Forum:Promotional crossover content

Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Promotional crossover content

Hello, friends!

I'm thinking about adding some articles on Fallout-related promotional content available for different games (and not only games). To be more specific, I mean:

• Pip-Boy in Team Fortress 2 (Fallout: New Vegas promotional content)
• Fallout Pack for Brink (Fallout: New Vegas promotional content)
• Fallout 3-related avatar items on XBox LIVE

So, I have a few questions to you:

• Do we really need such articles here? The content is definitely Fallout-related but it's not from any Fallout game.
• Do we need separate articles for each item/pack or should we make an overview article only?
• How should these articles be categorized? Of course they should go to Promotion and publishing but shouldn't we create some additional categories? How these categories should be named?

Thank you. veryblackraven 23:28, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

The content criteria only states that the content has to be Fallout related, it does not state that it has to appear in any Fallout game. Of course, any such additions to this wiki would require a non-canon tag. As for the rest, that is open for discussion. 23:57, October 23, 2011 (UTC)

So, a new source template is needed. Is it better no make a template for promotional content, something like {{Promo}}, or should it be something more general like {{Notcanon}}? veryblackraven 07:43, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with ghost on this. It is Fallout related, we just need to clarify that it is not canon and it should be fine.--Kingclyde 07:37, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

And what is the proper naming? Is Promotional crossove content fine? veryblackraven 07:41, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it needs a separate "source" tag. Fallout 3 promotional items doesn't have a source tag, so an article titled, eg. Fallout crossover videogame content wouldn't need it either. _Tagaziel ^(call!) 08:39, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Tag. Sourceboxes are used to mark in-universe content as non-canon if needed; since promo items are real-life items (i.e. not in-universe), they don't need a source tag. -- Porter21 _(talk) 11:31, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I'm with Tag and Porter on this one, it's fallout related, but not in universe, so it's not a part of the games, so it's automatically not cannon, so there is really no need ot mark it...unless of course it was a comic or somthing, but thats a different subject. ---bleep196- 18:45, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ After the following comments and observations, I would have to agree and change my mind on the need for a source template. 20:12, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

So, this is what we have now:

• Pip-Boy (Team Fortress 2)
• Fallout Pack (Brink)
• Fallout 3 avatar items (Xbox LIVE)

Do you have any comments? veryblackraven 11:25, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. As we keep background brief without going into much detail and have the link at the bottom, we should be good. --Kastera ^(talk) 13:01, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Per all, perhaps they may need a template to show it refers to real life content but beyond that they're fine. - Crazy Sam10 ^{Talk Poll} 13:58, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

So, this template should be a part of {{Games}} template. veryblackraven 14:05, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with everything that has been established so far. -- 21:57, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

But what about Fallout: Nuka Break series? It is, as well Fallout related. 94.253.172.224 14:00, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

We discussed Nuka Break some time ago. It's completely fan-made and therefore contradicts the content policy. veryblackraven 14:05, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

The big difference between Nuka Break and these promotional items, is that these items would have been released under some sort of license by Bethesda. So one would assume they would have had some sort of creative control over the content. 20:12, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Well, do these really need articles? I like the idea of a new template, but we should just put it in the behind the scenes section with the template tag above the note. That's what I personally think. TrailerParkApe ^TPA 22:42, October 24, 2011 (UTC)