Forum:Style question: In-universe vs out-of-universe

I've noticed a major inconsistency with articles, especially with additionnal content in MW2. One of the biggest problems I see is that there doesn't seem to be an agreement to write in an in-universe tone. This is most evident in articles that directly copy material from Wikipedia -- while legal, it makes the real-world weapon the focus of the article and the games are secondary. The Flashbang and Stun grenade articles are examples of real-world focus, whereas the Throwing Knife shows an in-universe focus.

A clear example of this is the article on United States of America. The article is directly taken from Wikipedia, with a tiny bit of CoD universe information added at the end. While I haven't been editing CODwiki for long, I generally assume that the video game wikis are not replications of Wikipedia. If readers wanted to find out about the history of the USA, they can go to Wikipedia.

What I am proposing is that all articles should focus first and foremost on the CoD-related aspects. The introduction should solely cover its position and role in the CoD universe. Real-world information should be a summary in its own section, followed by game-specific sections.

Using the above guideline, the USA article would essentially be trimmed down to "The United States of America is a major power in the Call of Duty series, being one of the main belligerents in every COD game. During WWII the United States fought in both the European and Pacific Theatres and, in the 21st century, engaged in a conflict against Russian Ultranationalists". Enter game-specific information and timelines; maybe a list of major characters from the USA, and that'll be it. No ripping from Wikipedia; no bloated article; just the bare CoD facts.

--Scottie theNerd 14:29, December 16, 2009 (UTC)