Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

• List of Android games (0 participants)
• Brent Pendergrass (1 participant)
• Avimator (0 participants)
• Spaceballs (demogroup) (1 participant)
• List of Skibidi Toilet episodes (7 participants)
• Gnasher Shotgun (4 participants)
• Football Madness (6 participants)
• A Date with Death (4 participants)
• Andromeda Software Development (0 participants)
• FreshGames (3 participants)
• Giant Squid (company) (1 participant)
• Giant Sparrow (2 participants)
• Ivy Road (3 participants)
• JungleTac (4 participants)
• The Wizard Sniffer (6 participants)
• Melon Dezign (0 participants; relisted)
• Flying Tiger Development (2 participants; relisted)
• The Wayward Realms (1 participant; relisted)
• Haytham Kenway (9 participants; relisted)
• Relentless Studios (2 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

• Minecraft – Volume Beta (discussion)
• Ornstein and Smough (discussion)
• The Narrator (The Stanley Parable) (discussion)
• Monster Hunter World: Iceborne (discussion)
• Forge (level editor) (discussion)
• Home video game console generations (discussion)

Other discussions

No major discussions

Featured content candidates

• Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number (nom)
• Teardown (nom)
• Mario Party DS (nom)

Good article nominations

• Setzer Gabbiani (start)
• Talim (Soulcalibur) (start)
• Klefki (nom)
• Sobble (start)
• Exdeath (start)
• Age of Empires: The Rise of Rome (nom)
• Pikachu (start)
• Fallout Online (start)
• Donkey Kong (start)
• Horizon Forbidden West (start)
• Surround (video game) (start)
• AirCars (start)
• Laura Matsuda (start)
• Puff-puff (Dragon Quest) (start)
• Sands of Destruction (nom)
• Counter-Strike 2 (start)
• Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (PC video game) (start)
• Sorceress (Dragon's Crown) (start)
• Yume Nikki: Dream Diary (start)
• Hyper Duel (start)
• Fortnite Festival (start)
• Jacksepticeye (start)
• Snorlax (start)
• Bonfire (Dark Souls) (nom)
• Raymond (Animal Crossing) (start)
• Gengar (start)
• Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel (start)
• Five Nights at Freddy's: Sister Location (nom)
• Laika: Aged Through Blood (start)
• Leifang (start)
• Megamania (start)

DYK nominations

• DarkZero Esports

Reviews and reassessments

• The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (nom)
• Pokémon Channel (nom)
• Rain World (rev)
• Mario Kart: Double Dash (nom)
• Amiga Format (rev)
• Kim Kitsuragi (rev)

Articles that need...

• assessment (1) (1)
• reassessment (0)
• cleanup (10)
• infoboxes (7)
• cover art (236)
• screenshots (8,789)
• photos (64)
• translation from japan (185)
• creation
• merging

Shortcut: WT:VG

WikiProject Video games

Main page

talk

Archives

Archive index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175

Project watchlist

• view
• talk
• edit
• changes

Overemphasis on sex/sex appeal-related content in reception sections of female characters' articles

I feel that some female character articles have too strong an emphasis on sexuality. Not that instances of the character's sexuality/sex appeal should be ignored because of what they are, but it feels that some things either go into too great of detail, or are downright vulgar in how the information is presented. Certainly guilty of that myself. I was wondering if anyone would be interested in going over some of these articles and trying to help tweak them. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 10:08, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, this has been a common complaint of mine as well. There’s way too much of this empty, pointless “X was ranked #8 on Complex’s ‘Hottest Girls of 2009’ because ‘she’s hawt and has long legs’”. But there may be some pushback, as 1) some people still don’t understand the problem with this and 2) for some of these character articles, that’s the only “reception” they could scrounge up. Sergecross73 msg me 10:42, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that it should necessarily be removed as much as condensed. ie, use these sources for a statement on, say, "[character X] has been praised as a video game sex icon by multiple outlets due to [characteristic X]." - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 11:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:NOTCENSORED - reception is reception and as long as the comments are made by RS, I see no policy-backed rationale to alter this. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 11:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

That’s not what I’m saying, though I can’t say I’m surprised to see it misunderstood that way. My point is more along the lines of WP:INDISCRIMINATE - Yes, if a reliable source says something, it can be elligible for inclusion, but just because there’s a source doesn’t mean it has to be included either. To create a less touchy analogy, I’d find it equally pointless to include that GamePro ranked Sonic the Hedgehog as #8 best mammal in a video game in 1994” as well. Sergecross73 msg me 11:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Only 8th? Sonic got robbed. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 12:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey, human characters are mammals too... :P Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 12:09, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Perhaps my tone in my above comment came across as a bit aggressive - soz :) My reply was more in response to the "some things either go into too great of detail, or are downright vulgar in how the information is presented" comment, which I feel definitely falls afoul of NOTCENSORED. As for your Sonic example - I would agree with you that such a source probably won't contribute to notability and help poor Sonic survive a hypothetical AfD, though I wouldn't really have an issue including it in an article either. A closer analogy here would be "#8th best mammal in video games of all time", plus a few sentences explaining why. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 12:09, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah yes, it’s fine, in fact, I hadn’t even initially seen the comment on vulgarity. Yeah, that’s not so much my concern, it’s definitely the short top 10 sentences that get added into the article that have little value/importance. As you say, the ones that show a more important scope (“of all time”) or can be expanded a few sentences to show a little more detail/importance, I have less of a problem with. And as NARH says too, sometimes it’s a matter of condensing like comments into a single sentence too, or just trimming some out when there’s example bloat. I’m not talking complete eradication of the commentary or anything. Sergecross73 msg me 12:38, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Vulgarity is more a thing of, as Serge mentioned, instances where people write ‘she’s hawt and has long legs’”. We should give a more encyclopedic summation, rather than quoting stuff like that. So like, "Wario was ranked the fifth hottest male character because of his weight" rather than "Wario was ranked the fifth hottest male character because he is "thicc af."" - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 12:55, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

It actually reminds me of the Poison (Final Fight) talk page, where there was a debate over whether the 'trap' slur should be used when a non-slur version of the term could be used instead. If there's a way to depict the intent of the message in a way that is more appropriate. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 13:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

We should be on the same page then. Re your Wario example, it was my understanding that most articles are already being written with phrasing more like the former than the latter - looking at the "Sex symbol" subsection for Ivy Valentine, for example, I'd say it's formal and academic in tone considering the subject matter. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 13:07, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

While scanning character articles and making notations of articles that need improvement, I had just noticed a few articles that go beyond an encyclopedic tone, though I can't remember which ones they were. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 13:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

As Sergecross pointed out, most of these articles likely can be found to heavily use "listicles" , top 10 lists from not-quite-bad RSes that give maybe 50-100 words about each of the top 10 hottest VG characters, or the like. Yes, these lists did not always focus on sex appeal but their most common use was for articles on "sexy" female characters. Hence why we have steered as far as possible from accepting these articles if they are principally built on coverage from listicles. There are certainly VG characters w/ known sex appeal that is part of their reception (eg Lara Croft), and we're not censoring there, just that, we want "in depth" coverage, and listicles simply cannot provide that. This goes for any other VG character too. --Masem (t) 13:33, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

You know what's more important than being PC? Updating the articles. For example of all the SNK characters I think only Mai and Nakoruru are entirely up to date regarding their appearances, and that's only I keep it this way. And the entire articles of, for another example, Warcraft characters (all of them) were just really badly written when I've checked them, and that awful writing extends to their reception sections (as tagged by me in Jaina Proudmoore 4 years ago) but really to everything. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

No one's talking about being PC, and it's not a zero-sum game. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 15:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Please stay on topic, Snake. If you’ve got unrelated concerns, make a new discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 18:55, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I was the guy who wrote those Warcraft character articles, lol. I've always wanted to improve them later on but never got round to doing so. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 10:51, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

If the reception sections focus a lot on the sexual aspects of a character, I highly doubt it’s undue weight. The reality is that’s what the sources involve, and even now it’s rare that many characters in general, especially female ones, get much deep content on that front. Better writing should probably not be spending a lot of time quoting passages and reciting exact placements and rankings in lists or similar, but that’s an issue of clear and concise encyclopedic writing. Without better examples I don’t see how anything is broadly actionable, certainly as “vulgar”. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

But we need to take into account whether content is just repeating the same stuff over and over, with listicles about a character's sex appeal that doesn't go into such great depth that we need to go into excruciating detail on the subject. Also, while it's true that I can't provide specific examples in this instance, I think Serge agrees that the text of these articles often (or at least too often) quotes things that needn't be quoted. This is true for more than just this problem, but it's a problem that's a lot more consistent here. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 15:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Then that’s an issue with WP:INDISCRIMINATE or stylistic concerns. Same as any other part of the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, as NARH notes, some of my concerns here are about the pointlessness of the direct quotes. To tie it in to Sonic articles again, as to not confuse the situation with other social/sexual issues, people would write Reception like “Tails was ranked 10th best sidekick of 2011, calling him “cute” but “fierce”. IGN notes that he was “the sort of guy who would support you.” Its correctly sourced...but it says little of importance. Sub in female characters names and mundane observations about their physical appearance and you’ve got what I’m talking about here. Sergecross73 msg me 19:15, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I would advise to think of the reception as a formal letter. Try focusing one section on the character, personality, or another certain traits appeals to others (gameplay moves, relationships, etc). The sex appeal might fit well in one paragraph unless there is a notable division between positive and negative notes (maybe a character is oversexualized, or maybe the character's sexuality is not appealing).Tintor2 (talk) 19:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

"Is regarded as oversexualized" by this or another particular person/institution, not "is oversexualized". As I've recently seen with the still very one-sided (showing only POV of Americans and especially sex-negative feminists, with nothing about how a Japanese character was received in Japan, I put some rather cosmetic edits to alleviate it while inserting a photo) article Quiet (Metal Gear) - there are and never been no global nor timeless standards for "oversexualization", and for example in some Islamic countries just merely showing hair is outright illegal and so the government in for example Iran is not only banning games but also doing things like specifically banning most of female characters from local LoL tournaments. I've already mentioned Nakoruru in this very thread, so now I'll point out to how I didn't neglect the Japanese perspective while writing Nakoruru#Reception and cultural impact. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 20:03, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

As an aside, I don't know that you know what exactly a sex-negative feminist is. More a pSWERF as opposed to someone who criticizes a design for being oversexualized. Also Quiet is silly. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 21:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

A sex-negative feminist is an opposite of a sex-positive feminist (a well-known example of a very sex-negative one: A. Sarkeesian who hates displays of female sexuality in media and has also vocally opposed slut walks, habitually calls sex workers "prostituted women", and so forth as for female sexuality in the real world). Quiet is "silly" powerful and literally awesome (that is: inspiring awe), but that's just my POV. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 11:05, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I legit laughed out loud when you mentioned Anita Sarkeesian. Not that I disagree with your assessment since she's kind of SWERFy, but it's not because she criticizes sexuality (and indeed never expresses "hatred" for sexuality, rather criticizing its overemphasis... hey, it's coming full circle!), but because, intentionally or not, this conversation gave me so many GamerGate vibes. I'm not calling you a member of GamerGate, but those were the initial vibes I got. Coupled with talking about "political correctness," and I'm legitimately curious what your intent and viewpoint is. That said, on the subject of Quiet, it's not merely an issue of character design and more an issue of framing. The outfit can work, but not with the camera framing. Quiet is routinely objectified, needlessly doing sexy poses with the intent of titillating the player. Also, Quiet represents another in-universe excuse for sexy women that is used in lieu of the creator being honest and saying that they wanted the character to be sexy. Cortana, Quiet, lawl. Give me more Sorceress and Bayonetta *chefkiss* - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 11:15, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

You're completely wrong, Kojima said always honest and completely open about how and why exactly he wanted the characters to be sexy: with for example Raiden (who goes much less dressed, that is is completely naked at one point) being a bishonen to appeal to teenage Japanese girls who hated the "stupid old men" from MGS (replaced a shitty EW article calling the reader to be "outraged" by this with the direct-ish source), and Quiet to appeal to cosplayers and sell figures (which I don't think is even mentioned in neither article). "Objectification" is just a (feminist) theory, if you don't believe in it no one ever is "objectified" (at least in a sexual and mass media sense - because for example prisoners of Japanese WWII human experimentation facilities camps actually were objectified when they were extremely dehumanized by being refered to as not even as something like guinea pigs but as "logs", that is pieces of wood). And yes, I've been a GG "member" (flashing a GG-gang sign). As for Cortana, it's only ironic Quiet's article cites criticism of her/Kojima coming from a co-designer of Halo games. Bayonetta: she's actually doing "needlessly doing sexy poses with the intent of titillating the player" all the time, and Sarkeesian's own review found the only perceived positive thing about her being allegedly "a single mother" (which was false first of all, but I also fail to see its "positive" aspects expect if one is hating fatherhood as institution). If you want to continue this, come to my talk page. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 11:37, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Alright, believing that Sarkeesian is a net negative on the gaming community or even being a GamerGater (or a Sarkeesian fan, or whatever) doesn't discount you from editing Wikipedia as long as you follow our (non-political) rules. Not saying that anyone here is or isn't one, but whatever - tbh I can't see anything productive coming out of this line of discussion so I humbly suggest to stop this now. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 11:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

"And yes, I've been a GG "member" (flashing a GG-gang sign)." OOF. I'm not gonna continue this specific conversation, but oof. Imagine someone willingly admitting that. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 12:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to be ashamed of, unless someone actually believes in the fictional narrative (any version, many of them) in which case it's still not my problem. Also I was joking about being a member as there simply were never any "members" (nor leaders - purposely so, and perhaps it was a mistake), unless to mean the membership in League For Gamers (Mark Kern's project which never went anywhere). Also I'm going correct my boasting about nakoruru being up to date - actually she wasn't, I've left her for few months and she was missing several games already. She's up to date now (roughly), but in short future it will be outdated again. And also on a related note, Samurai Shodown 2019 is coming soon while List of Samurai Shodown characters is still deleted. For 4 years now, having been deleted repeatedly: [1] --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 13:28, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I 1000% agree with Snake that our reception sections are overwhelmingly America-centric. I guess much of this can't be helped since most of us can't speak Japanese (or any other language), but I definitely would love more Japanese (or non-English, really) commentary in our reception sections, WP:GLOBALIZE and what not. I'm sure everyone else here would say the same. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 10:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Looking at the discussion, there seems to be two separate issues being discussed here:
1) That sexuality/sex appeal character reception in articles is inappropriate/vulgar/politically incorrect - broad consensus seems to be that removing these would be improper as per WP:NOTCENSORED;
2) That "top 10" listicles, sexuality-related or otherwise, don't contribute much of substance towards the article - this is a topic that has been debated ad nauseam on this WikiProject, both on this page and in deletion discussions, so the line between what is acceptable and what isn't shouldn't be too unclear now. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 10:51, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Why would it be improper? It's not censorship to determine whether or not specifically quoting certain text is good for the article. Just as Wikipedia is not censored, Wikipedia is also not an indiscriminate collection of information, and that can apply to unnecessary quotations. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 11:15, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm still confused as to what your viewpoint is? Above you say that "I don't think that it should necessarily be removed as much as condensed" and we should use something like "Wario was ranked the fifth hottest male character because of his weight" as opposed to "Wario was ranked the fifth hottest male character because he is "thicc af."" That would put is in mutual agreement. But now you're advocating we outright remove the content? Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 11:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I've never advocated for its removal, I advocated for removing nonsense quotes. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 11:43, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

We're both on the same page then. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 11:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I think it'd be worthwhile to form a task force to condense and cleanup content. Would anyone be interested in participating in such a thing? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 12:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Well right now a lot of the character articles are, admittedly, kind of a mess but I would definitely say treat everything case by case. I think what's conflating this is how a lot of articles overly rely on lists where there's actually no input beyond "they're hot!" or something tongue in cheek. If there's some actual meat that can be quoted, it should count as reception as long as it's clearly a statement on the character. I know there's still a massive disdain for lists, especially with their rampant overuse, however even those sources have seemingly dried up a lot (namely sites like GamesRadar that stopped utterly) and in some cases it's the only place to get any sort of reception for characters, so wholesale throwing them out isn't the answer either.

I don't know if a task force is really going to be the solution in light of that. You can't apply the same strict guidelines to Wario as you can Mai Shiranui because there are very different discussions going on with both of those characters. I think if anything a good place to start would be to examine which character articles are higher priority to get to at least GA, because if anything the vast majority of them have been deadlocked for literally years.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I really, really believe that for example at last un-deleting List of Samurai Shodown characters (which, again, has been repeatedly deleted by a single user over the course of multiple years) is just SO much more important than making Nakoruru alone a GA. Also, still there, getting the SS own Haohmaru out from the "Start" state (I honestly don't care about him personally, but the work is there, awaiting for also years). And to note how ironic that years-long insistence on destroying the SS roster was: List of The Last Blade characters from the so much obscure series (2 games, no series article), with its total of 0 refs, has been allowed to remain all along ([2]) as that one certain user has some some rather strange priorities. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 06:54, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with either Wario or Mai Shiranui's reception sections. Mai's reception section is actually pretty damn commendable for its diversity of non-American and non-English sources (or at the very least has more of them than most). And it's not like this is even an issue that's stopping articles from reaching GA status - off the top of my head, Ivy Valentine, Jill Valentine, Ayane (Dead or Alive) and Lara Croft are all GA and they all have considerable paragraphs on their sex appeal. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 11:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I never claimed that sex appeal discussion should be removed. Jill, Lara, etc. are not evidence that other non-GA articles don't have an issue. I'd have to look into some of these further to see if those specific instances are needlessly gratuitous.

Also Snake, why do you keep bringing up what's more or less important? What's most important for an editor to do is what they feel like doing. It's probably more important to create articles for, say, notable Game Boy Advance games that don't have articles than improving Virtual Boy games, but I find the former less interesting than the latter. If you wish to get people interested in undoing an unjust deletion, please use a different section to talk about it. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 13:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. Snake, if you want something done, and there’s no consensus keeping you from doing it, do it yourself. As I’ve already mentioned, people here generally aren’t looking for ideas of projects to take on, and definitely don’t respond well to negativity and berating. You’re just wasting your own time when you spend time with these lengthy complaints of editors not working on things you personally want them to work on. Sergecross73 msg me 14:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

What "do yourself" if that certain user will just redirect it again as he did repeatedly? In fact I just saw that same user deleted List of characters in The Witcher series - without a doubt one of the biggest RPG series of all time, and that's only an addition to the also very popular original novels and other media (like an upcoming new TV series). Such complete absurd. I posted The Witcher#Can someone explain to me why still no List of The Witcher characters yet? expecting to see a red link, turned out there was a list once, and OF COURSE it was this one certain user at work again. (And btw, also wasn't surprised to see that Geralt of Rivia is a shitty article about such an absolutely huge character. It's REALLY like if everything is shit unless I do personally it, yes. Guess I'm going to give him a sort of treatment I gave the Evil Queen (Disney). But not right now, I'm still inserting various photos elsewhere and then working on all these articles where even italics are not used for titled and it's all so bad it's really triggering all my OCD.) --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 17:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Moving forward

So, there seems to be general agreement that it’s something worth looking into, though with varying degrees of what’s acceptable - which is fine, perhaps the varying viewpoints will keep either side from getting too heavy-handed. So let’s move into a plan for moving forward. How should we do it? I don’t outwardly object to a task force, but it seems like a lot of those fizzle out pretty quickly, and may not be worth the effort to set it up. It might be best to just create a user talk sub-page or something and just go at it. I don’t plan on spearheading the effort, but I’ll be here to help. Sergecross73 msg me 14:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Why can’t these discussions happen on the talk pages of the character pages where it’s a problem? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 14:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Unless everyone is hunting everyone else’s contribs, I imagine it’d be a lot of discussions with 1 participant. I don’t know what NARH or others had in mind, so I’ll let them speak on it. Outside of moving us past those endless looping argument above, I’m really just hear for the ride and assisting a little. Sergecross73 msg me 14:54, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I opened a few merge discussions on some character pages in light of this (I-No, Baby Bonnie Hood, Hsien-Ko) that are primarily quoteless lists for the entirety of their Reception sections, I think that may be a good start. Clear out the ankle biters, then tighten up the rest so we can bring them up to B or GA at least. Starting with just the female video game characters category should be best, as they're a much smaller pool and easier to manage. What do you guys thinks?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:53, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

And those went about as well as I expected them to.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

You expected the right thing then. I've reverted all the tagging - procedurally at the very least you need to create a section on the talkpage so it's even possible to start a merger discussion. Although (and how should I put this delicately)... you know what, I'm just going to say it outright. No offence, but your edit history since March has pretty much just been feuding with Snake and suggesting deletions or mergers. It feels a bit petty to me. I think this is what Snake is trying to get at with his "less/more important" comments - there's better things to do, like, creating articles and expanding articles or something. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 22:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I just got done expanding King Hippo, I created Cadence of Hyrule, and I see the value in addressing whether Wikipedia articles merit inclusion on Wikipedia. I also created Guilty Gear Judgment, an article that Snake failed to create for themselves. I also don't buy that they're exclusively concerned about merging, since even the topic of improving an issue with these articles was deemed unimportant by Snake. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 22:37, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

At work now I so will respond to everything else later, but I wasn't talking about you @New Age Retro Hippie:. Just wanted to clear that up first. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 23:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I was more making the point that a person who is concerned with merging articles isn't inherently not concerned with keeping and improving others at the same time. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 23:35, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I don’t think they were in bad faith, but I do agree that a discussion/rationale should be given on the talk page for each one at least. Otherwise the discussion isn’t likely to develop much. Sergecross73 msg me 22:40, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

There's no pettiness at all: some articles can be improved and others are better off merged into character lists. What you're describing as a "feud" with Snake is unavoidable because he's essentially claimed ownership of a vast majority of the character articles, with a stance that he and he alone can fix them. That's not assuming bad faith here, that's clearly presentable by his response above. Article creation is good, but fixing up existing articles and improving them to be at least GA status is also a viable goal, and it's difficult when you have an editor that steadfastly will not let any other editor fix up "their" articles. That's not to say Snake isn't great at researching or finding information, but he needs to let his deathgrip and ownership go so these can improve. And shouting "what the hell are you doing?" for suggesting a merge on a character article is definitely not the way to go about it.

Re: not leaving a discussion, I've been out of the loop for some time but I was understanding leaving a notice on the page was an open invite for discussion regarding it, especially since a lot of times these articles don't get discussion from previous experience and the end result is to be bold and just merge it. Sorry if that was coming across as hostile in any way.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

It’s fine, I’m not sure creating a discussion is a “hard rule” as much as it’s a “best practice” type thing. Honestly, it’s probably in your best interest to start the discussion in the right direction and your intentions/rationale understood. Sergecross73 msg me 22:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

It's really confusing to me since I thought KFM and me are friends, and now I see him telling people I made him quit Wikipedia and that I'm accusing him of being sexist, which was never my intention, and I don't want him to quit and I'm sorry if he felt this way. Officially speaking.

Also since there's a confusion regarding "ownership" of article let me set it straight: I-No is really User: Gabriel Yuji's ([3] - my entire input was to literally only add 2 categories[4]), the work on all Darkstalkers characters has been shared between me and User:Beemer69 in various portions (she's also the author of the list article that we've been then splitting from), and it was only the (unmentioned above, award-winning and so forth but soon largely forgotten as it was just 1 PC game in 1999 - I also made Morte from the same game, same deal) Annah-of-the-Shadows that I can only actually consider "mine" out of all the articles that got singled out. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 10:24, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the point of WP:OWN is that no one owns any articles. As for the main topic of this discussion, I'm aligned with NARH and Sergecross. Certainly reception sections of character articles could use cleaning up. I think the INDISCRIMINATE rationale is the most convincing for reducing the undue proliferation of low-quality, dubiously reliable listicles that are drowning out actual critique and critical reception. I don't think any concerted effort of merging is warranted here. Probably better is judicious use of the red editor's pen to excise what needs to be excised as you come across it. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:04, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

• To @Sergecross73's point, would it be sufficient to codify the "best practice" consensus into the VG MOS guidelines? czar 10:59, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Independent game project Subverse passed $2 million in crowdfunding, still has no article

The following discussion 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.

---

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/990500595/subverse SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Why is this important? If there is plenty of RSs that say this is important, then it's ok, I suppose. But I don't really see how it's particularly notable. There's an argument for WP:1E against this being notable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:53, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Where's the reliable secondary sourcing to show WP:GNG? At least give people something to work with if you're going to complain. -- ferret (talk) 15:55, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

>What is google

https://www.google.com/search?q=subverse+game&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 16:00, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Make it then. I encourage you to do so as it is an interesting subject. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 15:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Is to arrive this month. It's important because it's currently around #14 ever according to List of video game crowdfunding projects (where it's not). Can't do literally everything on Wikipedia just myself. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

You seem to spend more time complaining about articles not existing than you do writing them is all. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 15:58, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I was told to "participate in collaborative projects", also no. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Request board is over here, feel free to follow the instructions. -- ferret (talk) 16:02, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I guess I would say that this instance isn't so bad, but your history of bringing up how X article doesn't exist in discussions about Y article is highly disruptive, and I'd ask you to cease doing that in the future. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 16:09, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Participation is great. Constant complaining and being rude is not. I’m sure whoever asked you to participate would similarly ask you to stop complaining and being rude while participating. Sergecross73 msg me 16:44, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I would go so far as to say your constant negging about perceived gaps in Wikipedia's coverage does not actually constitute "participating in collaborative projects". Axem Titanium (talk) 05:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Just because something gains a huge kickstarter success doesn't mean that it gets a lot of coverage. For example, one of the top-succeeding board game KS Kingdom Death: Monster still is extremely thin in sourcing overall. --Masem (t) 16:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Just because something gets a lot of coverage (https://www.google.com/search?q=subverse+game&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X) does mean it gets a lot of coverage. Like seriously I even posted this very link already. Generally few people care about board games that are not wargames and not Warhammer namely, but I checked and there are literally hundreds of sources (https://www.google.com/search?q="Kingdom+Death:+Monster"&tbm=nws&source=lnms&sa=X) so if this is "extremely thin" I don't know what is just "moderately thin" not to mention even just average. SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 08:22, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Sometimes I feel it's simply easier to create a stub for an article like this, than to post and say it doesn't exist. If you already knew it was notable, just be WP:BOLD and create it. It's not on me to look up sources for an article that isn't something I'm interested in. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:38, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

SNAAAAKE!!, if you think it's notable enough to have an article, then make it, even if it's a stub. It's that simple. You said you were told to "participate in collaborative projects". Making a post telling us that something does not have an article and only posting a link is not participating in collaborative projects. That's just basically telling other people to do the work (not all of us are interested or care about this subject, but you seem to be and seem to know a decent bit about this). Participating in collaborative projects is actually contributing to the development and editing of an article(s). If you do not feel comfortable with creating articles or are unsure of it's notability, what you should have done is made a post to discuss whether or not this subject is notable enough to have an article (with your input included) and if it's decided it should, then discuss on how to create/structure the article. That would be "participating in collaborative projects". --JDC808 ♫ 06:37, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

So I did and I hope this project will now help expand it in all directions, also the developer StudioFOW needs to be rewritten and updated (I'm copy editing right now but only that). SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2019 (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.

I actually did the StudioFOW rewrite/update. (Not that it can't use more work, but so can everything.) SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Just wanted to note here I recently reviewed this as part of WP:NPP. I just saw the closed discussion about notability and I have no issues with this article as I feel it passes WP:GNG. In the future if any editor is unsure about notability or something else I would recommend creating future articles first in draftspace then submitting it for review via the WP:Articles for creation process. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 13:04, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Age of Empires II

I have nominated Age of Empires II for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SchroCat (talk) 16:32, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Sakura Wars (video game) for FAC

Heads up, everyone: Sakura Wars (video game) is up for a featured article candidate. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:00, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations. I Hope it's successful.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:09, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. The ultimate goal is to get this article up on the front page by September 27 of this year, or at the very least its 25th anniversary (September 27, 2021). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:53, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Nintendo and Sony Interactive Entertainment as possible GAs or FAs?

Hello once again. Now that Sega is a GA, I'm thinking about getting Nintendo and Sony Interactive Entertainment to GA and eventually FA status. The main goals are to feature Nintendo as a potential TFA on September 23, 2019 for its 130th anniversary, and Sony on November 16, 2019 for its 26th anniversary. Any thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

The Nintendo article needs a lot of work. It has an awful lot of unsourced material, and some tags for things being unexpanded. With fixing these things, and a copy-edit it could be close to GA, however. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:26, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Got it. I've started a discussion at Talk:Nintendo#GA/FA push. Input from project members would be appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

In my experience 4 months is an aggressive timeline to get an article through FAC and TFA. That's not to say you shouldn't do it just to make the article better, but to warn that TFA has an unspoken bias against newly promoted FAs so don't take it as a failure if it doesn't go through. 130th anniversary is a big one though so it might cut through that issue. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:34, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Sega development studios discussion

There's an important discussion regarding a potential GT/FT plan for the Sega development studios article and making its other developer articles (i.e. Sega AM1, Sega AM2, etc.) GA status. The discussion can be found at Talk:Sega development studios#GA plans. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:35, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Myst III: Exile is Todays Featured Article

Almost forgot to give a heads up on this but Myst III is on the front page of Wikipedia right now. Congrats to User:David Fuchs for getting it and the other Myst articles to that status. GamerPro64 14:42, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, 2019 and 2020 marks a lot of influential games 20th anniversary, so if they are FA then make sure to run them. I have Wipeout 3 marked to run on Sept 8th. And, TFA missed the 20th anniversary of Brendan Fraser's The Mummy on May 7th. Both of those are David Fuchs article incidentally. Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:49, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

They were talking about The Mummy but I want to give it more TLC so I'm glad it was missed :) Thanks for the heads-up on Wipeout, I had no idea! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

DLC in Mortal Kombat 11

See Talk:Mortal Kombat 11#Shao Kahn is not DLC, less so Frost. There is an ongoing discussion in the section about whether or not Kahn is DLC but I think more comments would be appreciated. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 01:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Help with the Danny Lange article

Hello, I'm here as a representative of Unity Technologies on Wikipedia. I've declared my conflict of interest on the company article's talk page, as well as the Danny Lange, John Riccitiello, and Unity (game engine) talk pages. I've submitted a request at Talk:Danny Lange for editors to review my improved draft about the computer scientist and current Unity employee, which I've saved at User:Matthewpruitt/Danny Lange. An editor assisted with the Riccitiello article, but unfortunately no one has responded to my Lange request yet. Can a WikiProject Video games member please take a look? The current article is poorly written. Also, most of the text is unsourced, and there are lists of speeches, presentations, and publications. Thank you! Matthewpruitt (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

The current article was written by blatant COI paid editors Suli123 (talk · contribs), 131.107.0.73 (talk · contribs) (a Microsoft IP), Leicesterdemontfort (talk · contribs). No one cares, so just copy your article across. It's not worse. - hahnchen 10:47, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft has been overtaken. Regards, Lordtobi (✉) 14:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

New 2DS XL Photo

Could someone please update the New Nintendo 2DS XL photo in its article? The current one looks terrible, and it has a glare on the screen. I have found better pictures online, but they may not be allowed to be on Wikipedia.LBDCOM12 (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@LBDCOM12: the one who makes the quality images is User:Evan-Amos. you could ask him if he can provide a better image for 2DS XL.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 18:42, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

EGO Games

- My apoligies, and can erase this if it doesn't belong. Is this the correct place to give awareness to a page with broken external reference links? :) Or if someone could check it out and post a writing about it in a correct place for me as i am new to this but wanted it to be known. The 2 external links at the bottom on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGO_Game is not directing to the correct place. I also have not found any evidence yet through searching online that Ego still exists. I did not to an extensive search though :P Hope this helps! ;) -Magenet 11:04pm CST 5/11/2019

I moved this discussion into a separate section. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Where would you think these external links should send too? the company doesn't need to still exist to have a link to it's website. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:54, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Help with sources for the Electric Brain article

I'm looking for help with sources for the defunct UK video game magazine Electric Brain (1989–1993). Any help or pointers appreciated! Mattsephton (talk) 13:53, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Sakura Wars series

Given the first five games of the Sakura Wars series have attained GA status and now Sakura Wars is up for FA status, I think it's probably time for a good or featured topic regarding the main Sakura Wars series. Using the Final Fantasy FT and the List of Final Fantasy video games as models, I'm possibly going to create a List of Sakura Wars video games article before I take it to GT/FT. Any thoughts or ideas before we proceed? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:37, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

WP:GT's need articles within to be GA or above, I believe. I'm not sure you'd need a list of Sakura Wars video games article, as they are quite well explained in Sakura Wars. There's also only 6 games. I believe you could do something like the below:

Sakura Wars

5 articles

Sakura Wars

Sakura Wars 2: Thou Shalt Not Die

Sakura Wars 3: Is Paris Burning?

Sakura Wars 4: Fall in Love, Maidens

Sakura Wars: So Long, My Love

Project Sakura Wars

So, you'd really only have to get the main article and the new release to pass the GA threshold Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Fair deal. The new release won't be until winter 2019, so I think that we may need to work on the main Sakura Wars page and get that up to GA/FA at the very least. Also, if the first game passes the FA threshold, would that count towards a featured topic? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Sjones23 and Lee Vilenski: Principle sounds great, but better focus on getting the main article to GA and handle the sixth game's article when the time comes. Small update; there's also going to be a "Music of the Sakura Wars series" article at some point in the near future. I'm working on it in my sandbox. That's not really relevant to a GT for the series, but it's still something that will appear and result in some new additions in the near future. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

I believe there's quite a few non-video game articles, such as the one on the movie. I'd suggest working on the main article (it's clearly not too far away from GA) and it could be potentially nominated. If it were to be an FT, you'd still need 50% of the articles (so, 4 of them) to be FA. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: I am also working on my own draft, which is located at User:Sjones23/Music of the Sakura Wars series and like I said, I plan to merge both drafts at some point. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:39, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

You can also nominate Project Sakura Wars for Peer Review and that can be good enough to have the topic be nominated. GamerPro64 14:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Yep. I'm sure the Sega task force might be able to help here. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)