the article alone, someone might thing that there was a Street Fighter Alpha game named "Trivia".
You should have inspected my edits more carefully. I will revert to my edits now.--RockyMM 22:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry, but you deleted the A2 infobox, and there was no reason for that. The "Trivia" "problem" you mention could have been fixed simply by adding an extra set of equal signs. In any case, I redid the article a bit. I still do not agree that the article should be split. Danny Lilithborne 23:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that your edits made article much better. My mistake was that I saw that there were two infoboxes, so I thought (without carefully looking) that someone duplicated an infobox. There was no third infobox when I edited article. Also, now, when article is like this, there really is no reason for every game to have its own page. I just said that because it is common to have only one infobox per article, but now, when I see this article like this, it's just perfectly OK.--RockyMM 15:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, why do you think that Gameplay section should be a subsection of Series progression rather than a section of its own?--RockyMM 15:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.  :) The problem I'm having with doing these Street Fighter-related articles is that I've been playing SF a long time, and it's difficult to write about it in layman's terms without resorting to cruft, especially with Alpha 3. But I might give it a shot, see if I can hack it. Danny Lilithborne 02:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What about Street Fighter Alpha Anthology?

What do you think? Should it be merged here? Also, that article is not in very good shape right now.--RockyMM 17:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I was just wondering if that would be a good move. In either case the article should be cleaned up, but it could probably fit as a book end to this. I am gong to see if i can create an info box on this page to go with it's section. Hewinsj 17:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

It looks good. I don't think that there is much to say that isn't already covered in this article. I'll propose a move. --RockyMM 10:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge - The way the current article is set up, most of this information is redundant. It could be on it's own if there was more detailed information, but it doesn't seem like there's anything to add that hasn't allready been said. Hewinsj 17:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)