Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice of reliable sources noticeboard discussion

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is EssentiallySports. Thank you. --Left guide (talk) 05:12, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (March 10 to March 16)

[edit]
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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 11:55, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 10

March 11

March 12

March 13

March 14

March 15

March 16

"Video games playable in Street Fighter 6" is certainly one of the categories of all time. --PresN 11:55, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Durrr Burger article would have turned out particularly lame if made by anyone else, but Johnson524 has done great work with it. Panini! • 🥪 23:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Arguably that article is reaaaaaally stretching it. I'm not seeing much from the sourcing that contributes "significant coverage" particularly in development or reception, just a lot of the fact that Durr Burger pops up frequently in Fortnite and related merch, using weak sourcing (yes, you have sites like Polygon, but this reflects the heavy amount of SEO articles on how to do X in game Y that nearly all major sites do to keep themselves relevant). Masem (t) 00:11, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did y'all hear something? Panini! • 🥪 00:14, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Panini!: Thank you so much for your first comment! You just made my day x10 better 🙂 Cheers! Johnson524 01:18, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do have to echo Masem's concerns, especially regarding character notability. It's clearly had a lot of work done but some of it feels stretched.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:23, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, third'd. Sergecross73 msg me 02:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kung Fu Man, @Sergecross73, I hear your concerns, but what can I do specifically to improve this page? Cheers! Johnson524 02:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the sourcing is weak, probably not much. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 02:40, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The main problem is all the discussion is, well, promotion info. There's no understanding why this character in particular is notable or discussed, and instead it grabs stuff like "iconic" and whatnot which in the long run...really don't say much. There's no meat on this bone at all.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:01, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dissident93: Due to the nature of the article, every single source on the page was verified with WP:VG/S first, 100% of which fall under Reliable Sources. There aren't even any situational sources used on the page. A fair amount of these reliable sources discuss the character as a primary topic as opposed to a passing mention, though some still do. Because of this, I really don't see a sourcing issue. @Kung Fu Man The character has been used in virtually every chapter of Fortnite, had its own official game mode, placed 25th in an Dot Esports best skins ranking, has been recognized as notable by Dot Esports and CNBC (in lead), and was a key part of the 2018 ARG run by Fortnite. I included much of this I guess promotional material to establish notability, and wrote it as neutral to the best of my ability. Would you like to see some of this removed or changed further? If so I'd be happy to continue communicating with you on the Durrr Burger talk page, as I'd love to see the article achieve GA status eventually. Cheers! Johnson524 03:16, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Promotional material, on its own, does not establish any notability. It can appear in every chapter of Fortnite, certainly, but what does that mean for any real world importance or analysis? Where's discussion to illustrate it matters beyond the scope of just Fortnite itself or understanding it further helps one understand that game? These are things you need to establish for a character article. Right now we know it exists, it's commented as iconic within the scope of Fortnite, and that's about it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:27, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that there is a potential (but I can't 100% say for sure) of a List of Fortnite characters, as things like Durr Burger, the Fortnite Llama, and in-game characters like Jonesy and Peely, which if you took the promotional aspects out, the remaining content would be appropriate. Masem (t) 03:55, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kung Fu Man: One of my favorite character articles I've seen, and one that just so happened to be promoted by you as well, was Ditto (Pokémon). The only other Fortnite character article, Peely, wasn't very helpful to gain inspiration from, at least in the context of GA quality, so I turned to other GA articles like this one. From the formatting of the page to even the section headers, you can tell a lot of love and quality was put into the page 🙂 That being said, the main three themes for promotion and reception section of the Ditto article is that the character is: 1. Seen and commented on for its appearance in a franchise-related movie, 2. Commented on by a number of major publishers, and 3. available in merchandise. These three main themes almost entirely make up the notability mentions in this part of the article. I think is completely fine though! That's why I did something very similar for the Durrr Burger article: but instead #1 is a real-life ARG game run by Fortnite instead of Detective Pikachu, and #3 is Legos and Halloween costumes instead of capsule toys to bean bag chairs. The point being these three echo very similar themes of notability with my character article, and I don't see why mine is a problem. I mean no disrespect and I sincerely apologize if I came off that way in any of my statements above. Cheers! Johnson524 03:56, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well with Ditto the reason its notable is because their analysis of its themes as a character and a species, discussions about how its been used and reactions to said usage, and how players have come to see it due to its gampelay mechanics. Understanding Ditto helps understand Pokemon better, and it has weight itself as a shapeshifter concept in fiction. If Ditto had just appeared a lot and didn't have any of that, the article wouldn't be there (and frankly speaking if merch and promotions alone counted, almost every Pokemon would have an article).

Is there that sort of content for Durrr Burger? Discussions on its use as a mascot? Analysis of that? Stuff like that? Because I looked while we were talking and I couldn't find that.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:04, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Kung Fu Man: Not as much as with Ditto for sure, but it's still present. Without listing them off, supporting quotes about the characters impact are mentioned in the design and lore section by EuroGamer, In-game appearances by GameRevolution, and some already mentioned ones in the Promotion and reception section. The impact specifically of Durrr Burger's rivalry with another in-game Pizza business saw support from a number or players in and outside of the game (outside being the subreddit mention), and opposition from the real-life burger chain Wendy's, who repeatedly went against Durrr Burger in conversation and in game. I could potentially find more supporting quotes in the sources already mentioned, I just truly believed that these had already established notability. Cheers! Johnson524 04:18, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Eurogamer ref is basically discussing the event; it gives no indication why the character is important. The Wendy's "rivalry" can also be summed up more about the impact of Fortnite than about the character itself. What are your WP:THREE specifically that illustrate this character as important? Like this here you're citing as a source from CNBC when it's just saying it's "iconic" strictly in the context of Fortnite: the article is entirely about that game and its promotion. This isn't WP:SIGCOV for reception.
If you want to look at my work as a guide have three Overwatch character articles above. Look at how the reception sections on those is structure, and what they're saying to help illustrate those characters. OW is close enough to Fortnite for this example to give you an idea of what to look for. And by god I'm not expecting that level of sourcing but at least...something. And I'm sorry if I'm pushing hard, but I respect the work you put in, and I'm hoping I'm wrong and there's some sourcing you might've overlooked, or it helps you understand what to look for so you can write stronger articles for subjects that do meet notability.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:32, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who supports the idea of articles about fictional concepts, I'd still have to agree with the others that it only has trivial coverage. The main thing that got publicity is an ARG, rather than the fictional burger chain itself. Even if the ARG was notable, that wouldn't count towards this particular article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... Must have been the wind. Panini! • 🥪 16:23, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I could try to look into this guy, but as it stands, I agree that there's not the kind of coverage that is going to help show notability. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Panini! These kinds of dismissive comments really don't reflect great on you. -- ferret (talk) 21:50, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I kid because I know you all can take it :). Happy to assist with the article if it's determined to be of consideration. Panini! • 🥪 22:59, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for MkLeo

[edit]

MkLeo 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. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 02:10, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to sound harsh, but I feel like you should finish what's on your plate before opening any more after this: there's still Crash Bandicoot (character) open for GAR at the time and from what I can tell it's mostly done, just needs more contemporary reception?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:26, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oops completely forgot about that. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 04:30, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Someone should look over at the Super Smash Bros esports players' articles, like Glutonny. There are a lot of unreliable sources being used. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 06:07, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

id Software and MOS:TMRULES

[edit]

Our guidelines expressly tell us to capitalize proper nouns, like names. This is something I brought up in relation to id Software (and, by extension, the id Tech engine family) in the past. Just now, @DrakeFruit insists that S&box must be allowed to be called "s&box", because "engines such as id Tech are spelled with a lowercase first letter, it is not against any Wikipedia guidelines". Because of this "other stuff exists" argument, I'd like to raise the question again: Is Id's exemption from this guideline justified, and how does it apply to S&box? IceWelder [✉] 21:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Using all-lowercase letters may likewise be acceptable if it is done universally by sources, such as with the webcomic xkcd. id software is universally cased that way. One should look to the sources for S&box, I don't have a good feel on that. — Masem (t) 22:35, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Casually browsing many sources: the common standard seems to lowercase it. A fair amount do, but its much more frequently lowercased; many mentions of the game in source titles capitalize it, but looking at the source itself its often lowercased there instead. Eyeballing it, it's about 75% lowercase to 25% uppercase. Panini! • 🥪 05:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, right, this sentence often slips my mind because it is hidden at the end of another bullet point way, way down. Perhaps we should make it more prominent. My quick Google search roughly mirrors Panini!'s findings, and the same checks out for "id Tech", it seems. However, I see a greater split for "S&box" vs "s&box", with at least my results favoring the former (approx. 4:1). Do you see a parallel between the two cases? IceWelder [✉] 07:06, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assassin's Creed Shadows

[edit]

There's a discussion on Assassin's Creed Shadows here that we could use help resolving. The first question is about whether or not the material on the portrayal of the main character Yasuke should get its own subsection (the relevant material is currently in the subsection Portrayal of Yasuke), and what section it should it go into. The second question is whether or not this should be mentioned in the lead. Truthnope (talk) 00:17, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your annual reminder that the GDC official Flickr page has tons of Commons-eligible photographs

[edit]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/officialgdc/with/54403451284 The awards show is a great place to get a cropped photo of some indie devs. Upload the original to Commons, then upload your crop with a link to the original. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:36, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you happen to stumble across a pic of Dennis Gustafsson, please let me know! IceWelder [✉] 21:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very list-like stubs

[edit]

While going through the project's biography stubs, I noticed many that have grown into what are basically lists of the person's work. Just wanted to get people's thoughts as to how these should be approached. If there is room for these to grow as biographies, obviously they should remain as articles. But if the sources don't exist beyond a filmography/ludography, should these be renamed and categorized as lists? I admit I'm working with gaps of knowledge because I don't know what sources are out there for the individuals and that this may have to be approached case-by-case rather than as a broad policy.

A sampling of the larger such pages for reference:

Curious what others think. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Simple, if they pass WP:NPERSON they can be expanded; if they fail, they should be deleted. WP:NLIST requires there to be a main article for a filmography to exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EA (service) and EA App (application)

[edit]

From what I understand, EA service is a digital rights management system previously known as Origin, and it is still the same service, and EA service still supports (yet) both new EA App and old Origin applications, so why there is mentioned "EA Desktop" in the lead, which was the name for EA App PC beta? We can distinguish service and its applications as separate things. Eurohunter (talk) 20:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the page to "EA App" because that is the name of the product the replaced Origin when they dropped the name. There may be services by EA that back most of their games on both computer and consoles, but Origin / EA App is the dedicated launcher for Windows users (hence why EA Desktop also applies). Masem (t) 22:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (March 17 to March 23)

[edit]
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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 18:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 17

March 18

March 19

March 20

March 21

March 22

March 23

--PresN 18:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Little bit concerned on Minecraft speedrunning. A significant part of that is going into speedrun strategies which seems to be overkill, and if that's removed, this is more an appropriate section in a general speedrunning or Minecraft article. Masem (t) 03:13, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't doubt the concept being notable but it may need to be rewritten. I myself am admittedly concerned with List of fictional cats in video games since that seems to fail Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE, among other things. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Second here, considering how Mario speedrunning also doesn't have standalone articles even with more significant coverage from Summoning Salt... MilkyDefer 13:21, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I was more active, I would write extensive sections on speedrunning in this article, which has since been deleted. I like the idea of separate articles on speedrunning in specific video games, as it's an activity/community I care about. No one had bothered to write such articles before, I think, but Minecraft being such a singular game makes it a good first article for it. As long as the article follows the sources, I'm not too worried about it going too in-the-weeds on things. I think it's doing a fine job with potential for expansion. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:42, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I don't think Summoning Salt would be considered an acceptable source. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
List of fictional cats in video games seems not necessary or suitable for Wikipedia, but maybe that's just me? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 06:37, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Game Informer is back

[edit]

They're back, babey! Yes, that includes the print magazine, and the team has returned. The linked letter from the editor remarks that the website and its backlog is coming back online (example: Veilguard pre-release coverage hub). It's all in process, so some stuff might take a hot minute. But, if you're aware of anything that was lost due to the magazine going down, I don't know if anything ended up removed due to dead links, those articles are back in luck! There's also some new reviews and coverage being posted for things that came out or happened during their hiatus and a new 2024 best of list. Good news for us, and for games journalism. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 20:24, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but that also means that any of the GI magazines that are now available on Internet Archive and Retromags, for example, are going to be nuked at any moment's notice so, better grab those PDFs before they're gone! Roberth Martinez (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The site still seems a little slow for me (on a Mac with Chrome), but once the kinks get worked out, a WP:URLREQ should be made to set all the references from "dead" to "live". Here is the original request Sariel Xilo made back in August when the site went offline. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:28, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.gameinformer.com/subscribe - looks like creating a free account allows for (some degree of) access to a old content of theirs? Sergecross73 msg me 22:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's for magazine archive access. Old URLs should be live again (for example their Batman Arkham City review here). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of my request, only 2 refs linked directly to the digital edition of the magazine (Veilguard issue - https://gameinformer.mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=824318) & that link is still dead. Print sources don't require links so there might be more refs that cite the print magazine over the website that weren't found (but also, they don't need to be updated). Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:44, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I made the request at URLREQ here to have the online citations changed from |url-status=dead to |url-status=live since the online archive has returned. This is separate from any use of the magazine (print or digital) for citations. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right! Mostly added a clarification that access to the magazine isn't really a concern in terms of refs since you & Sergecross73 mentioned that access to the digital magazine has changed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced access

[edit]

I'm surprised we don't have a page on the general topic of video game release, because as this page stands it's very WP:DICDEF, and I think it should almost certainly be merged, but I have no idea where to. Anyone have an idea? ~ A412 talk! 20:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that advanced access article is awful (and not the common name for the term either.) It's only existed for like a day. I redirected it to Glossary of video game terms, which is probably where any release stuff should go. Sergecross73 msg me 20:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"early access" has been used too, though the definition here is not congruent with what early access has typically meant. That said I know the early access page has a brief discussion on this approach since it's closely related. — Masem (t) 21:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry, didn't see that until just now. I'm fine with it redirecting wherever, but it doesn't need a separate article by...any metric. Sergecross73 msg me 21:17, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Serge. ~ A412 talk! 21:24, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But won't impetuously redirecting the article to the wrong glossary explanation do more harm than leaving it as-is? MilkyDefer 06:37, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, feel free to redirect to early access or wherever else. Sergecross73 msg me 20:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello, fellow wikipedians! I am here to announce my new (and ambitious) project to improve Wii U related articles on Wikipedia:

edit | discuss
Nintendo Wii U
6 articles
Wii U GamePad
Off-TV Play
Wii U system software
Wii U Pro Controller
List of Wii U games
List of best-selling Wii U video games

Currently, i have Wii U GamePad as a nomination and Off TV Play is getting peer reviewed for a potential featured list. The main article, Wii U was delisted last week. However, i believe that collabarating together we can all improve the coverage and reliabity of Wii U related arictles on Wikipedia. The Wii U was a failure, and therefore not a ton of attention was poured onto Wii U related articles back when it was relevant. Let me know how you all feel about this. TzarN64 (talk) 04:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least, it seems like Off-TV Play has major WP:OVERLAP issues with the Wii U GamePad. Looking at the sources, I am also heavily doubtful that it passes WP:GNG. Given that only the Wii U GamePad is capable of this feature, and it is not something that was carried across consoles, etc., it should probably be merged to Wii U GamePad#Features. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:41, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm, you think i should just BOLDly merge off tv play then? TzarN64 (talk) 04:54, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt there would be much backlash if you did. I'm usually the one to oppose merging stuff (i.e. Nintendo DS Lite) so if I think it's too much, I'm not sure anyone else wouldn't. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:55, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Thank you for your time! TzarN64 (talk) 05:00, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I object to this merge, please stop repeatedly attempting to merge this after such a brief discussion without hardly any participation. Its reception section is written with reliable sources written specifically about the subject with significant coverage. It received detailed coverage by outlets like []Eurogamer]]'s Digital Foundry. I knows there's coverage that the concept help influence the Switch too. Sergecross73 msg me 12:44, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do concur with Zx that there's some considerable overlap here given cross tv play is inherently a mechanic intrinsically tied with the Wii U Gamepad; I'm not seeing much sourcing wise that would indicate a necessary split, at least at a glance. Even coverage covering the feature itself is still tied to its use in the Gamepad. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 15:29, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, it wasn't "split", it was started from scratch, 13 years ago. Sergecross73 msg me 15:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that. Admittedly that was unclear wording on my part, but what I mean by split is more or less just as a separate article. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was not a review at all for Talk:Wii U GamePad/GA1. This might need to be reassessed. GamerPro64 00:13, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have just gone ahead and reverted the passing, and returned it to the queue as /GA2. This was not a valid review. I'm sure the article can reach GA, but it needs more than a single word review to show that someone actually checked. --PresN 00:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeesh, that's pretty similar to why the Wii U itself lost its GA status. Not sure why people keep thinking they can skip the review process... Sergecross73 msg me 02:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure this was not an attempt to game the system by bypassing the review; I think we just need to be more proactive with following the GA criteria. Both Tzar and the reviewer are fairly new to editing, after all. To @TzarN64 and @User:Freedoxm, if you have any questions about the GA process, whether that be general breakdowns of how they work or a quick "am I doing this right", feel free to let me know on my talk page and I'll gladly walk you through it. Panini! • 🥪 05:01, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Freedoxm is currently conducting an actual review of Wii U GamePad at the moment. I was surprised when i saw the article getting passed with hardly an review at all- But i'm unfamiliar with the GA review process and thought nothing that much of it. TzarN64 (talk) 05:07, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks! 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:51, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (March 24 to March 30)

[edit]
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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 13:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

March 25

March 26

March 27

March 28

March 29

  • None

March 30

--PresN 13:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for 24: The Game

[edit]

24: The Game 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. Z1720 (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=1283337658"