Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 170

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 165←Archive 168Archive 169Archive 170Archive 171Archive 172→Archive 175

Fear & Hunger

This discussion could use some input. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:29, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Console and Handheld separation in Video game series templates

Hello! So User:TheJoebro64 referred me to an older discussion on this topic of separating series titles by console and handheld releases after they reverted my edits on the Donkey Kong series template. The consensus reached seemed to be that it wasn't a major issue and to go about it from series to series based on what seems most convenient. I personally believe that separating games by console and handheld is very arbitrary and becoming more and more outdated in concept. The Nintendo Switch is an obvious contemporary example of how certain games don't neatly fit into either, but there have also always been games that have had simultaneous releases on console and handheld; for example, Dr. Mario released on both the NES and the Game Boy on the exact same day. If a game is released on PC as well, is it a PC game or a console game? I know that's a silly question, but my point is that the distinction doesn't really matter. Donkey Kong might not specifically be facing these issues, but I think it should be avoided nonetheless whenever possible. I do think I reached a better and more effective categorization of the main series titles by separating the games into original arcade series, Donkey Kong Country series, and "other". But I'm probably a bit biased to my own edits, lol. I'm completely new to using these discussion pages so sorry if I'm going about this in the wrong way or anything. I don't really know what's required to reach a consensus or whatever, but I know that User:(Oinkers42) shares similar thoughts to mine as well. Cheers! TehRYNOL (talk) 15:52, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Sometimes it'll make sense, sometimes it won't. I can't imagine we're going to come to a Wikiproject-level consensus on how to handle every template - game series vary wildly. I'd recommend creating discussions at the template talk page(s) you wish to change, and notifying the WikiProject for more input if you're not getting much feedback at the respective talk page. Sergecross73 msg me 16:01, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Agreed. For example, I feel like it makes sense for Mario, but not Fire Emblem. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Exactly. I believe this originated from the Sonic template, and I know that part of the argument there was that it didn't particularly make sense to integrate the minor Sonic and Tails and Sonic Triple Trouble handheld titles in between the major Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles titles. Sergecross73 msg me 16:09, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Fair. Ultimately I suppose trying to categorise games in templates like this does just become an arbitrary way for us to make it more convenient and better ease-of-access. But then I don't exactly understand what the issue with the Donkey Kong template was, as the main series list was edited back to how it was several months ago with the claim that "There's been consensus for this for a while, not sure why people can't get that through their heads". But I'll take it to the talk page, thank you! :) TehRYNOL (talk) 16:15, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
I am not opposed to setting the Donkey Kong Country series and the arcade games aside, leaving the other games in an "other" section, although I would still prefer my method. Also, what consensus is @TheJoebro64: talking about, he is seemingly the only one who thinks this way. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
You guys should probably start offering some WP:DIFs if you're really looking for input on these sorts of questions... Sergecross73 msg me 17:07, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
This is the proposition I'm making. Thanks for linking that help page. TehRYNOL (talk) 18:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
The template has stably used the arcade/console/handheld distinction since at least 2020, which is consensus through editing. There was no consensus to change it in the discussion last year (therefore, we retain the status quo) and two editors (myself and Soetermans) have reverted efforts to change it without discussion. It should have been more than clear that the distinction should not be changed unless there is a discussion and consensus to change it. JOEBRO64 21:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Skyrim Sales issue

This discussion needs more experienced opinions: Talk:List_of_best-selling_video_games#Skyrim_has_apparently_sold_over_60_million_copies.

Todd Howard offhandedly said Skyrim has "60 million copies" in an interview about Starfield. My thoughts and opinions on this at the linked section. We're also seeing some clear citogenesis on this topic from RS's. -- ferret (talk) 16:45, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Pokémon Crystal

Can somebody please close this split proposal? It has been open for a month after discussion ended. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I need help getting the Game Rankings link for Trouble Shooter. Apparently, multiple pages for the Genesis on Game Rankings are not archived, and I can't figure out how to get to the Trouble Shooter GR page (if it's even archived). - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 15:51, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

@Cukie Gherkin: Here's the Trouble Shooter GR page. If you're looking through Wayback, then just put into "https://www.gamerankings.com/ (insert platform here)" into the Wayback search bar. In the browser's address bar, add a "*" in front of it and/or in place of any date range the website comes up with. It'll bring up a list of saved URLs of that type, which can be searched through based on type, date, or name. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Here's an example of the above: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.gamerankings.com/genesis/*. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Much obliged! - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Handling sparse multiplatform, multi-generational review tables

Eg Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy - that's a huge table with half the entries as NA.

I don't know an immediate good solution. My first !vote would be to group generational releases (in this case, you'd have 3DS, the iOS, then the Switch/PC/PS/Xbox) and if there happens to be a different or specific version score in that group (like for PCGamer), to add the specific version with it. That narrows that down from 7 total columns to 4 but may lengthen the table. Masem (t) 00:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree, no need to separate the most recent releases, everything but one secondary IGN score is the same. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't know that a table is a useful way to convey this information. To begin with, it's dozens of reviews, of which only a small fraction are actually used in the prose. You might nix the table entirely or just keep some of the platform aggregators. Some of the metascores are based on only a handful of reviews so they're not particularly reliable to begin with. Axem Titanium (talk) 07:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
We absolutelyndo need to stress that any review put into the table is expected to be used as part of the reception...we are not just gathering reviews. We have gotten lazy on this area for a few years. Masem (t) 16:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
It's an explicit instruction at Template:Video game reviews but it could be more clearly spelled out in MOS:VG#Reception. Beyond that, it's just whack-a-mole where you see it and/or have the energy to fix it. Driveby editors see a table and feel possessed to fill it, alas. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:49, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
More reason to just get rid of it and force editors to add it as prose. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
I hate the multiplatform format. Nothing further to comment. There's no reason this can't be handled like we do for Metacritic on most normal review tables. -- ferret (talk) 17:10, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Agreed that the multiplatform table is terrible - the majority of it is empty space and it's massive and in my opinion it's just better to use the regular video game reviews table and note platform reviewed in parentheses next to score. Waxworker (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
My recommendation is to axe the table entirely and just leave the Multiplatform Metacritic rankings as a vertical rather than horizontal list; right now the table is taking up more room than the prose, and that's simply not the intended use (it's also damn hard to read anything on it given most cells are functionally empty.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:51, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
I think we should just kill the multiplat table. It looks absolutely terrible and is far harder to read than the normal one. Also support spelling out "reviews in the box must be used in prose" at MOS:VG. JOEBRO64 18:18, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
If there is support for this, I believe I can rework the module to, instead of generating the big table, instead list the reviews in the typical Metacritic format of (Platform): Score in a list. This would mean nothing needs retrofit or cleaned up. -- ferret (talk) 18:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (June 5 to June 11)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 18:50, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

June 5

June 6

June 7

June 8

June 9

June 10

June 11

  • I went through the categories here a moment ago and cleaned out some redirected article templates so they actually were redirect-class now, after noticing they weren't mentioned up there. So good chance you'll probably have a good chunk showing up next week.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:58, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
    I'll watch out for them, thanks! --PresN 01:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Genres in List of DSiWare games and applications

I think that the genres list is incredibly difficult to maintain at the best of times, but for a list of games with as high a percentage of non-notable games compared to a lot of other platforms, it's even more difficult. I saw multiple games where I felt the genre was incorrect, and I figured that rather than citing this information that I would not consider valuable for a list, I decided to delete the information. A while later, @NPI WOL: reverted it, arguing that this info should be fixed and sourced instead of removed. I'd like to get consensus on whether the genres column should be retained. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 05:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Because (IIRC) anyone could publish on DSiWare, similar to the Switch store today, that that list must be cut down to those games that are blue-linked notable or that there is at least one third-party source that affirms the game's release on the store. Otherwise, we are way into WP:IINFO/WP:NOTCATALOG. The consoles' digital storefronts are not the same as heavily curated physical carts/CD games of the past, and there should be no expectation we can document each one. --Masem (t) 12:33, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I personally think we should be cutting subjective items like genre out of all of our lists. I don't include it in the ones I create or rework. Sergecross73 msg me 12:40, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I'm uncertain if DSiWare was an open platform or not. Could you weigh in on the genres bit though, Masem? :) - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, that would be news to me too. I didn't think Nintendo really started "opening up" until the Switch launched really... Sergecross73 msg me 17:05, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
My bad, seems like both DSiWare and WiiWare were curated more by Nintendo per [1], but that said, there is something about this approach, which isn't quite self publishing but also not solicitated/sought after by Nintendo that makes me concerned about the full list of games... it would the place Steam was at Steam Greenwich compared to new. Masem (t) 17:31, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Really? Did Nintendo open up in Switch era? That's news to me. MilkyDefer 09:15, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
See [2]. They still have a casual review of game content (eg no porn games like on Steam) but the process is far less hands off by Nintendo. So we do not try to list every Switch eshop game, just like we don't like every Steam game. Masem (t) 12:18, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
From a practical standpoint, genre discussions are a huge time sink on Wikipedia. It'd definitely be nice information to have in a game list, but if it's causing issues or can't be readily verified, I agree it should get axed (and yeah the list should just be notable games.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eltomas2003

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

It's basically in the title. There's an investigation opened into the activities of Therealgamer1234, who is suspected of possibly being a sockpuppet of banned user Eltomas2003 following the sudden FAC of Tokyo Mirage Sessions ♯FE. More people coming in and helping would be appreciated. I'm trying to be impartial, but Therealgamer1234 behaving in a very odd way on my talk page. It's making me nervous, and whatever the conclusion it would be good to resolve this quickly. ProtoDrake (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: I'm sorry, I was just curious, these replies won't happen again. Therealgamer1234 (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Assuming you are not a sock... I took a look at the messages you left on ProtoDrake's talk page, and I have to agree they're unwelcome and are borderline harassment. You were informed a few times that Wikipedia is not a social platform, yet you continued to press for personal information. If you want to be an "ally" then keep all your interactions to collaborating on improving articles, not looking to make "friends." ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Eyes are on this. -- ferret (talk) 20:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Good article reassessment for Pikachu

Pikachu has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:20, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I've done some work trying to fix up the reception but it needs a lot more. If anyone's able to help it'd be appreciated.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:05, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Machine-translating vertical Japanese text

We've had some real success at the Chrono Compendium recently by using Google's OCR to feed magazine pages into DeepL (though we're rapidly reaching diminishing returns on Chrono content). But some articles are presented using the vertical format, and I have yet to find a rock solid solution for extracting those. Game magazines often have a complex format, with some horizontal text also presented under screenshots (a classic example is here). Does anyone have a preferred method for OCRing these? ZeaLitY [ Talk - Activity ] 04:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Merge discussion input needed re Switch Lite

Talk:Nintendo Switch Lite#Merge could use additional input as I think the results of that would be pertinent to other similar hardware offshoots. Masem (t) 18:38, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Kain (Legacy of Kain)

Kain (Legacy of Kain) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:57, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (June 12 to June 18)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 16:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

June 12

June 13

June 14

June 15

June 16

June 17

June 18

Requested move at Talk:Daithi De Nogla#Requested move 13 June 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Daithi De Nogla#Requested move 13 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

On a recently deleted category...

Category:Video games with alternate endings was deleted per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_6#Category:Fiction_with_alternate_endings (which was initiated by @Zxcvbnm:) specifically on a NONDEF rationale. Now, my first inclination is that was a poor one, but I think on further consideration I agree with it. That said, I do think we lost something in terms of "video games with branching narratives", and this more than "you get one of two endings depending on what option you made at that point in the game", but specifically things like the Telltale or Dontnod games, for example. I think this is a more refined cat that is defining, as long as we are keeping it clean of far misses. For example, one could argue GTA V is such a game, but open world games by their nature are more freeform without a hard plotline to follow, whereas these branching narratives are ones that you stay the course of a main narrative but the smaller events within it are up to choices the player has made. And again, we should not include, like, Bioshock or similar ilk in this. I want to get opinions before creating this category to repopulate it to some degree, hence this discussion. Masem (t) 04:10, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

@Masem: Not sure even branching narratives is definitive for a game. It's pretty common to the point it is often mentioned in passing if at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:15, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Multiple or alternate endings is certainly non-defining nowadays, but I completely disagree with the branching narrative, particularly when you consider how The Walking Dead defined the concept of choice-based storytelling by RSes. Masem (t) 12:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Maybe Category:Video games with alternate storylines or something of that nature? (Oinkers42) (talk) 04:37, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
I agree that branching narratives would make a good category. The problem with the "alternate endings" category is that it featured everything with ending variations, no matter how minor, which are non-defining. However, entire alternate branches of narrative can be a defining feature of a game. For example, 80 Days's branching narrative is the central feature of the game, one of the first things mentioned in almost any coverage of it. As long as RSes identify the branching narrative as a key feature of the game, I believe a corresponding category will work. A quick look in the reliable source search engine for "branching narrative" turns up a spate of material on the topic. Phediuk (talk) 15:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
It's possible we could put a Category:Interactive narrative video games as a subcategory of Category:Interactive narrative, but as a parent category of Category:Interactive fiction? I like the idea of removing the "with" so it emphasizes its primacy within the game. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
The problem is that a core category guideline - one that is unfortunately commonly broken in the video game space - is that categories require clear inclusion criteria. If that can't be done, then it's not suitable for a category - see WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Assessing the sources is fine for prose, but not for categories, which by their nature are disparate and maintained by random other editors on other articles. If the inclusion criteria is vague or contestable, the inevitable result is overcategorization as the category will slowly grow to every single vaguely related article. Again, I'm not saying that there aren't games where branching paths aren't important; there clearly are. It's a bad fit for categories, though. (For one trivial example: Fire Emblem Fates as a whole technically has a branching narrative, albeit it's a single branch very early. But in practice, it's really just three games that share a prologue and system; you could go to the store and buy just a single path and not have a branching narrative. Does this count for such a category? The answer is probably "it's complicated", and that answer itself shows why such a category is a bad idea.) SnowFire (talk) 18:47, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, this is along the lines of what I was thinking myself. For some games it's major, for others it isn't, so it will be hard to keep the category focused. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:24, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
I am pretty confident we can carve out the category to only include games which are principally built around the branching narrative approach. But that said i think i would like to make sure the key article this cat would cover or extend from, Narrative of video games, discussion specificly about branch narratives and how they differ from most other games. Masem (t) 21:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
I agree that starting with a prose article is probably a good idea, but even if one is created with a section on branching narratives, I'm not at all confident it'd lead to a good category for the reasons stated. Does Fallout: New Vegas have branching narratives? You could argue that the branches in "solve a bunch of quests however you like" are more significant than the branches in a Walking Dead game, and I'm sure a search would show some sources talking about it, but is that really the focus of the game? What about a game with a lot of small choices that all feed into some morality meter, and that morality / faction alliance / whatever meter determines the branches, and that's really important? And so on. But maybe there's some adjacent term out there that does have a clean inclusion criteria. SnowFire (talk) 02:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

OpenCritic listed alongside Metacritic as main video game score-aggregator in the reception sections of videogame articles

Well, I think that just the title speaks for itself. So, what do you think? https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-is-the-highest-rated-game-ever-on-opencritic/

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2023/05/zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-is-now-the-highest-rated-game-of-all-time-on-opencritic

https://culturedvultures.com/the-legend-of-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-reviews-metacritic-opencritic/

https://thetab.com/uk/2023/05/12/zelda-the-tears-of-the-kingdom-metacritic-opencritic-reviews-nintendo-ranking-308010 151.38.77.188 (talk) 04:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC) strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Personally, I think that Opencritic is valuable in the different way it judges reception. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
Am I missing something or does it not carry reviews from Edge? I can't find any on there. If they don't carry them, that would be a big negative mark in the comprehensive category for me. Probably it's because Opencritic seems fixated on naming the reviewer and Edge never carries a byline on its reviews, specifically so that the reviewer can write what they want unhindered by any repercussions. Seems a bit odd for a site that is fighting for honesty in reviews to not carry the magazine that started it decades ago. - X201 (talk) 07:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
https://opencritic.com/game/1130/edge/charts 151.36.53.161 (talk) 10:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
That's a game called Edge. I'm talking about the magazine Edge (magazine). - X201 (talk) 11:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
It doesn't appear so. On their FAQ Page there is a list of all publications they use and Edge does not appear to be one of them. In addition there is a clause: Reviews must be freely available online. Reviews behind a pay-wall or print-only reviews are not permitted. As far as I am aware, Edge is print-only, correct? - Skipple ☎ 13:21, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't see how those sources change anything. Websites routinely write best/worst article like this. I think it's saying more about that than OpenCritic in particular... Sergecross73 msg me 11:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
I still don't get your reluctance to add OpenCritic as score aggregator alongside Metacritic, you did add GameRankings when this was still active and OpenCritic has gained popularity among gamers and games magazines and adds another perspective like GameRankings did. What problem do you have with OpenCritic? 151.36.3.3 (talk) 12:01, 23 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't think anyone has a problem with it, and GameRankings is generally only used today if there's value that Metacritic lacks. For example, I've seen Metacritic scores that don't cover certain RSes, and of course, certain platforms are not covered on Metacritic. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
But GameRankings is dead, while OpenCritic is active, still I don't see the latter in the reception sections of video game articles. 151.44.72.68 (talk) 12:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I just don't see the value in every reception section starting of as "(Game) has an aggregate score of 82 on Metacritic and 81 on Opencritic" which is almost certainly the main way it would be implemented in articles. If there were notable difference scores, I wouldn't oppose inclusion. But they're usually just a couple of points different, if that. Sergecross73 msg me 12:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
OpenCritic's approval ratings percentage has been brought up several times in these discussions as an alternative to its average critics score—so articles would instead say something like "(Game) received 'generally favorable reviews' according to Metacritic, and an approval rating of 91% on OpenCritic". Disagreeing with that inclusion is perfectly valid, of course, but it's not a redundant measure. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
I agree with this and have been including OC's approval metric on articles I frequently edit. Policy follows practice and I have certainly been practicing. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
The long-standing issue with editors pushing on OpenCritic is that unlike MetaCritic which does weigh review scores from more reputable sources higher than others, OpenCritic is a pure average. That means that when a game that typically has raised the ire of the playerbase but which the main critics are positive on, MC will be artificially higher while OC will be somewhat lower, which to those players upset at seeing high MC scores on a game they loathed, will be more appreciative of. There's nothing wrong with how OC has chosen to do this, but because their aggregation is different from MC, we really can only use one or the other, lest we present a fan-driven selection of which aggregator to use. Masem (t) 12:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
The same could be said about GameRankings, but you people didn't have problems adding it in the reception sections of every video game article alongside Metacritic, because both sites gave a different perspective on how total of reviews and scores were collected and users and gamers preferred one than the other, so why suddenly Metacritic is more important than the other and it's the only one worth of consideration despite the other aggregator site is not less respected or efficient? 151.82.245.201 (talk) 16:37, 23 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I mean, we did have a problem with GR though. GR is either "not used" or "not used unless MC is absent or substantially different". I forget what the current status is, but GR is rarely used these days. Sergecross73 msg me 16:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
This logic sounds backwards to me? Because MC's weighting is concealed, there's no way to know what their metascore is reflective of, without doing a bunch of non-WP:ROUTINE calculations to back out the weights. On the other hand, OC's score can't be "fan-driven" anything because it's simply all scores, equally weighted. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
FWIW, since it doesn't seem to get enough attention—OpenCritic has an approval rating (Critics Recommend), akin to Rotten Tomatoes' Tomatometer, that's completely different from the weighted average that Metacritic uses. As a different method of measurement, it's not redundant to the MC score (which is the issue OC averages often run into, they're often so similar that they're not worth including) so I think that it's more than worth including. The fact that OC has started to be adopted by RSs alongside MC also gives it some weight, from my perspective. JOEBRO64 16:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
None of the above sources I would consider particularly good examples of adoption by RS, though, in that they're just news items on a game getting a score, versus discussing OC scores in a wider context than just "Zelda is the new hotness" (and I mean, it should go without saying Nintendo Life deciding to write a story on that is less than noteworthy.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:17, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm cold on review aggregators in general, and OC seems like a lower quality version of MC. I don't see what these sources add that make OC anything more than redundant to MC. If a game is well rated, then that's already covered by the individual sources. If someone thinks OC's aggregated score is really compelling and important information, they can visit OC. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't know what makes it of lower quality compared to Metacritic, considering also that mainstream magazines consider both the scores of MC and OC equally, and it's like saying GameRankings was of lower quality compared to MC, based on who knows what basis. I don't understand why MC yes and OC no, what's the problem? P. S. I took sources talking about TLOZ:TOTK because I started the conversation based on what they suggested me to do on the game's article's talk page. 151.36.233.77 (talk) 21:37, 23 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I told you to start a discussion here because the Zelda talk page wasn't the place to make a decision on something that's much bigger than just that game. As far as your question goes, MC is more widely considered the industry standard in both games and other entertainment media. It's been around longer, while OC is newer and redundant. It's not that complicated. Sergecross73 msg me 22:10, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
Well, I'd contend that the Rotten Tomatoes-like measurement, which Metacritic lacks, may be worthwhile to include. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
And again, I used the Zelda sources because I had them in my hand ready previously and I planned to use them in its talk page before being sent here. Plus, the fact that OpenCritic is newer (2015 I guess) it's not a justification not to use it on Wikipedia alongside Metacritic, and it's not less efficient than Metacritic or even GameRankings. 151.36.233.77 (talk) 22:35, 23 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
No one is faulting your use of Zelda sources for being about Zelda, we're just saying it's more of an example of "routine coverage for a well reviewed game" than than commentary on the importance of OpenCritic. Sources more focused on the importance of OpenCritic itself would probably be more persuasive. Sergecross73 msg me 23:27, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but it's stronger than me, it's just I can't really understand this big deal and refusal to not wanting to use OpenCritic as a source on Wikipedia as an alternative games' score-aggregator, it's like you have a personal resemtmemt or feud against it. 151.38.233.234 (talk) 23:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC) strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
You...can't understand a simple concept like "redundancy", so you turn to a baseless theory of me feuding with...OC...? What...? Sergecross73 msg me 00:23, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
What? No! For Pete's sake, it was just a figure of speech, I didn't mean literally, it was to say my confusion in trying to understand this refusal to accept OpenCritic as a reliable source and aggregator and really I don't see any valid reason why it shouldn't. 151.38.233.234 (talk) 00:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Might I suggest avoiding such figures of speech. You are in a discussion with humans, directing said figures of speech, which look like an accusation, at said humans. We deal with all the time where people get personal because their favorite source/figure/game/whatever isn't being presented the way they like, but are otherwise in line with Wikipedia policies/guidelines or consensus. -- ferret (talk) 00:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry, really, but I wrote it in a way it would be understable it wasn't serious, I would have never guessed somebody would have taken me seriously, mine was just a weird way to describe my confusion. 151.38.233.234 (talk) 00:45, 24 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
If it's just RT for games, I don't see why this wouldn't be useful in theory. Percentage approval and average score aren't quite the same. Toa Nidhiki05 00:08, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
In a way it is RT for games, it uses percentages just like it, both for critics and audiences. 151.38.233.234 (talk) 00:46, 24 May 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 21:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Just as films only use the critics measurement from Rotten Tomatoes and not the user score, we are not going to use the user score aggregation from either MC or OC. The existence of review bomb is reason enough to avoid these. Masem (t) 02:02, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
You misunderstand, the point being made is that Opencritic shows critic recommendation, and Metacritic does not - just the weighted average. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:19, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, the approval rating is different from the average score and thus not redundant to MC. It should be more than fine to include. JOEBRO64 12:31, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
I support adding OpenCritic.
Some complain about redundancy, but that certainly isn't the case when it comes to some niche or smaller indie titles. OpenCritic still vets the publications it includes, but has a much wider range of them. This sometimes means that niche games have scores on OpenCritic, while they have none or don't have enough for an overall score on MetaCritic. It could also mean a more comprehensive overview for titles with few reviews generally.
It's certainly known in the industry too, even being included on multiple store pages, including the Epic Game Store.[3] DarkeruTomoe (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Since there seems to be some agreement that OC's Critics Recommend isn't redundant to MC, I've drafted this in case we ever decide to add it to WP:VG/S:

OpenCritic provides two metrics of review aggregation: "Top Critic Average", an average score similar to Metacritic's Metascores, and "Critics Recommend", a percentage of positive reviews similar to Rotten Tomatoes' Tomatometer. Top Critic Averages should only be used if a Metascore does not exist, since it is usually too similar and therefore redundant, but Critics Recommend can be used alongside Metacritic as it is a distinct form of measurement that serves a different purpose.

JOEBRO64 20:28, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I support it. Axem Titanium (talk) 07:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
I am also in support. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 08:13, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
This has my support as well. Toa Nidhiki05 14:01, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
This needs a proper RFC and I believe it should happen at MOS:VG. If approved, once worked into the aggregator details of the MOS, then I'll be more than happy to add it to the review template. As it stands, the last site wide RFC was in 2017 and established a consensus NOT to include OC. -- ferret (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
As User:DarkeruTomoe pointed out above, I think direct integration into the Epic Store is a significant development that was not brought up at all in the most recent 2021 discussion. That alone warrants a revisit, IMO Axem Titanium (talk) 18:12, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm not debating a revisit or the need for one, just saying that a proper RFC at the MOS is needed to settle the issue. -- ferret (talk) 18:15, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Agreed. Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Yeah. I don't see a consensus for this. I am skeptical that OC adds anything reliable, but let's start with a proper RFC where people can discuss. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
I'll get around to setting one up tomorrow or sometime in the weekend. Will probably have two separate sections for the different forms of aggregation that OC has. JOEBRO64 22:23, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
So? When can we start to include OpenCritic in the Reception sections of video game articles as aggregator? 84.222.66.203 (talk) 16:53, 2 June 2023 (UTC)strike sock-- Ponyobons mots 17:36, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
If and when the RFC closes with a consensus to add it. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

RfC is live. Go nuts. JOEBRO64 14:14, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Concluded

The RFC at the MOS has closed and OC has been added to {{Video game reviews}}. Actual MOS:VG guidance still pending. Please see follow up discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Video_games#Implementing. -- ferret (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

In case this is of interest: inspired by this RfC, we now have User:Josh404Bot populate the OpenCritic Critics Recommend (Q119576498) scores − only 284 so far, but it will catch up to the 4000+ OpenCritic Top Critic Average (Q114712322) that it already had done, and more generally to the 5500+ uses of OpenCritic ID (P2864). See this SPARQL query for the list. Jean-Fred (talk) 12:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
(We’re now at 1546 OpenCritic Critics Recommend (Q119576498). Jean-Fred (talk) 07:41, 22 June 2023 (UTC))

Fictional character

Is "character" or "fictional character" better to use? I believe it is "fictional character", but Greenish Pickle! disagrees. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Usually "fictional character" on first use, unless a different adjective is used like "Pokémon character." For reference on what is being discussed: [5] [6]. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Just "character". "Fictional character" is tautological — characters (in the standard sense of the word) are always fictional, unless we tell the reader otherwise. Popcornfud (talk) 15:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
The adjective "fictional" would indicate what definition of "character" we're using. It disambiguates from Character (symbol), the concept of an agent's "character", and other pages listed here. Moreover, legendary/mythological figures might also be called characters, as do archetypes I think? It's clearer at least. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 16:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
I understand, but you’re optimizing for the wrong thing. “Fictional character” doesn’t add information anyone needs. For example, in sentences such as “Ellie is a character in the video game series The Last of Us by Naughty Dog”, no one is going to wonder if Ellie is a sort of typographical symbol.
Mythical creatures should be described as mythical creatures and not characters — because that’s what they are, except in cases where we’re talking about, you know, characters. Popcornfud (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
That's a good argument, but languages rarely make logical sense. "loup-garou" literally means wolf-werewolf, which is one of my favorites. "Fictional character" emphasizes that the character is fictional through repetition, much like "free gift" emphasizes that something has no strings attached. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:28, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't think "free gift" is a useful emphasis, though — I think it's just an idiomatic set phrase, a kind of cliche. It's common in speech or marketing materials etc, but when writing an encyclopedia I can't think of an example of how it would be helpful to write "free gift" over "gift", and if there is such a situation it's not typical.
See dozens of other common tautologies such as "end result", "first began", "personal opinion", which we're all used to and use without thinking — but which add nothing to prose and which readers don't miss when they're not there. Popcornfud (talk) 09:29, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Another comparison might be characters based partly or completely on real persons? I do like a bit of tautological emphasis in this situation, as well as the clarity. But it seems mostly a style thing and might just depend on what sort of phrasing you're used to. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
“Character”. “Fictional” is 100% tautological. JOEBRO64 09:33, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Just "character". As a note, I actually don't mind repetition-for-emphasis and am mildly annoyed at other editors removing quite intentional word choices out of a misguided dedication to concision (i.e. "inauthentic forgery", "end result", etc. are fine as far as I'm concerned). However, why do we even want to emphasize "fictional character"? As best I can tell, the movement to label everything "fictional character" came about in the 2006-2008 struggle to adopt a more real-world and less fannish perspective. Just driving home that yep, we're talking about fiction here, this isn't real. But... I don't feel that is actually necessary, and is just some Wikipedia inside-baseball that readers won't care about. We should take cues from the literary world: someone might call Romeo & Juliet "characters", but they are exceedingly unlikely to call them "fictional characters" except, perhaps, in the context of speculation of whether Shakespeare based the play on some historical event (he didn't). There's no need for such emphasis. The only time "fictional character" is useful is in the rare case of discussing characters based on actual historical figures, if there's a desire to separate the character from the person - something like Stephen Colbert (character), or maybe when discussing the various Fate characters based on real people. Otherwise the repetition isn't adding anything. SnowFire (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Your Romeo and Juliet comparison has convinced me that "character" is slightly better. Adding 'fictional' indeed seems like a more modern phrasing? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 19:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
What is misguided about aiming for concision? What is the advantage of writing “end result” over “result”? Popcornfud (talk) 20:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Think about this abstractly: suppose phrase A and phrase B are perfect synonyms. Not even any change in emphasis. Dedication to concision suggests something like "always pick the phrase with fewer syllables and never ever use the synonym" which isn't how real writers write. It's even worse if, for whatever reason, the "longer" version is actually more popular, and the short version is an uncommon construction. Add in the possibility of a change of emphasis or avoiding a close repetition, and you have a solid reason to use a slightly longer construction sometimes... except on Wikipedia, some people who want to help out will come "fix" the issue that didn't need to be fixed.
That said, per above, my problem isn't with longer phrases per se, just that the additional emphasis makes the most sense with something like "Peter Brand is a fictional character invented for the film Moneyball, while the other main characters are real people", which is rarely the case in the video game sphere. (And, of course, there are many times where the shorter phrase really is the better phrase - just the reason to replace then isn't that it's shorter, it's that it's better, like getting rid of extraneous "very"s.) SnowFire (talk) 20:47, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
"which isn't how real writers write" is kind of begging the question, isn't it? For what it's worth, I am a "real" writer — which is to say, I make my living from writing (though I am still waiting for the check from Wikipedia).
I'm not sure what you mean by one turn of phrase being "more popular" than another. If you mean that A is in more common use than B, that would likely make A more widely understood and therefore the better choice, regardless of length — at least when keeping the goals of an encyclopaedia in mind. Ease of comprehension might not your goal when writing song lyrics, for example.
But the goal is to remove elements that offer no utility. If an element makes something easier to understand, then that adds utility. I agree there are circumstances where "fictional character" aids clarity, it's just that there aren't many of them. When we write, we should be conscious of the choices we're making, know why we're making them and avoid writing simply out of habit. Popcornfud (talk) 21:06, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, wasn't trying to throw shade at you, and it sounds like we agree on this anyway. When I meant with "real writer" wasn't intended to imply there was a class of "real writers", but rather just that "real" authors have radically different writing styles, and that's okay. H.P. Lovecraft probably would have infuriated Strunk & White if he'd sent his stuff into the future to them to be edited (he can be rather... long-winded and tell-don't-show at times), but he's still a "real writer". Wikipedia, similarly, can support a range of writing styles (maybe not James Joyce tho). SnowFire (talk) 04:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Rereading my comment this morning, I think it sounded more wounded than I meant! I was just trying to unpick some of the ideas you posted here. Anyway, yes, I think you gave some reasonable examples of where an attempt to be concise can come at the cost of other things. Concision isn't the only goal — we also have clarity, etc... Popcornfud (talk) 09:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
"fictional character" is fine.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 00:03, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

FFXVI diversity

Hi. Edit conflicts are beginning to appear on Final Fantasy XVI over the stuff surrounding its portrayal of gender and different ethnic groups (or lack thereof). It's becoming a bit of a mess of "well actually it's like this". Recently done...a lot of edits, so I'm burned out on XVI. I admit i was contributing to the conflict, which is why I'm pulling out. Any other opinions are welcome, since this is becoming a needlessly thorny issue. ProtoDrake (talk) 13:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts on the article. It's launch day so it's probably not productive to spend a lot of time fighting the tide on the content editing front. Other than obvious vandalism, it's probably wise from a mental health perspective to let the article be a little wrong and unfinished for a few days until the wave breaks and reassess then. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
I agree with Axem. You have done a ton of work on the FF XVI page, so you can take a nice rest from the page until you feel the tide has been settled. Roberth Martinez (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

RFC at WP:NOT about whether articles should list of every version/beta/patch

There is a (second) RFC about how Wikipedia articles should treat complete development logs in articles, which can be found at this subsection. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Nathan Drake (Uncharted)

Nathan Drake (Uncharted) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 10:32, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Someone broke the project banner

Self-explanatory. All Low-Importance assessments have been converting into Unknown-Importance. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:18, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

This seems like an issue for Template talk:WPBannerMeta rather than the Video games one in particular. It affects all banners. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:21, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Hmm, on second thought it could have been the edit in April that broke things. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
I could not find any other projects affected by the error. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
@QuicoleJR I had reported it to the maintainer before you posted. It should be resolved shortly. -- ferret (talk) 02:12, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
OK, sounds good. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
PresN is looking into it as well. -- ferret (talk) 02:15, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Fixed, I think- something about the way our banner worked was unlike any other project's and broke when WPBannerMeta got updated today. Categories seem to be repopulating and talk pages look correct, so ping me here if anyone sees any problems regarding importance categories. --PresN 02:23, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
But now the question is who broke the banner?
My guess is that it was Salvidrim! with the barnstar in the newsletter room. Panini! • 🥪 21:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Nah, WPBannerMeta got updated to use code instead of wikitemplates, and we were the only project with a weird way of handling importance. Specifically, for redirects, our banner ignores whatever editors put as the importance and leaves it as NA-importance. I've now gotten that working again, and as a treat added a similar bit that forces any article that's a redirect to be redirect-class, no matter what you put in the talk page template (so, making an article a redirect will make the talk page template update automatically to redirect-class, in case you forget to update it to |class=Redirect). --PresN 22:14, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

User uploading new images and overwriting perfectly valid ones

A new user X2025 (no relation), has been overwriting cover images and other images with new files, when perfectly valid images already exist. No edit summary has been given explaining a reason why. It's worth having a look at their contributions list as I haven't seen a single image that warranted changing yet. - X201 (talk) 09:51, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Seems to me that the user wants to upload higher res images of current covers but isn't aware that a bot will just reduce them back to the previous size again. --Mika1h (talk) 11:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Looks that way. A load of needless work and disruption. - X201 (talk) 16:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Should definitely be brought to the attention of admins to stop that, per WP:CIR. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Has anyone tried talking to them yet? Sergecross73 msg me 17:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
^-- Step 1. Sysop is not required to let them know why this is problematic and ask them to stop. Sysops come in when they refuse to listen. -- ferret (talk) 17:53, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
I left a caution this morning User talk:X2025 Masem (t) 17:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
They...uh...handled your warning very poorly, so I indeffed them. Sergecross73 msg me 01:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Kirby characters

A discussion has started to define inclusion criteria for the list. Your feedback is welcome. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Amber (2nd nomination)

Opinions requested. Unlike most of the afds or the current ones, I think this Rachel Amber afd needs more attention as it is a bit controversial (1st afd before). GreenishPickle! (🔔) 01:05, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

You don't need to list AFDs here, especially brand new ones that just started. Most of the regulars who would see this, already have WP:VG/D watchlisted. Sergecross73 msg me 01:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Categorization of Japanese games with lesbian elements

Hello! I have a question! I removed the yuri category from the latest Blue Reflection because as far as I remember this game has yuri elements but is not a yuri game per se. But I have doubts, so I want to ask. What games should be added to this category, given that it is already included in the category of LGBTQ-related games. Any Japanese games with a canon lesbian element of varying degrees of importance like lesbian subplots, token yuri characters, etc., or only games like Flowers that officially belong to the genre and have it as a main/one of the main ones? Solaire the knight (talk) 19:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

LGBT-related should be games that explicit discuss and focus on LGBT representation or themes, not games that simply have LGBT characters. -- ferret (talk) 19:40, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
I understand that, I'm interested in the yuri category, since in this case we are talking about a separate genre / its elements. This franchise has always had a certain LGBTQ subplots or aesthetic, so I don't question that. Let's take a simpler example then. Azur Lane and KanColle have a notable amount of canonical bisexual characters and this has been the subject of subplots several times. Does it deserve only the LGBTQ category or the yuri category too? Solaire the knight (talk) 19:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Merely having "elements" does not make it defining per WP:NONDEF - it has to be significant enough to be mentioned in most reviews or discussion about the game. I don't think a game simply having a LGBTQ character, for example, would be enough to place it in any such category. If one would not call Azur Lane a "yuri game", then it probably shouldn't be there - generally that means only romance-centric games would qualify. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:55, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
"Or neither". The case of "this game has some LGBT characters and sometimes romance subplots" does not a "LGBT-related" (or yuri) game make. If I were talking to just a random person about Azur Lane, is "Yeah, it's that game that focuses on LGBT" going to be part of the conversation? Not at all. -- ferret (talk) 20:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
That is, yuri category for lesbian romance-centered games and at least if it's not the main, but still one of the important genres of the game like in Honkai 3D case? While the LGBTQ category is for games that have enough of this for reputable sources to take notice and describe it as in D4DJ? Solaire the knight (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Are sources calling it a Yuri game? You need reliable secondary sources. Categories are not exempt from WP:V. -- ferret (talk) 20:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
I can find a bunch of Japanese sources because they have a very broad definition of yuri in recent years. But on a more serious note, I think that if any case requires sources, then there will be no problems. While there may be some debate about yuri googles, that's a completely different matter. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:25, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
A saying goes in Chinese-speaking regions that most "yuri" works in Japan are only "light yuri", similar to "light novel". These works seldom contain any male characters, only focusing on the casual interactions between female characters, not including romance between them. Typical examples include comics from Houbunsha. Even a kiss can be categorized as "a kiss of pure friendship", "a kiss as lover", maybe more. I think all works mentioned here, like Blue Reflection, Azur Lane, Kantai Collection, only fall in the realm of "light yuri", but not "serious yuri".
Light yuri can be considered yuri, but light yuri cannot be considered LGBTQ-related. MilkyDefer 12:43, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Do you mean what is often called "platonic yuri" in the west, or roughly "yuri bait" when yuri tropes are simply used to idealize or fetishize platonic female relationships? In general, everything that can be described with the help of a cliché about "meaningful emotional bonds". This seems to have become a noticeable "problem" since female friendship works were included in yuri and Hibike Euphonium became a cult hit. Recently I accidentally stumbled upon a page of Animate readers' "Top 20 yuri", and even they wrote that yuri now includes both platonic or idealized "teasing" relationships, as well as what viewers just like to rate as yuri. I've added an LGBT-related category to some shows or games like this as Class S inspired, but often it doesn't even amount to "platonic romance" like Hibike. As for the unrealistic all-female cast, as far as I remember, it's called Girl's zoo (a more traditional but cruder Japanese term for what we call CGDCT). It is sometimes parodied, sometimes referred to in Japanese culture. Like a parody in anniversary animation from visual novel developer Key. Solaire the knight (talk) 12:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
I would just suggest move all yuri-related categories out of LGBTQ-related categories, keep lesbian-related in, and add lesbian-related category to all "serious yuri" articles. This requires broader discussion, of course. MilkyDefer 12:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
I think this also requires the development of rules for the further inclusion or removal of articles from this. Maybe then leave it for the future until we have some heated debate about this or that article? Solaire the knight (talk) 12:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
If you're talking about Blue Reflection: Second Light, it's a difficult one. It does have two female characters who are explicitly together later in the game, and the main character goes on 'dates' and holds hands with every other character, which is closer to yuri bait, but very strong yuri bait. This article mentions lines like "Why is my heart racing like this?” and cuddling in bed being part of it which seems closer to romance than bait. I think there'd be a case to argue to consider it within the light yuri category since it's pretty significant, while I'd not for games where it's just bait. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 15:46, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
It is important to understand here whether this is positioned as romance and a serious part of the plot, or something like the ancient classics like Queen Blade, when attempts to get characters in fanservice situations reached almost a memetic level due to their consciously comical forcerdness (if I'm not mistaken, there are even a separate subgenre of ecchi comedy around it). I looked article, it does seem to have a Persona-like visual novel yuri element of varying degrees of fanservice or seriousness (I haven't played this sequel so I can't judge deeper), so I think at least in terms of the upfront and current reputation of this developer , the tag can be returned at least as an advance. Solaire the knight (talk) 16:01, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
I'd say I disagree with removing the Yuri genre from LGBT related media. Regardless of its intent or who it is oriented towards, it is still related to LGBT. Proving whether or not a show is oriented towards LGBT people or just fetishizing them seems like original research and a matter of highly personal opinion - we can only prove whether it involves those themes. As such, I would also suggest removing the "directed at the LGBT community" from Category:LGBT-related mass media, as there is not really a way to definitively state that an LGBT person will not be interested in something. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
The problem is not so much "quality" as the fact that these categories often overlap, because any show that has a yuri category is obviously an LGBTQ-focused show. That is, in fact, we get two related categories that contain the same articles applicable to Japanese media. But going back to purely genre issues, trying to tag something by saying "you don't have a source for it being wrong" is not only cruder original research, but also a logical fallacy Argumentum ad ignorantiam. With the same logic, you can put the "comedy" category in an article about any films that have some kind of humor, saying that it should not be deleted, because whether these jokes are funny is a subjective matter. Solaire the knight (talk) 06:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm a little stupid right now, what is the goal of this discussion? Are we trying to figure out a way to separate games about lesbianism and games that are less explicit? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:13, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

We're trying to figure out if Japanese (or possibly Chinese) games with lesbian elements should have a yuri tag besides "LGBTQ-related games", or if this category should only be added to articles about games where lesbian romance is the main or one of the main genres. Well, along the way, how to define it. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Basically there's been confusing as to what the category covers: like does it cover a game that has a character that's a lesbian, or a case where lesbian elements/characters are more a focus for the title (think like Dragon Age 2 vs Fear Effect 2 respectively)--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
I would not call yuri western games, but yes, you correctly noticed the point. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Just on this point, it's worth noting that some western visual novels (for example, many by British developer ebi-hime or US-led Studio Élan) do refer to themselves as yuri at least.
That said, most titles it applies to wouldn't be notably enough for a Wikipedia article anyway, apart from Heart of the Woods. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
There are probably more categories than that, so it's be quite difficult IMO
LGBT-specific games that focus more on the experience of lesbianism, like a lot of low-end indie western-developed visual novels
The same as above, but with explicit content
Yuri games that are meant as a romance story primarily as a fetish
The same as above, but with explicit content
Yuri-bait games with actual confirmed lesbian relationships or one-sided love in them
Yuri-bait games that contain hints of romance that could be close friendship
Others that lie between them. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 07:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Personally, I'd create a "games with yuri elements" category for anything that isn't objectively a yuri game as the core genre. But obviously without games that don't cross the line of shipping and interpretation, because otherwise we'll have to add that to most Japanese games with female characters, if you know what I mean. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Those with explicit contents can use another category alongside the yuri/lesbian part. eg. Category:Eroge (for Japanese games) and Category:Erotic video games (for games in other countries).
I think it is a good change to review the purpose of Category:Yuri (genre), since Category:Lesbianism already exists. Japanese people also use the term "lesbian". There are perhaps some interesting differences between yuri and lesbian in Japanese.
As for those "low-end indie western-developed visual novels", since my Steam store homepage is now flooded with them, I agree that they are the typical examples of lesbian video games. (I also believe they are effortless to make, and almost every single one is trash wrt production quality.) MilkyDefer 10:37, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
There is indeed a difference in Japanese as by virtue of Japanese media they separate lesbian content as ficton/fetish and lesbian content as actual LGBTQ. For example, Erika Friedman from Okazu divide yuri per se and Japanese lesbian content. But I think it's already semantics. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:58, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
"Games with Yuri elements" would fail WP:NONDEF and be deleted. Categories are for games that have such things as a defining trait. Categorizing games under "low-end", "Yuri-bait" or similar would be WP:SUBJECTIVECAT and also run afoul of policy. Since Western VNs are generally pretty similar in appearance, gameplay and content, you're getting into subjective notions of what is better or worse.
If you want to debate the purpose of the Yuri category, start with the article, not the category. If you can't convince people the article should be merged (i.e. into Media portrayal of lesbians#Manga, anime, and animation), then it is highly unlikely the category will be merged. However, due to the sheer amount of sources about the Yuri genre, I find it unlikely. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:06, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Why? There are a bunch of games that are not yuri, but are described in the sources as having yuri elements. It's not as unusual as you might think. I also don't understand why you are trying to exaggerate things. No one is going to delete or rethink the category. It's just that as a genre category, it's not suitable for any games that have yuri elements, but are not a yuri game to the fullest of the word. Otherwise, we'll end up with people using it for all games that have some kind of lesbian fanservice or subplot. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:58, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
I think my issue is that a category of games with "yuri elements" would get a lot of people stretching what that means. I think it would also have people disputing the difference between a yuri game and a game with yuri elements. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
That's why I said that for this you need to develop rules and a description. Solaire the knight (talk) 04:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Rules don't mean that we don't have people trying to constantly stretch things to make them fit though. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 05:10, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
There are always such people, but we will not cancel the rules because of this, will we? :D If we have rules, we can use and refer to them every time someone wants to abuse the categories. Another question, in our time of shiping craze, many even often good sources wear very strong yuri goggles. Solaire the knight (talk) 05:53, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Opinions on Category:Roguelike video games being in Category:Video game clones

Apparently, the category was added to "video game clones" in 2006. I feel like it's misleading or reductive to call all roguelikes "clones" of Rogue, just like all Soulsborne games aren't "clones" of Dark Souls. A clone should really be a more direct and purposeful resemblance. I am wondering if people feel the same and think it should be removed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Definitely, roguelikes should NOT be under clones. Individual games would qualify based on their history (eg Moria and Hack as clones of Rogue) but not the whole cat. Masem (t) 01:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Okay, since we both agree on this, I'll remove it for now. If there's a serious argument for it being there later, I don't mind undoing it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Assistance with locating potential deleted WP:VG article

Hello - I'm trying to identify whether a page for a video game titled Sacred Line Genesis was ever created and subject to a previous successful deletion. Evidence that the page did once exist is from an external website scraping the former article on a website called EverybodyWiki, but I cannot find the deletion discussion in any archives. If you could point me in the right direction on where to look, it would be appreciated, and would prevent me from re-attempting to draft an article that has already been decided not to have notability. Vrxces (talk) 02:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Looks like it was at Draft:Sacred Line Genesis. There was no deletion discussion as it was an abandoned draft. Woodroar (talk) 02:26, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
It doesn't seem notable regardless, though. I'm curious what sources you were trying to use to demonstrate its notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
There are sources, but sadly not in-depth enough to make an unambiguous case for notability. The developer's website [7] has compiled a reasonably long list of coverage, including some reliable sources. However, many of those seem to be previews and passing mentions. I don't plan to proceed given the lack of in-depth reviews, which is my usual approach when drafting. Vrxces (talk) 03:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I really appreciate it - that explains a lot! Vrxces (talk) 03:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (June 19 to June 25)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 13:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
~135 new categories
Kronos Digital Entertainment games — Waxworker, Puny Human games — Waxworker, Reverb Publishing games — Waxworker, Stunlock Studios games — Waxworker, Those Awesome Guys games — Waxworker, Torn Banner Studios games — Waxworker, Hi-Rez Studios games — Waxworker, Iam8bit games — Waxworker, Mucky Foot Productions games — Waxworker, Playdead games — Waxworker, 2023 Overwatch League season — Pbrks (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), 2023 multiplayer online battle arena tournaments — Yue (newly tagged - originally created 5 months ago), 20th Century Studios video games by franchise — StarTrekker (newly tagged - originally created 10 months ago), 68k-based arcade system boards — DigitalIceAge (newly tagged - originally created 9 months ago), 68xx-based computers — DigitalIceAge (newly tagged - originally created 9 months ago), Activision beat 'em ups — John Pannozzi (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Adventure game puzzles — Belbury (newly tagged - originally created 5 months ago), Alternative versions of Superman — WuTang94 (newly tagged - originally created 8 months ago), Arcade controllers — Maxtremus (newly tagged - originally created 29 days ago), BlazBlue character redirects to lists — Jotamide (newly tagged - originally created 6 months ago), Business desktop computers — Kattimattinen (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Business laptops — Kattimattinen (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Chessmaster — Mika1h, Chinese Paladin (TV series) — Sdf (newly tagged - originally created 3 months ago), Climate change video games — Dadu (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award for Game of the Year winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Achievement in Animation winners — MR.RockGamer17, D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Achievement in Art Direction winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Achievement in Audio Design winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Achievement in Game Design winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Achievement in Original Music Composition winners — MR.RockGamer17, D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Achievement in Story winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award for Outstanding Technical Achievement winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), D.I.C.E. Award winners — MR.RockGamer17 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), DeepMind — [[User:|]], Defunct and inactive StarCraft teams — Pbrks (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Desktop computers — Kattimattinen (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Donkey Kong characters — StarTrekker (newly tagged - originally created 5 months ago), Esports at the 2023 SEA Games — Hey man im josh (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Esports at the ASEAN Para Games — Hey man im josh, Fallout (series) location redirects — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Fictional pirates in video games — Nigoyyakot (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Final Fantasy VI characters — Kung Fu Man, Final Fantasy location redirects — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Five Nights at Freddy's user templates — Ionic Ludicrous (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Former League of Legends Master Series teams — Yue (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Former Pacific Championship Series teams — Yue (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Former Vietnam Championship Series teams — Yue (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Fox Engine games — Tec15 (newly tagged - originally created 16 days ago), Game controller attachments — GoldenBootWizard276 (newly tagged - originally created 7 months ago), Gamepads — Maxtremus (newly tagged - originally created 29 days ago), Gamergate (harassment campaign) — CJ-Moki (newly tagged - originally created 3 months ago), Games on ninth-generation consoles — Sdmn2011, Gateway, Inc. laptops — DigitalIceAge (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), GeoGuessr players — Ionmars10 (newly tagged - originally created 9 months ago), George Newnes Ltd — GrahamHardy (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Grandslam Interactive games — Mika1h, Interactive fiction based on works — Trivialist (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Jaleco beat 'em ups — John Pannozzi (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Kirby (series) element redirects to lists — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 27 days ago), Kirby (series) location redirects — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 27 days ago), Laptops and music — DigitalIceAge (newly tagged - originally created 5 months ago), Literary devices in the Lord of the Rings — Sm8900 (newly tagged - originally created 18 days ago), MSX2+ microcomputer — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), MSX2 microcomputer — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), MSX hardware — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), MSX microcomputer — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Mario (franchise) element redirects to lists — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Mario (franchise) location redirects — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Mattel Interactive games — Mika1h, Metroid location redirects — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Mobile workstations — Kattimattinen (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Monkey Island games — Cat's Tuxedo (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Nintendo navigational boxes — StarTrekker (newly tagged - originally created 28 days ago), No Brakes Games games — Obi-WanKenobi-2005 (newly tagged - originally created 17 days ago), Nuon games — Trivialist (newly tagged - originally created 16 days ago), Origins Awards by year — PrimeHunter (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), PlayStation 5 accessories — Phillycj (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), PlayStation Productions — WhoKnew99 (newly tagged - originally created 9 months ago), Q*bert — Marisoft69 (newly tagged - originally created 7 months ago), Respawn Entertainment franchises — Lo Chiamavano (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Rooting (Android) — PhotographyEdits (newly tagged - originally created 2 months ago), SAM Coupé — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), SNK beat 'em ups — John Pannozzi (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Seoul Infernal — Pbrks (newly tagged - originally created 5 months ago), Sinclair QL — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Soda Den games — Ersene (newly tagged - originally created 31 days ago), Sonic the Hedgehog element redirects to lists — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), The Elder Scrolls location redirects — TAnthony (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Third-person shooter characters — AHI-3000 (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Ubisoft navigational boxes — StarTrekker (newly tagged - originally created 28 days ago), Universal Music Brazil — Perci Hong (newly tagged - originally created 15 days ago), Video game characters with superhuman senses — The Editor 155 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games about missing people — ForsythiaJo, Video games about twins — Mochgamen1 (newly tagged - originally created 25 days ago), Video games based on Uralic mythology — P12k (newly tagged - originally created 15 days ago), Video games based on classical mythology — Mclay1 (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Video games scored by Kenichi Matsubara — BartSmith85 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in 1916 — Vesperius (newly tagged - originally created 6 months ago), Video games set in 2027 — Iritscen (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in Bangkok — Hope(N Forever) (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Video games set in Barcelona — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in Central America — Vesperius (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in France by region — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in Oakland, California — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in Overseas France — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in Prague — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in abandoned buildings and structures — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in insular areas of the United States — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in the Bermuda Triangle — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set in Île-de-France — 4meter4 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Video games set on trains — ForsythiaJo, Virtual reality accessories — Elilopes (newly tagged - originally created 6 months ago), Works based on Arsène Lupin — Kanghuitari (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Works featuring video games — St. Jimmy Jammy (newly tagged - originally created 25 days ago), Yoshi media files — Gray eyes (newly tagged - originally created 5 months ago), ZX80 — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), ZX81 — 4throck (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Hijinx Studios games — Waxworker, NStigate Games games — Waxworker, Studio 33 games — Waxworker, Takeru (company) games — Waxworker, Access Games games — Waxworker, Crimson Cow games — Waxworker, Firesprite games — Waxworker, Hypnotix games — Waxworker, Japan Studio games — Waxworker, Kuju games — Mika1h, MuuMuu games — Waxworker, Psyop (company) games — Waxworker, Signal Studios games — Waxworker, The Artistocrats games — Waxworker, Video game case law — Smasongarrison, Video game copyright case law — Smasongarrison

June 19

June 20

Isn't that a bit too soon? There's just some development, rehashing of plot and no reception. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
@Soetermans: Reception is coming soon. Given the amount of info there was dedicated to story and characters, it seemed right to have its own article sooner rather than later so the article wouldn't bloat (XV character article was created in April 2016 for comparison). As to the "rehash", it's modelled on other FF Character articles which adopt a similar style, and it's still early in development. This game's...a lot on the emotions, so I've needed to pace myself with this. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Even Torgal seems notable now. There's several sources (SIGCOV) talking about the dog. Sources are already at the refideas Talk:Torgal. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 13:03, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

June 21

June 24

June 25

That's a lot of categories! June 23/24 are missing because the bot skipped those days. I'm also surprised that Walking simulator wasn't an article already. Note also that Balthier isn't a new GA; it' went to AfD and then has been bounced back to DRV. --PresN 13:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Which reminds me that I think the walking sim section at adventure game could be cut down and merged to the new article. Didn't have a chance over weekend. Masem (t) 13:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Looking at Reimu Hakurei, it seems like a translation of the Japanese Wikipedia's entry on her. I understand that this isn't copyvio (I think), but it does pose a problem with a lack of attribution. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 14:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
For whatever reason, when you begin searching the Desire game in the top left search box (in Vector 2022), the preview as you type shows its cover image despite it being a non-free image. Either I screwed something up or there's a bug, possibly due to some kind of a conflict with Désiré (video game). --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:55, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
It appears fixed now.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 12:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I was even more surprised that Point-and-click adventure game does not have an article. That would probably be a larger task if I attempted it though. I may or may not try to recreate it at some point. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:49, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't think every subgenre needs its own article, particularly when the overlap of information (types of gameplay, history, etc.) with the parent genre is very tight, which I am pretty highly confident is the case of point-and-click. We want articles to be comprehensive and we want to try to avoid excessive duplication of information between articles. Not every notable topic needs a standalone article. Masem (t) 12:21, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, it really feels like it's current section covers things just fine... Sergecross73 msg me 12:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
There are plenty of lengthy sources specifically about point and clicks rather than the genre as a whole, see here, here, here, and there's an entire book called the Guide to Graphic Adventures that qualifies as a WP:RS. I am fairly confident that point and click/graphic adventures can form a rather lengthy standalone article and don't need to be shoehorned into a broadconcept page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:24, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No one expressed concerns about sourcing on it, the concern was redundancy, and that it's already pretty succinctly covered as is. Sergecross73 msg me 14:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Figuring some stuff out with infobox details on Nathan Drake, B.J. Blazkowicz, etc.

@Rhain: @Kung Fu Man: Basically, there's disputes on these articles whether to include Nathan Drake's birth name and nickname, as well as whether to include B.J. Blazkowicz's full name. I and Kung Fu Man feel that this is trivial information of value only to fans, with Rhain's argument being that - and Rhain can correct me if I am wrong - Nathan's birth name is integral to his character and that Nate is frequently used to refer to him, and that whether it's obvious is not relevant to whether it should be included. However, I feel that, as someone who doesn't know anything about Nathan Drake, I don't really get anything of value from seeing his birth name, and seeing 'Nate' is as valuable to me as it would be if you informed me that his gender was male.

The discussion can be found here for additional context.

(Honestly this is so sidetracked, we should be focused on cleaning up an article recently nominated for GAR lol) - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:13, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I feel infoboxes should keep to the basics to understand a character at a glance, and it's particularly weird to have "fullname" be forced when it's...literally the very first sentence in an article?. Standardizing these articles would do a good ways to help steadily improve them and keep them improved, vs cases where infoboxes are so big they either dominate most of the page or push images/quote boxes out of their way past their intended usage.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Daytona USA FAC

The FAC is due to be archived in the next few days unless it receives more feedback. Editors are invited to comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Daytona USA/archive1. Thank you in advance for your review. Red Phoenix talk 12:35, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Mona Sax

Mona Sax has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Notability of Rad Spencer

Looking for community input on this. Was turned into a redirect today. While it's never going to be a GA, I don't see this as a failing notability. No rationale for why it fails was left. Nevertheless. I'd like to see what everyone thinks. For now I am reverting the redirect with a note to the discussion here. --Teancum (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

"While it's never going to be a GA"--But why tho?
I mean if there was something there in the reception section any article can reach GA, though in this particular case there's next to nothing actually being said here. One of the sources is even more about the game, while the rest are just short statements and quips.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
By never going to be a GA, I simply mean that traditionally it's really hard to pass GA for articles that have less coverage, and yes, there are lots of articles that have less coverage but are still notable. I don't think the gold standard for notability has to be that it could hit GA status. If that were the case tons of articles would get axed. That being said I'll definitely concede if the community disagrees. I have no real fight here, I just wanted there to be more than just a tag and then a redirect a month later from a different user. I think it's worth having a discussion to assess things. --Teancum (talk) 17:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
I think you misunderstood me? I'm not saying "it needs to be GA-able to survive", I'm asking why you're certain it'll never be able to be a GA article. It fails notability because it's relying on quick short mentions, but that's a separate matter entirely.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

@Teancum: I don't have too much knowledge about Bionic Commando but even really old games can spark commentary (Even Mega Man X had commentary by Scholars or articles dedicated to him despite his debut being in 1992). I suggest entering google scholars, google books or famous websites that might have articles focused on the character. That's pretty useful to prove notability of a fictional character.Tintor2 (talk) 21:12, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

PWND

Excuse me but I have a draft on a FPS game called PWND and I’m looking for some good sources to make it official. So far, I only found one for Vanossgaming but one isn’t gonna be enough. 64.56.17.172 (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

The only thing close to significant coverage from a reliable source that I've found is VentureBeat. I won't say it's totally impossible for source to exist somewhere, but most likely, the only place it should be mentioned is Skydance Media#Skydance Interactive. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:00, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
I put down the refs from VentureBeat in the draft. Is that enough? 64.56.17.172 (talk) 22:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
No, articles usually need several pieces of significant coverage from more than 1 website. I wouldn't characterize the Gamespot one as significant. The others are primary or not reliable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:02, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
But could you find some sources for me to look through? Besides VentureBeat? 107.77.198.34 (talk) 23:44, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Take a look at WP:VG/SE. It should help you. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Note that the IP has been blocked for block evasion.-- Ponyobons mots 22:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Super Smash Bros. Ultimate peer review

I am looking to nominate the Smash Ultimate article for GAN, but I have not received much feedback in my peer review. Looking for opinions, criticism, advice, etc. The more the merrier! KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 00:22, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Indiscriminate inclusion of staff in infobox

I feel as though there's a bit of a problem with infoboxes having staff included whose work on the game is uncited. While the credits could be themselves a citation, I feel like RS should be used to at least verify this info. Sometimes, it also creates issues with being a comprehensive coverage of the game - for example, God of War (2018 video game) has multiple uncited staff members in the infobox, one of whom being the story lead. And it's not for a lack of things to cite about his contributions, this just isn't covered. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

100% agree. It's a constant struggle of editors bloating and trimming the fields. Sergecross73 msg me 00:02, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
I think if we want to make this less likely to happen, the correct place to fix it isn't here, but rather the documentation page of the Infobox. @IceWelder: reverted me on an attempt to do this (diff), but we should just crank up the volume there that "Do not use programmer / designer on modern large studio games" rather than hiding it in the field-by-field docs. IceWelder's edit summary is that these fields are still used in recent games, but I'm not sure that's true, or at least should be true. It's harmless for true indie games but I think the suggested wording makes the distinction clear. If we wanted to go even further, we could add in some comments in the copyable "sample" fields that recap the key limitations from the fields - only include the most major figures, etc. Any thoughts? (Bringing it up here rather than the Talk page of the doc because I think this is a wider-audience issue.) SnowFire (talk) 15:28, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
I think that's a sound idea, yeah. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:32, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
It comes up enough that we should try to address it. Documentation can only help. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:00, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree with IceWelder, I do not see anything wrong with including the most senior lead (or directors) programmers or lead designers for large AAA games provided there is only a maxiumum of about of about 4 listed.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 15:23, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
If you believe that's the case, then the later documentation needs to be updated. In the actual "please read inclusion notes below" section, both of those fields already say This field is often unfilled in modern high-budget development due to large team sizes and collaboration. In other words, I'm not offering any change of policy, just trying to highlight what is already the case but often invisible / unknown / ignored. Actually changing that to say "never mind, go pick 4 programmers at random from a 15 person team in the credits" would be a new policy. (To be clear, I think the existing policy is fine of simply not including this information, and just needs larger and more aggressive highlighting.) SnowFire (talk) 16:43, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Not to mention that the filling of fields in the infobox usually goes against not only our guidance, but MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. Most creatives in a video game article are never even mentioned, let alone so important to understanding the topic they have to be included in the infobox; in practice, what people are doing is treating the fields as areas that must be filled in, even if they are a) unreferenced or not referenced to anything other than a primary source, b) not mentioned in the body, or c) all of the above. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting "never mind, go pick 4 programmers at random from a 15 person team in the credits". I mean if there are say 3 programmer directors or leads then I do not see the harm in including them. However, if the most senior level is programmers listed in the credits is above 4 than leave it blank since it would bloat the infobox by listing 15.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 19:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree. I think IceWelder's reversion was correct too; there's a difference between "often unfilled" and "should almost always be blank". – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
To be clear, the "at random" part was a little glib... but only a little. I fully expect that, given a sea of names in the credits, well-meaning editors may just pick the first four listed, even if none of them are public figures and the role of these 4 wasn't that much more special than the people lower down the chain. In older games or indie games, you can at least be assured that the programmers or designers did a lot of the work. As for Rhain's comment, note that "should almost always be blank" is after "for games produced by large teams" which I believe is just true. Checking a random AAA game, Horizon: Forbidden West lists Michiel van der Leeuw as the programmer, but his title is "technical director." This is just a guess off no information, but I strongly suspect he was actually a manager of many programmers with a title like that. And we don't really have anything in the article clarifying what his role really was. So... yeah, standing by these cases generally being blank if we want to follow MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. SnowFire (talk) 06:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
For some reason, I though that we had written advice that names in the infobox should be named mentioned by RSes that are also within the body. Sadly for large teams (eg AAA) this usually limits that to lead director, narrative director, and music composers, while there's larger varability in smaller teams; we're not like films or TV where nearly all the major positions are documented in RSes. I still agree we need to keep those credits thin in the infobox. Masem (t) 00:50, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Rayman (character) as it own section for the series article

The advice suggested that I get this notice here so, my draft of this character got rejected but the advice suggested that I start the character own section in the series article Rayman. the advice also suggested that i also could join with others in this wikiproject. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 00:16, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, we're always looking to help people get more comfortable in the video game space. I think that a section above "Playable characters" could be fine. I think Rayman could eventually get a character article with enough work, but obviously, it's a little tougher since he shares his name with his game and series. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:28, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
So basically, you suggest me to create the section above the playable characters so you want me to put it one the characters section or creating a new main header NatwonTSG2 (talk) 01:32, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
People are telling you that the character, as is, doesn't meet the standards for having its own separate article, but until it does, you could add some of that content to the series article. It's sound advice. Sergecross73 msg me 01:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
I think the idea is good, as Rayman is the title character of his franchise, and pretty much entirely enclosed by it. I'm genuinely not sure how much there is to say about Rayman that isn't just direct development/reception information on the franchise as a whole. "The character was created by x", "his moveset in these games is considered good," etc. Looking at the Rayman article, I would primarily suggest a general overview section at the top to describe the concept and evolution of the series in more detail.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maplestrip (talk • contribs) 23:26, July 4, 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (June 26 to July 2)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 14:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

June 26

June 27

June 28

June 29

June 30

July 1

July 2

  • Yeah, it's good content, but there's no reason it needed to be split out into its own article, especially when a series article exists. This is the sort of content that helps justify series articles. Sergecross73 msg me 15:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Rainbow Six Mobile seems WP:TOOSOON, no? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
And is Bet UK notable? It's unsourced currently and I find it hard looking up sources with such a generic name. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 04:05, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Created by a user with a single edit to their account, primarily writing about a product's target demographic? It's rare to see a Marketing/PR employee to be that blatant about what they're doing... Sergecross73 msg me 04:21, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
It should also be mentioned there's already a List of Punch-Out!! characters which may be an even more pertinent target for stereotypes concerning the characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a good target too. Sergecross73 msg me 14:27, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Thirded. I’ve often thought that a list of characters article is a good place for critical commentary on the group of characters as a whole; for instance, I have considered but haven’t done yet a section in List of Sonic the Hedgehog characters about criticism of how many characters there are and why the developers continue to add more. Red Phoenix talk 14:39, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
I would support that section if there are enough sources for it to be WP:DUE. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:31, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Christian video game

I just learned that this article exists, and it has a SERIOUS scope problem. It's so vague in its inclusion criteria and scope that it lists anything that has anything even vaguely Christian influenced even distantly (Dante's Inferno), by a Christian creator (Five Night's at Freddys), or has a concept that is in any way Christian (Red Dead Redemption 2). I've excised a lot of these, though I've left Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia despite thinking they should also be removed on account that I'm not sure they strongly inherit the "Christianity in fiction" as adaptations automatically. It doesn't seem to be a highly watched article, so I'm just mentioning it to get a couple more eyes on it potentially. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 05:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, to be clear, the article is on video games that are religious in nature rather than simply having a Christian creator or vague themes. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:49, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Back in 1997, I got roped into babysitting for a relative, probably because I was the only adult sitting around doing nothing but playing video games. So I sat the kids down in front of my favorite game, Diablo. An hour later, their mother comes by and says, "How's everything going?" And there's all kinds of satanic imagery on the computer screen: pentagrams, demons, the whole deal. So, I'm thinking, "They're fundamentalist Christians, so just spin it positively" – Yup, we're playing a Christian game where you slay demons. She loved it and told me to keep up the good work. I dunno, man, it worked for me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:15, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
I feel like this article should approach it like Christian rock. On that basis, I think LOTR and Narnia don't stay in the article: video game adaptations of those properties do not engage with their Christian themes... like at all. On the other hand, Five Nights at Freddy's is a glaring omission. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
I had removed FNAF on account that the mention in this article and the FNAF articles don't discuss it as engaging with Christian themes or narratives beyond "the developer previously made Christian games" and an interview linked off the FNAF game specifically stated it was an attempt to make a game that wasn't a Christian game, so I don't know that it's appropriate to include. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 16:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
I looked around and I couldn't find any books that depicted FNaF as having Christian themes, and the interview that I cited basically said what TTP was talking about (The creator wanted to create a game that was not marketed towards Christians). The Night Watch (talk) 17:31, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree with the tightening up the criteria since the article appeared to be conflating use of religious imagery for decorative purposes with the works being directly Christian in origin. For example, despite using weapons that tie into religious iconography, Simon Belmont, has not at the article in question claimed, ever been identified as a Christian.--67.70.144.202 (talk) 17:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Kadabra

Kadabra has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 11:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"Family" listings in Mortal Kombat character infoboxes

I think it's time to remove this as it's unnecessary in-universe content that clutters the infoboxes without saying anything noteworthy about the MK characters. Plus, especially in the case of Mileena, it's now become a confusing mess due to the constant series reboots. Pinging Kung Fu Man, Greenish Pickle!, Tintor2, Cukie Gherkin, and Sergecross73 because I would much like their input on this issue. sixtynine • whaddya want? • 23:29, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree, honestly those parameters a whole usually end up *such* a mess so fast, especially with long tenured characters. That said we do use that template with other projects, so that may be a complication.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
I hate it too. There's always constant attempts at awkwardly adding cruft to Mario and Sonic character articles too. I never know how much to trim back though, so it'd be good to try to come to a consensus as a community here. Sergecross73 msg me 23:56, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
In general, I'm a fan of cutting down infobox fields to just the most important stuff (see discussion above on staff), but... I'm not so sure on this. I'm not a Mortal Kombat expert, but "family" does seem like the kind of thing that can be relevant. Like, isn't the fact that Kitana is a princess and the rightful heir to the Outland a big deal in her plot? Which is reflected by saying Sindel is her mother. If there are certain cases that are too complicated for the infobox, sure, say "See plot" or something, but it doesn't seem clear that's the common case. SnowFire (talk) 05:39, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Sure. Only the most outofuniverse notable information should be mentioned in the infobox like introduction or actors. Same with how some characters have different fighting styles, they are barely discussed in the body.Tintor2 (talk) 21:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Designer

In some series like say, Devil May Cry or Mortal Kombat, the character designer is often changed. In the case of Final Fantasy IX and XII they were designed by Yoshitaka Amano and Akihiko Yoshida respectively in the crossovers Dissidia, Tetsuya Nomura was responsible for their looks. Should every designer be shown in the infobox or just show the original one? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on this policy, but I'd assume it would be the original character designer only, unless they were were changed in a major way and used like that going forward. One game redesigns don't really make sense to add. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Super Mario RPG

So, I reckon since the remake was announced, it may be worthwhile to move the SNES game to Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars to reduce the potential for confusion (should a remake page be created). - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

That will not reduce the confusion, as there's a likelihood people will call the remake that too. I think the best course of action is to leave the original where it is, and then disambiguate the remake, as with Demon's Souls. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Perhaps people familiar with the original, but I don't think that there's so many people aware of the subtitle that they'd call it that. I mean, I've never seen anyone call the remake "Legend of the Seven Stars," though it's certainly a YMMV situation. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 03:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
The best call is to wait. Right now what is announced is a remake. It does not require an immediate spin out, and it's entirely possible if unlikely it *never* spins out. -- ferret (talk) 13:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
But actually a draft already exists (Draft:Super Mario RPG (2023)). Terribly written, declined on the spot. MilkyDefer 05:10, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't think that this article should exist became it just a remake of 1995 Mario game and remake usually just be part of the original article so NatwonTSG2 (talk) 23:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
I do not think that being a remake is itself justification for merging. Final Fantasy III (2006 video game), Pokemon FireRed and LeafGreen, The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019 video game), etc. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:18, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
The draft was correctly declined, but I don't think we have enough information on whether or not there will be enough info for a separate article or not. We don't even technically know how faithful of a recreation it will be, or if any new content will be added. Those details, and the coverage they'd receive, would affect things greatly. Sergecross73 msg me 02:45, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Turn Tinykin into a Good article

The article which i created Tinykin which i had remove any sources and add a brief summary in the lead section, remove any non-reliable sources, rewrite non-reliable word and most important, someone add the game cover, but even with all that, the article still is rating a start class so is they any way to remove or add or show to learn. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 17:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

@NatwonTSG2: One problem with the article is a lack of content. It doesn't really describe the gameplay beyond "it's a platformer and you collect tinykins", so the reader doesn't have a clear picture of how the game works. The development section is pretty small, especially if you ignore the details of the developers' history, and the reception section doesn't really summarize what reviewers felt about the game, just whether or not they enjoyed it.
The main problem, however, at the risk of being rude, is that your English writing is very poor and difficult to understand. The article's writing is a bit better than your writing here or on your userpage, but it's still really hard to understand what you're trying to say in any given sentence. I recommend slowing down when you write and really think about each sentence; right now it's a lot of sentence fragments jumbled together as you jump from thought to thought, along with numerous spelling and grammar mistakes. Try taking your sentences and reading them out loud, and you may see what I'm talking about. --PresN 19:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi NatwonTSG2, I tried going over the article and rephrased what I could, but like PresN said, it's hard to figure out what is meant by the text. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:18, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
You guys were saying that my writing is HARD and LACKING? The best I try is the hardest thing? But Outside that I made a list of words on my sandbox so can you understand this writing of do you just whole another language? NatwonTSG2 (talk) 23:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Neither of us said such a thing. "Hard" writing isn't a thing either, you are hard to understand though, I'm sorry. Also in this case, I can't figure out what you're trying to say, "so can you understand this writing of do you just whole another language?", what does that mean? Even in that context, I can't figure out what you're trying to communicate. I do not know what your mother tongue is, but have you tried a translating software like Google Translate? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 04:00, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
oh the "do you just whole another language" was a mistake that was supposed to said "do you just speak a whole another language" my bad :(. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 13:54, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
The problem is that the article itself is full of such mistakes. Players and Reviewers are impressing of the game saying that the game was enjoyable and having adorable characters design.. Your very first step towards thinking about Good Article status is to go proofread the entire thing again. -- ferret (talk) 14:22, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:AVATAR (MUD)#Requested move 1 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:AVATAR (MUD)#Requested move 1 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:37, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Use of "XSXS" as an acronym for "Xbox Series X/S"

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Use of "XSXS" as an acronym for "Xbox Series X/S" has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Abbreviations#RFC on the use of acronym "XSXS" to stand for "Xbox Series X/S" across a wide range of articles in tables and templates. Thank you. —DIYeditor (talk) 17:20, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Ryan York seems to prefer an acronym for Xbox Series which I can find very little use of on the web, XSXS. I think this may be confusing to our readers. There is plenty of space in the Reception tables to spell out "Xbox Series" or "Xbox Series X/S". Unfortunately Ryan also seems to stubbornly refuse to use edit summaries so I am not sure what their thinking is, but they have chosen to simply revert here rather than attempt to discuss it. Can we establish some broader consensus on this? —DIYeditor (talk) 03:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

I think the consensus is pretty obvious, Xbox Series X/S. Nothing really needs to be "established" here. That said, you just warned them about edit summaries today, so how is it "stubbornly refusing"? Were they notified in the past? Did you discuss with them the acronym? It seems like you are trying to bring down the lightning of Zeus upon them when this is simply a matter for discussion on their talk page - and they seem to be responding on their talk page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:03, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
I guess I confused this individual with someone else, it is just a new editor. I was frustrated by them ignoring my edit summary, reverting, and not providing any justification in their edit summary for doing so. WP:BITEy for sure. —DIYeditor (talk) 05:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
XSXS has been in use on Wikipedia for years and is codified in several of our templates and modules as a suitable abbreviation for Xbox Series X/S. It's literally documented in {{Video game reviews}}. -- ferret (talk) 12:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
I mean, I guess... but does that make it suitable for use in an article? Seems like a weird acronym to me. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
It's not being used in an article's prose though. It's being used in the review template, as it has been used for 3 years, as an abbreviation in the Metacritic score section. I'm honestly surprised this question is coming up, because it's literally been the standard for review templates for every XSXS game released for three years. -- ferret (talk) 13:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Strangely this abbreviation appears almost nowhere on the web from what I can tell. Isn't this confusing to readers to have abbreviations that have absolutely no broader meaning, especially when there is space to spell it out? Also Ryan York was using it in the article body, not just the reviews template. —DIYeditor (talk) 14:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
The specific initialisation is in the table, rather than linking to the term. If we are to use it in the linked way we would need to have Xbox Series X and Series S (XSXS). Actually on that article, we don't do it for PS5 either, so that should be done too. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:20, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations: Use sourceable abbreviations: Avoid making up new abbreviations, especially acronyms. For example, "International Feline Federation" is good as a translation of Fédération Internationale Féline, but neither the anglicisation nor the reduction IFF is used by the organisation; use the original name and its official abbreviation, FIFe. If it is necessary to abbreviate in small spaces (infoboxes, navboxes and tables), use widely recognised abbreviations. As an example, for New Zealand gross national product, use NZ and GNP, with a link if the term has not already been written out: NZ GNP; do not use the made-up initialism NZGNP). Seems clear cut that according to the MOS we should not use made up acronyms. —DIYeditor (talk) 14:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
You linked a diff where he was using it in the template, not the prose, so I went with that. The only place it should be used is in the template. -- ferret (talk) 17:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
In the template where it generates the full link is fine, not as plain text. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:37, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
In the multi-platform mode, it would generate a full link automatically. For the normal mode though, users type this up. That's a very quick fix though. Just link it. -- ferret (talk) 19:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Comment I got no hits from either search engine at WP:VG/SE, and Google shows hits for a song/album, not Xbox. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
    I put the redirect up at RfD due to ambiguity. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
  • TheDeviantPro Regarding this please see the current discussion here and what I quoted from the MOS. We are not to concoct our own acronyms for things, which is what has happened here. "PS5" might be standard enough but "XSXS" is by no means an established acronym. Template documentation is not a citation. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:26, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
    The problem is you've begun enforcing changes while this discussion continues and before template documentation is updated to reflect a new consensus. As I said before, made up or not, this has been in place and in use for three years. If you just start going around clearing out it's uses, you're going to be reverted by dozens of users who follow the template documentation and are likely unaware this discussion is occurring. -- ferret (talk) 13:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
    Additionally, "Xbox Series" is also unacceptable, if not more so. The console line is not the "Series" line. It is two explicit models, the Series X and the Series S. "Xbox Series" is not a thing, even less so than XSXS. PLEASE make sure you're not going around putting "Xbox Series". -- ferret (talk) 13:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
    You can check my edit history if you want. I changed two pages. "Xbox Series" can't be any worse than "XSXS" given that anyone will recognize "Xbox Series" but nobody will recognize "XSXS" which has like zero usage by anyone other than Wikipedia and looks like a jumble of letters. —DIYeditor (talk) 13:37, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
    The only thing wrong with "Xbox Series" is the capitalization of "series". Series X is one of their series. Series S is another of their series. That's two series of Xbox. They are "Xbox series", just as, at least in the US, Outback, Forester, and Impreza are Subaru models, even though they aren't part of a product line called "Subaru Models". Largoplazo (talk) 17:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
  • "XSXS" xbox gets me about 22,000 google hits and "PS5" playstation gets about 142,000,000. PS5 is a legitimate abbreviation for Playstation 5 but XSXS is a completely manufactured acronym. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:33, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
  • WP should not be using this "fake-ronym" in any reader-face way. Template documentation is not a source. Wikiprojects do not get to make up their own "rules" against a sitewide consensus like a clear guideline, which we have (for good reasons). "But we got away with it for a couple of years" isn't an excuse; there is no deadline for cleanup of bad writing.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:14, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
    I think that since Wikipedia is for the readers we should not use the acronym as it is more likely to confuse them. Blitzfan51 speak to the manager 12:48, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

XSER

This might just be me but I added an extra letter, since something tells me another Xbox Series (Letter) is going to be a thing in the future, and if I need to differentiate between the specific consoles, so I ended up with XSERS and XSERX. This might only be useful in that scenario though... Zero Serenity (talk - contributions) 16:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

We are not supposed to make up any acronyms for anything on Wikipedia. —DIYeditor (talk) 17:43, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Close/conclusion/consensus

I've unarchived this because it was prematurely archived when consensus had not been determined. Do we have consensus here not to use this acronym? I haven't seen any policy-based arguments that it is acceptable to use. Is there any objection to looking into a semi-automated removal and replacement of it? For example with "Xbox Series X/S" or something? —DIYeditor (talk) 15:44, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

At the very best, this discussion is a no consensus with no path forward, including the separate redirect discussion of XSXS that was kept. The only guideline argument presented against its use is the claim that it's 100% utterly made up, but that's not the case. It's clear the acronym exists in the wild, even if not the most widely used. The acronym is validly used for brevity in tables and templates. -- ferret (talk) 16:27, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
The valid acronym "PS5" is somewhere around 6000x more common. The XSXS barely exists and seems to be largely citogenesis. No serious articles from major publishers were found using it. Metacritic does not use it. It is disingenuous to say that because after years of use on Wikipedia, perhaps the original use, a handful of cases on Twitter and such exist that this is a real acronym. —DIYeditor (talk) 17:17, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
We might want to use Xbox Series X/S as it's a bit less confusing than XSXS. Also I couldn't find "XSXS" used much. 2NumForIce (speak|edits) 04:48, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (July 3 to July 9)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 18:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

July 3

July 4

July 5

July 6

July 7

July 8

July 9

  • Ended up redirecting Clank (Ratchet & Clank) again on my end. While I get Haleth's point that it can be seen as bad form to tag and shortly after kill off an article, what was there didn't support the article's notability nor has from the getgo and editors can and do change their mind at times. Additionally restoring something without trying to fix it up or indicating you plan to is honestly eh in itself; notability tags on their own are just by my experience getting outright ignored.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
    Let's agree that video game characters are generally an inherently controversial topic and should go through a merge discussion if possible. Bold redirects are for minor pages nobody will care about, not major characters, as notable or non-notable they may be. I'd feel uncomfortable unilaterally passing judgement that a character is not notable, especially if the article existed for that long. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:40, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
    That flies into the face of WP:BOLD. You're free to approach it that way, but it's literally not enforceable to others who disagree. Sergecross73 msg me 19:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
    Yeah I definitely don't agree with that assessment Zx.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
    It is definitely at least practically enforceable. I do agree that most fictional character redirects should go through merge discussions instead of being WP:BLARed. Also, you cannot just revert someone reverting a WP:BOLD edit, that is basically one step removed from edit warring. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
    I wasn't trying to imply that it be enforced as a rule, just suggesting it as a courtesy. (But yes, the fact that it was re-redirected when User:Haleth restored it is not great under WP:BRD since the redirect was already bold). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Merger discussion for New-Style Super NES

An article which may be of interest to members of this project—New-Style Super NES —has been proposed for merging with Super Nintendo Entertainment System. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. CascadeUrbanite (talk) 08:03, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Article statistics updated

I know that the WPVG Article statistics page is something y'all care deeply about, which is why no one has ever commented that it hadn't been updated since March 2021. At long last, however, your pleas have been answered, and the table and charts have been brought up to date. Learn fascinating insights like that someone tagged over 2000 redirects in October 2021, that we crossed 100,000 pages tagged in April 2023, or that we've actually been on a downward trend for stubs since 2015, with the current count of 9086 the lowest since April 2007 even though we have more than double the number of overall articles and despite every other article class being the highest count it has ever been. --PresN 23:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I love a good overload of statistics, and that does it nicely. Sergecross73 msg me 23:16, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
I do like to toot my own horn that I reduced the stub count by around 1000. :v - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Screenshot discussion

Hi everyone, sorry to bother you with this, but can some help out in a discussion? I don't believe a screenshot is needed, see Talk:The Awesome Adventures of Captain Spirit#Screenshot. I'd love to argue myself, but life with a nine month old means having different priorities. I can't find the time or the energy to reply properly. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Is Amiibo Tap: Nintendo's Greatest Bits a "game" or an "application"?

Currently being reviewed for GA, and this was brought up. Which should I use? I currently use application. Panini! • 🥪 21:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I would characterize it as an application. It is not in and of itself a game, and doesn't have the level of indepth-ness that something like NES Remix does where beating parts of the game is in itself a game. It's simply a demo system. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Borderlands (series)#Requested move 8 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Borderlands (series)#Requested move 8 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 02:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Is this video game company notable?

CTW, Japanese operator of HTML5 gaming service G123. It has ja:CTW article. Not seeing much sourcing in English, however. Some of the games they released have some theoretically reliable coverage but that's really rehashed press release stuff ([8], [9], [10], [11]...). Right now I can't find much to show this would meet NCORP, but on the other hand, it seems like non-trivial publisher of dozen+ games. Can anyone find some decent sources to stub this, or is it WP:TOOSOON? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:56, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

This company seems strange to me. The corresponding article in Japanese Wikipedia has no reliable sources to it. But the source itself is strange enough - a supposed Japanese company article is using articles from Chinese websites. MilkyDefer 11:13, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
If you want to write an article in English Wikipedia, then having citations from English-language website will be much more beneficial. But by taking into account that the subject is a Japanese company, to ensure notability, then at least it needs to have the official website, all of its social media available, at least in Japanese language, and also any secondary & tertiary sources in Japanese language. It you found out only in Chinese language, try to double check if that so-called Japanese company is really a Japanese company or it is a subsidiary of a Chinese company operating in Japan? Chongkian (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
I am not sure about ownership, but Chinese angle is there - Baidu is involved, and it seems the games are designed in China and then reskinned with Japanese IP and localized/translated for international market (more recently, some earlier games may be just Chinese IPs, but new ones are related to some Japanese anime/manga series). In either case, sourcing I can find is poor, we would need Japanese/Chiense speakers to dig for more. My gut feeling is that the dev is notable to have an article, but it's WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES argument, I know... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Announcing creation of the Video game characters task force

Given recent efforts to overhaul and clean up character articles across wikipedia, and the need for a means to not only track the fictional character articles (including species) under the project but also have a centralized point of discussion regarding such matters without flooding the main project's talk page has become a necessity. This task force should ultimately help with that and can be found at WP:VGCHAR/WT:VGCHAR or via the sidebar links on the video game project main page. We're still in the process of setting things up, but a few discussion points have been raised for anyone that wants to offer their input.-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:55, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi. That looks like a very good initiative :D .. Just wanna add a point. Based on my experience, since many of the video game characters were adopted from movies or vice versa (e.g. Mario Bros), isn't it better for the two to be mutually inclusive? (e.g. let's say the task force name shall be 'Fictional characters task force', and this task force can be the task force for both WikiProject Video games And also WikiProject Animation) Because many of them are interchangeable. Chongkian (talk) 06:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
It's a nice thought conceptually, but I don't think it's really of much interest to the current participants. It's mostly formed of WP:VG participants, and widening it would lead to a massive influx of other topics - film, book, comic book, etc - and would quickly become unmanageable, in my opinion anyways. Sergecross73 msg me 12:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
In my opinion, task forces are only really useful if there are people who are interested in the taskforce but not the larger project. In that case, those people would be able to follow conversations there without being bogged down by larger conversations they might not care about. That being said, if you think this task force will inspire you to do more work in this field, then that's good of course :) – PS, be sure to check out WP:WikiProject Fictional characters for a similar project. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:19, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Elaine Marley

Elaine Marley has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GAR will remain open this time longer. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (July 10 to July 16)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 14:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

July 10

July 11

July 12

July 13

July 14

July 15

July 16

For once it's me filling up the new category section. --PresN 14:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the tag. I only added it to those two pages because there are some video game characters who are LGBTQ. Thanks to this, I'm going back and updating the video games section of each of the articles I created... adding in some citation needed tags. Historyday01 (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

FCIV.NET Freeciv 3D version is just a circumvention of a previous AFD which was closed as delete. Also some sketchy behavior by the creator claiming inital draftifying was vandalism. --Mika1h (talk) 16:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Advice for writing about video games

Please see Wikipedia talk:Identifying and using primary sources#Addition needed on "Primary sources should be used carefully" which is about using video games as a primary source on themselves. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Genre Category

How come Drama isn’t a video game category. Hamster Gomez (talk) 00:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Basically, video game genres don't work on the same scheme as films or novels. Video game genres are based around the kind of play. Fighting is usually a 1v1 battle, Adventure games are typically about exploration or story-based, shooters are based around... well, shooting. However, genres are not really "comedy" or "drama" or "romance". Even a lot of games based around romance are called dating simulators. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:15, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Question regarding Dungeons of Dreadrock

Hi. Could someone please look at Dungeons of Dreadrock and check the COI issue raised there? ChristophMinnameier (talk) 11:47, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I do believe the COI tag is unwarranted. The COI was declared and the page went through AfC as policy dictates. I didn't see particularly spammy or promotional language there and the game itself is notable. It can probably be removed with no issues. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, if there aren't any specific concerns about the article being raised or discussed, the talk page COI notice is probably sufficient. Sergecross73 msg me 13:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thank you. then could you please remove it @Sergecross73? Because I'm pretty sure I shouldn't BE doing that myself. ChristophMinnameier (talk) 17:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Metagaming (role-playing games)

An article which may be of interest to members of this project—Metagaming (role-playing games)—has been proposed for merging with Metagame. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Sariel Xilo (talk) 17:45, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Meta Knight

Meta Knight has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 10:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

New Articles (July 17 to July 23)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.15 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 15:11, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

July 17

July 18

July 19

July 20

July 21

July 22

July 23

Atelier

Hi. I'd like some soundings about a potential project that I've been growing interested in. The Atelier is overdue for some TLC, but I'm noticing that its various groupings don't have a large number of sources that I could find, or great differences in their gameplay within each grouping. I was thinking of treating the grouping that could be sourced similar to some subseries within Megami Tensei (Last Bible, Majin Tensei, Digital Devil Saga). Opinions? ProtoDrake (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake:I found a bunch of sources regarding Atelier Marie that are placed at its talk page. I could lend some help here and there by finding some sources regarding other articles related to the series. Roberth Martinez (talk) 00:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Unlike the Megami Tensei games, I feel the Atelier series is one that really lacks a lot of decent sourcing in English. If you can dig into Japanese sources that help delinate the subseries, that might be good, but make sure the sourcing is there first, otherwise, you're creating articles on non-notable series. Masem (t) 02:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@KGRAMR and Masem: I guessed the sourcing would be Japanese-dependant, it was just amatter of how to do it. As to sources for the proposed approach, I found these three interviews and this summary page (Plus one more). In them, the different game groupings are referred to as "Salberg series", "Mysterious series" "Dusk/Twilight series", "Gramnad series", ect.. This seems like a good indicator that the subgroup method would work. --ProtoDrake (talk) 07:12, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
  • I think subseries articles might make sense for some of the oldest games that never were released in English in Salburg / Grannad, but I'm skeptical if the intent is to do a merge of articles on games into subseries articles for the later ones. My understanding is that there's notably different reception for games within the same subseries (i.e. people liked Atelier Sophie but didn't like Atelier Firis), and there are more differences than you'd think between game 1 and 3 of a series. I think something like a single article for Digital Devil Saga makes sense because the two individual games are very closely connected and clearly designed as a whole with a chapter 1 / chapter 2, but the Atelier subseries do some clear swerves based on feedback (i.e. Japanese audiences allegedly didn't like Ayesha's somberness, with the result that the Dusk series went a different direction in later games). The later "4th games in trilogies" were also clearly not part of the original plan, but rather created later - Sophie 2 is probably more related to other 2022-23 Atelier games than the OG Atelier Sophie in terms of engine, graphics, etc.
  • Speaking of which, if anyone wants to try a new project, Atelier Lulua: The Scion of Arland is surely notable (e.g. 22 MC critic reviews for PS4) but is currently a redirect. (And per above, I don't think it'd work best as part of a hypothetical "Arland" subseries article.) SnowFire (talk) 22:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@SnowFire: After going through further research, I've been weighing up the options, and I'm in general agreement, with some small comments. With the exception of Atelier Marie (I've found loads of sources which justify its standalone status), the Salburg titles could be contained in one article, same for the Gramnad duology. Particularly as they all share subtitles, so the articles could be something like "Atelier: The Alchemist of Salburg" and "Atelier: The Alchemist of Gramnad". While it may be a bit of a hassle, the individual Arland, Dusk, Mysterious and Ryza titles could easily have enough sources to have self-contained articles for each game, mooting the need for series articles. The two difficult ones to my mind are the Iris trilogy and Mana Khemia duology, which don't really have that much about their individual development, and seem to share the same publishers and staff. Also, for clarification, I'm not intending on taking any of them to GA, just tidying them up and expanding them so the series has more of a footing and is less like a collection of stubs. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Although the exhaustive detailing of mechanics is a bit weird, our Japanese-language counterpart only has a single article for the Salburg series called called Atelier series (Salburg). There's quite a few, albeit in Japanese, sources to be found there.  ►Kyo  ►Talk  22:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

List of best-selling video game franchises limit

Fan Of Lion King started a discussion here. Talk:List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises#Limit. Any imput would be great Timur9008 (talk) 10:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:EA FC 24#Requested move 18 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:EA FC 24#Requested move 18 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Moving My Draft to Mainspace, What will Happens

In the past days, I have done a lot of my draft Draft:Rayman (character). I had added reliable sources, perfect writing and follow the manual of style but my draft kinda got rejected which means the editor want me to either stop working on the draft or ask for advice but I thinking what if I move the draft to mainspace and what will happens to it. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 17:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I am sympathetic to the fact you worked heavily on the article, but no amount of effort can overcome basic non-notability. If you moved it to mainspace it would just be redirected for the same reason it was rejected as a draft. But I realize that I am the only one who reviewed the page, so I welcome others to confirm or deny my review was right. If there really is significant coverage out there, let me know. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:56, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
So you saying that my draft may not overcome basic non-notability but you welcome others to deny my review was right so is there anything I should remove from the draft because I can't figure it out myself. NatwonTSG2 (talk) 20:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
If I may offer my two cents, it definitely is a decent start but I don't think it passes WP:N as a lot of the commentary is in passing or small and there isn't much there. That's not something you can fix sometimes unless sources manifest at a later date.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:11, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I kinda can't understand what you saying like the word "commentary" and the phrases "as a lot of the commentary is in passing or small." NatwonTSG2 (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
You need to find reliable sources that say more about Rayman. Sergecross73 msg me 20:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
To re-iterate what Serge said, Rayman the character as opposed to the titular video game franchise or intellectual property as a whole. Haleth (talk) 09:04, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I will say, this draft must surely come in use if Rayman becomes more significant outside of the context of his video game franchise. We can definitely keep this draft around. That being said, I wouldn't mind to see this in mainspace already either. I never know how to treat a source like this, but even all of the 'much requested for Smash Bros.' sources help a lot in establishing notability for the character himself. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Rikku

Rikku has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 12:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

MachineGames Indiana Jones game sources

Are these sources enough for an article? (similar to Untitled Grand Theft Auto game) This is all I found. Was wondering if anyone found anything else.

Timur9008 (talk) 11:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

There is actually a draft which has some of these sources and others. I don't know if it's considered ready for mainspace, though.  AJFU  (talk) 13:17, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
@IceWelder what do you think? Timur9008 (talk) 13:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
I'd recommend keeping it as draft now. We don't have a clue of the state of the game, yet. I would assume that the next time we have major news about it, we'll have a taste of what the game will actually be and its release date or year, at which point we can then move that draft to mainspace.
(There's something that we should consider for VGs like WP:NFILM does for film production, to avoid having full articles on games so far out in the future until we can give them fair coverage, but that's a separate discussion) Masem (t) 13:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Yeah this got discussed on the Discord recently as well, and I think while it's a bit tougher to determine when an article should stand alone versus film, it's worth having a rule. Should start another discussion about it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:04, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
I support having articles incubating at draftspace before they are published to mainspace. All the "untitled" video games (e.g. BP/Captain America game, GTA 6, Last of Us multiplayer) should really stay in the draftspace until they have an actual title. They are obviously WP:TOOSOON. OceanHok (talk) 10:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I definitely disagree with the idea that they are "obviously" too soon, especially GTA VI; the game could be cancelled tomorrow and I'd argue the topic would still remain notable (though perhaps with a different title). – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Over at the film project they are adamant that if WP:NFILM is not met (that is, production hasn't started) then the film article can't be created. Yet I have argued with them that there are some projects that have taken forever to get off the ground to have become notable in their failure to be produced (like the live action Akira adaption).
I would not want us in the VG project to have that same level of stubbornness. I agree that the "Untitled GTA game" at this point is still notable for what we know of its dev and the leak. Or even more apt, Beyond Good and Evil 2. What this advice would be aimed more at is that when we come off those game announcement shows (E3, Summer Game Fest, etc.) with trailers of games that we had not yet heard of at that point, with no clear announcement date or any immediate followup in sources to discuss the game in depth, we shouldn't be rushing to create articles on those. On the other hand, game announcements with clear release dates or windows and where there is some deep discussion on the game in the days that follow would be reasonable to have an article. The MachineGames Indy game falls more into the former class, its been announced, and we have some idea what the gameplay is, but not an iota of a release date or any deeper details with it. Masem (t) 12:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 18:19, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

So, it could find where sources that we deemed unreliable are being used? QuicoleJR (talk) 18:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Using this for Sportskeeda would be a good start. It's a content farm that was repeatedly found unreliable here and at RSN but was never properly phased out. It's currently in use on several hundered articles. IceWelder [✉] 18:46, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Would also be good to use on sources like Gamerant or Screenrant, since there are probably a lot of places where Valnet is used to demonstrate notability that nobody pays attention to. NegativeMP1 (talk) 18:48, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
I'd feel wary about doing it with Valnet sources, because they're also used to confirm some things in game or cited for larger statements in articles where notability is established: the last thing you'd want is a culling that leaves editors wondering what the hell happened. Best to keep it to the absolutely unreliable.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
I know that, I was referring to using it to check for Valnet sources used for notability (ex. list based commentary in character articles) NegativeMP1 (talk) 02:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
I think we should just make it only on objective value, so only unreliable sources. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
I agree with Cukie here. Checking whether it is being used for notability is way too subjective. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_170&oldid=1171445747"