User talk:IceWelder/Archive 7

Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Happy New Year!

IceWelder,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! CaptainGalaxy 00:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Regarding changes made to my edit

Hi, sorry about the poor edit and illegal changes. Thank you for informing me about it. Have a good day! ExrionLexom (talk) 15:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Bad Rats

On 13 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bad Rats, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the video game Bad Rats was a popular gag gift on Steam? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bad Rats. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bad Rats), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

GTA 2

I'm not sure why you insist the release date for the game boy color port of Grand theft Auto 2 be changed to 1999 despite overwhelming evidence to it being released in 2000. You are not being helpful by putting up false information and changing it back once it's corrected to spite me. Jericho735 (talk) 15:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Jericho735, with "overwhelming evidence", do you just mean the copyright notice? Because that easily fails WP:V. You previously claimed that the source from 1999 was actually from 2000. If this actually is true, there will certainly be a reliable secondary source that backs this up. IceWelder [✉] 15:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I remember it releasing in 2000. Most sources, including IGN (the product page, and their review of the game), GameFAQs, Mobygames, etc. have all listed December 2000 as its release. I just took a closer look at the article you had linked, and the October and November release dates (in Europe and the United states, respectively) are the release dates for the *original* Grand Theft Auto on game boy color. I'm not trying to come across as a jerk, but that is simply oversight by the writer of the article. I can post sources if you'd like; I'm sure on this. Jericho735 (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Jericho735, thanks for the hint. The archived version of IGN's review actually had it in verbatim: "Release Date: December 2000". I'm curious as to how Eurogamer reviewed it in November that year if the December date was correct, but at least WP:V is met. Aside from this, GameFAQs/MobyGames are not reliable per WP:USERG. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 16:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder No problem; cheers! Jericho735 (talk) 02:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Keywords Studios Logo.svg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Keywords Studios Logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Parent parameter on SIE subsidiaries

Hi I noticed you did some maintainance for SIE WWS and related article (which I thank you for). However, I know I previously brought up the parent parameters on the studio articles [2] [3] and agree there should be consistency throughout those related article in regards to the parent parameter. However, I was wondering why you decided to conclude listing Sony Interactive Entertainment as opposed to SIE Worldwide Studios [4] [5]? Kind Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 14:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Spy-cicle, as I explained before, I prefer WWS as it is a separate division under SIE. However, Poklane has changed this unilaterally on several articles after our chat, so I made it uniform for now, pending further discussion. It should not hinder your Media Molecule GA, though. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 16:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah understandable. I mean just for reference I know the studios report to WWS but are they legally owned by WWS or they legally owned by SIE itself? Not too fussed either but might helpful to know if there is a future discussion. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 22:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Spy-cicle, some are owned by SIE LLC ("SIE proper"), others by SIE Europe Limited, others by Sony Corporation directly. That's the fun when dealing with multi-level holding companies. The official WWS website[6] refers to them as part of that group, which would be WP:verifiable. IceWelder [✉] 17:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah I see, thank you for the infomation I was not aware of the discrepencies between different legal owners/parents between studios. If I had to decide now I would agree with you to put SIE WWS on all articles as the parent then, but I suppose it is not urgent to have a discussion on it now. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 19:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Updating instead of uploading new

Hi, I saw you updated an SVG here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bohemia_Interactive&action=history Instead of uploading a new image. If I want to do this in the future, how would I go about it, I don't know how to replace image files directly so any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Rmoostet (talk) 12:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Rmoostet, thanks for message. You can overwrite files by navigating to the their pages (usually achieved by clicking the image, then "More details" on the bottom-right) and then using the "Upload a new version of this file" function below the file history. From there, the upload process is the same as for uploading a new file. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 13:51, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder, ah, I now know how to do this, thank you for your help! Rmoostet (talk) 02:15, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

"widespread canvassing"

Talk about pejorative! I marshalled external resources to find additional information, while also cautioning them to NOT bother commenting on the AFD since it's not a vote, and SPAs are unhelpful and unwanted. You failed to do sufficient research before nominating, used bogus arguments throughout, and stuck to them when called on them. I would prefer that the AFD remain, and that it be closed as keep ... instead, your withdrawal and close (thus denying any rebuttal) means that we might be here again soon, wasting everyone's time further. Please modify your remarks to remove your pejorative comments. ++Lar: t/c 16:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I've seen several users canvassing via Twitter. Example. The most recent commenter was apparently driven by this comment and, notably, has been a member of LUGNET for 21 years. It's a trend I've seen time and time again. Keeping the AfD would most certainly result in keep, not least due to this circumstance, but the sources you presented already make the case, making further discussion unnecessary. An early closure also leaves ample room for immediate improvement. Although the closure comment does not refer to you, I struck it so I can close this chapter. IceWelder [✉] 16:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I think the AFD would have benefited by an admin closure as keep but this will have to do. The most recent commenter you disparage has been a valuable contributor here at WP since 2008. ++Lar: t/c 19:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I did not mean disparage anyone. Saving items close to one's heart is a normal human tendency. Anyway, as I said, we now have enough room to fix the article. I added the various sources from the AfD to the article's talk page. Good day. IceWelder [✉] 19:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bigben Interactive.svg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bigben Interactive.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Template:Infobox person

Was this a mistake or some sort of test? The template data is dealt with in the documentation page. --RexxS (talk) 14:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

RexxS, thanks for the heads-up. Indeed, the change was misplaced. I performed it on the doc instead. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 14:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Italics in caption

Hi there again, in regards to my edit here [7] about adding italics to captions for this like "(pictured)" or "(left)" I could not seem to find a MOS guideline which stated they should be implemented though I have seem them around in WP:TFA Examples or WP:DYK Examples or in some mainspace GAs (e.g. D'oh-in' in the Wind, 200 (South Park)). But I'll try to see if I can create a discussion on relevant MOS page(s) about it. Anyway good luck in the peer review / FAC. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 02:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Grand final

Hey there. Maybe you missed my comment in the edit summary, but it was already discussed and is now being discussed again here. I did start a discussion about this over a month ago to which only one person responded. I then made all these changes after waiting a bit longer. This initially came about because I was asked in a Good Article review why we used both "final" and "grand final" interchangeably and to pick one for consistency. Naturally I chose what nearly all sources call it. The "minor" finals are the semi-finals. At this point, the initial consensus is to keep as "grand final", that's why I reverted. I object to the "I missed the initial discussion and disagree with what you wanted, so start over, set everything back to the way it used to be" approach. It's frustrating for me as I felt I already crossed all the Ts and dotted the Is. I ask questions all the time on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Eurovision looking to find consensus and typically no one cares to respond even though comments there affect thousands of articles. If you have a moment, maybe you could provide your thoughts, as I think we should have as many views on this as possible. Thanks, Grk1011 (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

The WikiProject site is no longer on watchlist, sorry. Since one comment does not constitute consensus, (further) WP:BRD would have been required after the first revert. I laid out my points at the relevant discussion, so let's continue there. IceWelder [✉] 22:36, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Teardown "Upcoming"

Hello IceWelder. As you claim Teardown is upcoming, it's not. Despite the fact it being in Early Access doesn't make it upcoming. Recently, you made edits saying it's upcoming but other users were trying to say that it's out and not upcoming. If you want to stay up to date with us, follow us on Twitter (@tuxedolabs) for more information. We're glad your enjoying Teardown (If your playing it as of now) Tuxedo Labs (talk) 05:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Tuxedo Labs, I am well aware of the situation (primarily because I wrote the entire article). The status quo for the past several years has been to denote early-access games as "upcoming" since they have, formally, not had a full release yet. In the same vein, early-access games that cease development are referred to as "cancelled". The former is also explicitly part of our manual of style. I previously started a discussion to amend this, but there was no significant consensus that a change was needed. Currently, the policy is:

Early releases such as open beta-testing periods, early access, or other similar mechanics should not be included in the infobox once the game is actually released. While the game is in an early release state, that early release date may be included in the infobox, but it should be indicated as an early release, and in the article prose, the game should be treated as an upcoming video game that has yet to receive a full release for all other purposes.

{emphasis added)

Label unreleased, pre-release, and early access games as "upcoming".

The former of these two was amended late last year; pursuant to that change, I added the early-access release date to the infobox directly, rather than via a note. Lastly, the "other users" you cite were primarily one user who created about 10 accounts to do that edit, but was caught vandalising several other articles, resulting in his accounts being blocked (primarily under our sockpuppetry regulations). Regards, IceWelder [✉] 23:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Please don't redirect articles on notable topics without discussion

Re: [8]. Please don't do this. The game is clearly notable and would survive an AfD (go ahead and AfD it if you don't think so, but I am 100% sure it will be a speedy keep). At worst, you should WP:PROD such an article - this at least would generate a notification for the relevant WikiProject and the creator. So pretty please - let's not redirect articles like this, it is a de facto stealthy deletion (since nobody was notified of this). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:38, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Piotrus, I've been told that, since both PROD and AfD aim for deletion, redirecting is an WP:ATD (there have been several heated discussion on WTVG). I did a WP:BEFORE then and barely any sources showed up. I see that you added some more sources, which is great: For one, you are always free to exercise WP:BRD, and the article now at least appears somewhat notable, even if bare-bones. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 10:59, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder, It's all good, and yeah, the policies are not clear cut here. IMHO since PROD/AfD can end up in redirect or merge too, they are preferrable as they are noticeable, unless a redirect. That said, you didn't do anything wrong - I just wanted to share what I think are best practices. But this is just my view, albeit informed by my ~15 years of history here, for what it's worth. Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
@Piotrus: It's a little disingenuous to say in one breath "stop doing it" while with another say "just my opinion". Anyway, your opinion is not the general consensus at this time; see WT:Merging#Request for comment: Proposed blank and redirects where that line of opinion is mentioned directly in the closing statement as being in the minority of those who believe that current processes are sufficient. --Izno (talk) 19:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Video games Newsletter survey

Hello IceWelder! I'm conducting a feature for the video games newsletter similar to that of a survey. I'm going to ask users their opinions on a specific matter and highlight unique and common answers to determine consensus on a subject. Your input would be very valuable, alongside others, to help answer this question.

The question is: How do you determine what makes a video game character notable enough for their own page? Do you follow pre-existing guidelines or have your own opinions on the matter?

Panini🥪 10:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Panini!, I'm not really a characters guy, so I don't even know whether there are specific guidelines for VG characters (or fictional characters in general). When I need to review one for notability, I mostly check whether it passes WP:GNG, especially the "significant coverage" aspect. For example, a character page might contain a novel-length fictional biography but is only held up by just one or two sources that very briefly discuss the character's creation (like 1 or 2 sentences). That kind of content is, simply put, not suited for Wikipedia. IceWelder [✉] 16:03, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder, Thanks for your input! Panini🥪 16:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the ZeniMax Board of Directors

Before I update each of the board members' pages(Cal Ripken, Jerry Bruckheimer, etc), noting they are now formerly board members of ZeniMax.(from 2007-2020 for Cal Ripken Jr and so forth). Should we wait for each of their statements regarding this? or should we wait until the Microsoft/ZeniMax deal is done?Timur9008 (talk) 17:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Timur9008, I would not update anything until the fact has actually changed. ZeniMax still exists in the same shape and form, which will only change with the closure of the acquisition later this year. Also, some subsidiaries seem to have boards of directors as well; Gearbox Software, which was just bought by Embracer Group, reported that 2K would remain a board member even after the acquisition. As usual, see what is verifiable and add that to the articles. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 15:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder Michael J. Dominguez is no longer a ZeniMax board member. [9] . And according to this Bruckheimer [10] is no longer a board member as well.(says "served on the board of ZeniMax") Timur9008 (talk) 13:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Timur9008, I'm assuming that the board is being dismantled as part of the acquisition. We will probably see it in one or another source soon. IceWelder [✉] 12:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Join the edit-a-thon today!

Hello and thank you for your comments in Template_talk:Infobox company. I'm co-organizing Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Online edit-a-thon Tech February 2021 and would love to see your contributions, particularly in gaming! Shushugah (talk) 13:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Plok! and Plok

Orphaned non-free image File:POSTAL Redux.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:POSTAL Redux.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:32, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Concerning deletion of page Affliction Networks

Hi, it seems you were right about the page lacking valid references.. The page has been updated to contain independent valid resources.. I urge you to please re-read the article and re-consider your vote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoggingOnto (talk • contribs) 16:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

LoggingOnto, you only added more primary sources (store pages, etc.) or user-generated content (wikis like PCGamingWiki). There is not a single reliable source (WP:RS) in there, and even those that are there do not contain "significant coverage" about the company. Please actually make yourself aware of our guidelines, like WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, first. Also avoid canvassing every single user who already weighed in on the issue. Instead, start a discussion on the already-existing AfD page where all users can discuss. IceWelder [✉] 16:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Headup Games.svg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Headup Games.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digital Homicide Studios

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Digital Homicide Studios you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DasallmächtigeJ -- DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 09:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digital Homicide Studios

The article Digital Homicide Studios you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Digital Homicide Studios for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DasallmächtigeJ -- DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 08:22, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Xbox ZeniMax

Phil Spencer and Pete Hines have confirmed that the ZeniMax studios are part of Xbox Game Studios. This is even reflected on the Xbox Game Studios wiki page. So I do not understand why you keep reverting my edits when they are factually correct. B-RexTheT-Rex04 (talk) 15:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

B-RexTheT-Rex04, Microsoft has stated that the existing structure will remain, this it stands as: Microsoft → Xbox Game Studios → ZeniMax Media → id Software (et al). There is currently no indication that there will be a horizontal integration. IceWelder [✉] 15:18, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

The user who created 10 accounts concerns (from Teardown "Upcoming")

Hi IceWelder. On the message Teardown "Upcoming" you cited about how some user created 10 accounts. I am slightly concerned why you said that. Please give more information about that. Thanks. Globglogabglab (talk) 23:31, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

The user who created 10 accounts concerns (From Teardown "Upcoming"

Hi IceWelder. On the message Teardown "Upcoming" you cited about some user who created 10 accounts. Please give more information as I am concerned about this. Thanks. Globglogabglab (talk) 23:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Globglogabglab, please see the following listings:
These are six so-called "sockpuppets" that the master account, Account10000, created to evade their block. They are in two separate categories for technical reasons. Furthermore, at least these three IPs were operated by the same user:
All ten entities (1 master + 6 socks + 3 IPs) are currently either permanently or temporarily blocked for vandalism, disruptive editing, and sockpuppetry. Multiple of these either edited or tried to edit the Teardown article, though their vandalism extended to multiple other topics as well. Because of their persistence, the Teardown article was "protected" for a few weeks, meaning only older accounts could edit it. IceWelder [✉] 10:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Hollywood and the video game industry

IceWelder Can you help me expand this page with more sources? Timur9008 (talk) 12:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Timur9008, I might look into that at a later point. Has the notability of that article ever been discussed? Also, "Hollywood" in the title suggests that the VG industry collaborated with the actual neighborhood in LA. IceWelder [✉] 14:17, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder There are enough sources to warant a page.(that's why i created it). There are 19 sources with more as Refideas. I guess if not we can always werge with Film adaptation#Video game adaptation. [11].Timur9008 (talk) 16:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info

Hi IceWelder. I just got the info about Account10000 and the sockpuppet investigation. I do to have one more concern. You cited that the user created mutiple accounts to evade their block but after reading the article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Clean_start, my guess was that the user created mutiple accounts just to start a clean start, yet he was blocked for sockpuppetry (or misusing the clean start policy). It's only my guess. Tagging the user en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Acroterion who dealt with the user. (Found that out on the page history on mutiple accounts of the user) Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globglogabglab (talk • contribs) 19:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Globglogabglab, to quote the clean-start policy's "in a nutshell":

A user who is not under current restrictions or blocks may stop using their current account and start using a new one. Clean start does not guarantee the two accounts will not be connected, and a user who uses clean start to resume old habits of editing may be identified and seen as trying to evade scrutiny.

The user falls into the latter category, performing the same disruptive edits (which I had explained to them multiple times were incorrect) repeatedly. Not least their account "IceWelder and Scottywong are jackasses" made clear that they did not intend to contribute to Wikipedia with any of their accounts. I'm keeping a close eye on the situation; for all I know, you could be another alt. If you're connected to Dave Panpa (talk · contribs) (or any other blocked account, really), make sure you do not do whatever got them blocked in the first place. IceWelder [✉] 19:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Reverted edits

Hi IceWelder. All I did on the user Dave Panpa was revert edits. Nothing suspicious. That's one thing I may do most of the time. Revert edits. Thanks

Cobra Kai: Card Fighter

In an edit summary in the mentioned article, you said that only admins can decline CSDs. I am letting you know this is untrue. Thanks!5a5ha seven (talk | contribs) 21:58, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

5a5ha seven, in this case, it was the article creator again through their IP and then a new account, which clearly violates the CSD guidelines that read:

For most speedy deletion criteria, the creator of a page may not remove the deletion tag from it

IceWelder [✉] 09:05, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

VCBSDMN

I did not want things to change at all i just wanted is to put things right and ViacomCBS Domestic Media Networks was accepted by a bunch of users so i didnt think you need to restore the old version Thank YouUser:Karrotfan22Karrotfan22 (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

The article has been vandalized by a long-term abuser — 2603:9008:1C80:BA76:E8F0:7C4C:DEFD:6802/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) — since at least January. Several of their edits have been reverted by other users but many on DMN flew under the radar. The article became so convoluted with unsourced content that restoring an old revision was the only viable option. If you want to add to the article, feel free to do so, but everything you add needs to be reliably sourced. IceWelder [✉] 14:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
We do not need all of that corporate lineage information in the infobox, @Karrotfan22:. That's why I keep removing it; to keep the template simple and organized. The corporate timeline is already in the ViacomCBS template below the article and applies to all the networks I reverted you on, so it's duplicating things already in the article. Nate • (chatter) 16:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok i think i understand now User:IceWelderKarrotfan22 (talk) 17:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I think TNT would be best...and I would probably go to ANI and ask for a rangeblock with the 64. Nate • (chatter) 20:35, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Paper.io Issue Response

Paper.io and Paper.io 2 are popular. Paper.io should have a standalone article like Hole.io. Maybe merge Paper.io and Paper.io 2 together. That's more downloads than Hole.io. At least Paper.io 2 could have its own article, since it still has more downloads than Hole.io without the help from Paper.io. 2A00:23C7:5A9C:3F01:BD3A:DF3B:564:8E4A (talk) 16:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Download numbers don't make for notability, only sources do. The article was already analyzed for such notability and its lack of that got the article deleted. IceWelder [✉] 16:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, you could delete it. But I will make it again someday. Maybe months. But I will come back...

I made a word document and saved the code. So I know and not forget. Yes. 86.185.161.192 (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Several IPs and ranges blocked, page salted indefinitely. -- ferret (talk) 17:22, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Nate • (chatter) 00:02, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

sorry about this message but Atari Interactive has a different logo to the rest of Atari SA's subsidiaries. It is the Atari logo placed in a red square, Atari SA did use this logo for a brief period but the logo is now used just for Atari Interactive. Any modern media that credits Atari Interactive uses that Logo, I have submitted a svg version of the logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyanbox782 (talk • contribs) 06:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Lyanbox782: Do you have a source for this? Looks to me like all three have the same logo as they share the same branding. IceWelder [✉] 09:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Paper.io

Thinking of making a new page about the Paper.io series, not a redirect.

The page will be called ‘Paper.io(series)’.

I know it had a deletion in 2018 before and was protected in 2021 since some IP was disruptively editing to make it pass, without sufficient references. It was a long story.

I want to try something else though. Hope it works.

92.40.171.0 (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Paper.io has been deleted multiple times because it lacks notability. This has not changed since. There should not be a new article on the game or the series. A series article would additionally violate our requirement of three notable games in the series for there to be a series article in the first place. IceWelder [✉] 16:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Oh well. I could check for the total references before though. If it reaches 50, I might try, no offence...

92.40.171.15 (talk) 16:49, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

This has been thoroughly analysed before and there was no indication that we have enough in-depth information available in reliable sources to sustain such an article. The total number of references (which all need to fit our guidelines as well) would ultimately be irrelevant if they collectively do not produce significant coverage. IceWelder [✉] 16:52, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
This is block evasion by the same anon user, blocked. -- ferret (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Ferret, cheers. Demon2343323 might be related. IceWelder [✉] 19:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

It’s not me running this account. Noted guy and put on administration notice board/incidents. 92.40.172.105 (talk) 16:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Reversion of my edits

Hey, thanks for fixing my edits on Development of Grand Theft Auto V. Did not realize that "license" was actually used in British English (and, clearly, based on how I spelled "realize," I'm an American). Much appreciated. Packer1028 (talk) 21:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Addendum: I knew that was a currency template, but at least on the mobile version, the use of that template was causing a space to appear between "million" and the comma (i.e.: "US$137 million ,"), so that's why I took it out. I wasn't sure what to call it, but it appeared as a typo initially, so that's why I used that as the explanation. I also didn't see a difference between writing it out longhand and using the currency template, so that was the reason for my edit. No vandalism or non-constructive editing intended. Packer1028 (talk) 21:22, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Packer1028, I've actually been discussing just this issue with the MediaWiki team, only that the Visual Editor was the only place where I encountered this behavior. Which browser are you using on mobile? IceWelder [✉] 22:10, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
For mobile, I use the iOS Wikipedia app. Packer1028 (talk) 23:46, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Landfall Games

Hello, IceWelder. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Landfall Games".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Supercell (video game company)

Hi.

I did put there an citation to the official company investment web page. I think that should be reliable enough. See [1]

I put everything in citations (") as that is the text at the oficial web page. Maybe you should check that out. That text, yes, might be "unencyclopedic writing" but it is a direct quote.

Anyway, I'm OK if the text is gone (I wanted to add it as a base for the table below), but the investees table should be left there as it contains interesting and useful information.

br, Janta — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janta (talk • contribs) 10:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ [1]
Janta, I did indeed not see the quotes, but knowing this adds two problems:
  • Quoting what is effectively an entire work could be considered a copyright violation.
  • The article was directly infused with corporate-written fluff/peacockery.
Should I find the time, I will look into reliable sources for this and then write original text around the information. If you wish, you can also do that in the meantime. Please see WP:V and WP:RS for advice on sources. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 13:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Digital Homicide Studios

On 24 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Digital Homicide Studios, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that all video games by Digital Homicide Studios were removed from Steam after the company sued 100 of the platform's users? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Digital Homicide Studios. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Digital Homicide Studios), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Cleaning up Special:WantedTemplates

Hi, due to quirks in the way that Wikipedia parses javascript pages, curly braces are parsed as templates, unless they are inside of <nowiki>...</nowiki>, <pre>...</pre>, <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight> ... As a result of this, your script page, User:IceWelder/USEnglish.js, is generating links in Special:WantedTemplates (in particular links to Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:)((?:NYT and Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:\w*\scolor\). Recently, an interface editor attempted to fix this by adding <nowiki> at the top and </nowiki> at the bottom of your script page. This didn't work because you already have <nowiki>...</nowiki> on that page. It would be great if you could add <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight> tags (you don't have these) at the top and bottom of your page like this which will prevent your page from generating links in Special:WantedTemplates. Thanks for your help! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Plastikspork, this should be fixed now. But is that not a thing that should be fixed in MediaWiki's interpreter (i.e. generally ignoring JS/CSS/Lua files completely)? IceWelder [✉] 15:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
That would require losing useful properties like categorization of such files. Izno (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
But surely this specific issue can be natively avoided? IceWelder [✉] 16:12, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

The Nomad Soul

Nobody else seemed to add anything over at the talk page and it's just gone into limbo with the archival - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_156#The_Nomad_Soul

I feel like the only uncertainty was what title to give the individual credit for, as it seemed established that they definitely did contribute to the game largely in the nature they claimed to have contributed to it in.

Given that discussion seems to have ended, I'm going to WP:BOLD be bold and readd the information in preference to it not being present, and add a section on the talk page (more visible to anyone stumbling across the article). Hopefully rather than just removal of the information, improvement of how it is included might be achieved.

Decided I'd give you a heads up as you were the one who reverted it previously. 94.13.35.21 (talk) 14:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations

Your DYK hook about Digital Homicide Studios drew 10,551 page views (879 per hour) while on the Main Page. It is one of the most viewed hooks for the month of March as shown at March 2021 DYK STATS. Keep up the great work! Cbl62 (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

The Altman Family/Family of Robert A. Altman

IceWelderCan you help me find more sources for this page that I am about to create? The Altman Family or Family of Robert A. Altman. Similar to the family of Donald Trump article. So far I've only found these ones. Timur9008 (talk) 19:50, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

+other sources mentioned at the main Robert A. Altman page. I feel like there enough sources to warrant its own page.

  • @Timur9008: I don't dabble with biographies too often, so I don't know what the [notability] requirements for family articles are. You should run this by an expert on the topic (or someone with more general knowledge). I'll also note here that Altman's own article should be expanded; there is plenty of information in the sources we already use, especially the obituary in WaPo. IceWelder [✉] 21:14, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Rockstar San Diego


A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you for the improvements you made to the article Red Eclipse during review. TucanHolmes (talk) 09:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Wuhu Island

About this, the reason I abandoned the draft. Someone tried to revive it, but it's just not notable. Panini!🥪 14:44, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Panini!, I figured that was the case. I rejected it based purely on the state I found it in, though. IceWelder [✉] 19:33, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Hello. Do you think there's an upcoming sequel to the game Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, or at least found some signs that a sequel is imminent? 172.250.44.165 (talk) 19:18, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

No. There wouldn't be a source for this anyway. IceWelder [✉] 19:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
In that case, can we call it the last game in its main series? 172.250.44.165 (talk) 02:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
There is no reliable source I am aware of that can definitely say that there will never be another Counter-Strike game. Adding such a claim because there hasn't been a new game in eight years is speculation. IceWelder [✉] 08:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
In TV show articles, we have a rule where if the show does not air a new episode for one year, we can add the end date which is the date the last episode aired. If we have a time rule for TV shows, why can't we have such a rule for video game series? 172.250.44.165 (talk) 05:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
The Counter-Strike series article already lists CS:GO as the latest title. TV series articles do the same, just additionally put 'present' when it is known that more content is in production. IceWelder [✉] 06:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I must admit the fact that the Counter-Strike series has not had a new game in 8 years maybe insufficient reasoning. But another reason that makes CS:GO's final status more likely is that there has not been any news regarding the future of its series. When I say news, I mean articles about the developers working on a sequel, or at least expressing interest in making a sequel. 172.250.44.165 (talk) 21:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
WP:Original research, WP:Crystal ball. IceWelder [✉] 21:55, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
If a famous singer dies, is it original research or crystal ball to say his latest album is his last one? 172.250.44.165 (talk) 06:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
We have seen several cases of posthumous album/single releases. You might find something like "X was Y's last release before their death." Aside from that, Valve is very much alive and video game companies and musical artist are not really comparable. IceWelder [✉] 08:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

StarCraft II

Um, I appreciate the call to WP:BRD, but I've already initiated the discussion at the talk pages, and the person who started reverting me didn't actually participate in the D part. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The person making the bold edit (you) is the one who has to stop and discuss. Masem has replied to you, either way, both at Talk:StarCraft and on his user talk. -- ferret (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Rollback

Your use of rollback in Special:Diff/1018678428 is not permitted by policy. Please see Wikipedia:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback. Thank you. Naleksuh (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Naleksuh, your edit contradicts the sourced material in the body. Edits like that occur frequently and can be considered vandalism, wherefore rollback is permitted. IceWelder [✉] 22:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Actually no both later in the article it says the date is the 18th. The official primary source is also the 18th. Where could you have possibly gotten the 19th from? Naleksuh (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
As a sidenote, you would need a very convincing case to claim a year old account with 2k edits is vandalizing, which simply correctiny a material to not be self-contradictory article or matching the primary source-- is not even close to vandalism. Let's be real here, what happened is you saw I changed a date, and that my user page was as red link, and clicked revert. So please don't do that again. Naleksuh (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Naleksuh, as the body reads: "Some journalists believed the game denoted the release of Portal 2 on April 15, 2011, instead of the target release date of April 19, 2011.", which is backed up by four sources. The only other mention of April 18 cites this article, which reads: "[Update: 5:40] Valve has told Shacknews that Portal 2 will hit North America and Australia on April 20 and on April 22 in Europe. The original press release noted the game would be pushed to 'the week of April 18,'".
I make no distinction between red-/bluelinked users as creating a userpage requires no effort from a vandal. Date vandalism has been performed so many times on that and related articles that hitting the revert button has become muscle memory, even when it is a genuine mistake. I actually WP:DTR'd and did not tag you, given your edit count. IceWelder [✉] 22:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
April 19 appears to be the canon release date; Valve still publicized it days before the release. IceWelder [✉] 22:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
I've looked into it a bit more and it appears to depend on the timezone. It is identified as April 18th by the primary source in PST, but in later timezones such as GMT is the 19th. I'm not sure how Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Time_zones is supposed to work for something online, but I'd assume that here the publisher's timezone (Bellevue Washington - PST) should be used. Is that okay? Naleksuh (talk) 22:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Also note that the "target release date" is not the same as the release date Naleksuh (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Naleksuh, the raw database data shows April 19 without any set time. Assuming the date is interpreted as 00:00 UTC, West-of-UTC timezones will show a faulty date in the visible storefront. The Portal 2 blog post shows a very specific release time of 7 AM PST, why they would change that six days before release is beyond me. Alas, Steam pages should generally not be used for such data, otherwise we would have to use incorrect dates for (at least) Half-Life and Counter-Strike that Valve never bothered to fix. IceWelder [✉] 23:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

As I wrote down the release time, it clicked: The game was released ~ten hours early because of GLaDOS@Home, which obviously pushed the date just before midnight. Shacknews has the juicy details: "Portal 2 became available via Steam at around 9:30pm PST on April 18. It was originally slated to launch at 7am PST on April 19". I add this sourced and fixed the date again. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 23:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Awesome, date looks good now. Naleksuh (talk) 00:10, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

"Barack Roll" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Barack Roll. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 3#Barack Roll until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Football Glory

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Football Glory you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Football Glory

The article Football Glory you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Football Glory for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Football Glory

The article Football Glory you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Football Glory for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:21, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Video games Newsletter survey

I'm conducting another survey for the Wikiproject Video games Newsletter. If you could leave your thoughts on the matter it would be greatly appreciated. Every response will be compiled into a MOS-Esque answer that balances the thoughts of our top contributors. You're one of them! The question is as follows:

What would you consider the requirements of making a video game series article? What about franchise articles?

If you would like to respond, please ping me here and write your reply. I'll handle the rest. Thanks in advance, Panini!🥪 14:53, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Football Glory

On 30 May 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Football Glory, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the video game Football Glory features its developers in the Croatia national football team? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Football Glory. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Football Glory), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

CodeMiko Declination

Hey IceWelder.

I would like to discuss the rejection of the CodeMiko draft. The rejection was due to non-reliable sources, specifically:

  • IMDB: I have removed this reference, and I agree with the criticism.
  • LinkedIn: The LinkedIn reference is to Kang's personal LinkedIn profile, and is as such a self-published, primary source about themselves according to WP:LINKEDIN?
  • PogChampsChess: Is the primary source on the PogChamps chess tournament, and is also the reference used for the main-space PogChamps article.
  • YouTube: The YouTube references are to raw interview VODs. Strictly speaking they could be removed, but they do serve as proof that events happened. Would this use qualify by WP:YOUTUBE-EL?
  • TwitchTracker: Serves as an archive for Twitch statistics. Strictly speaking they could be removed, but no references for Kang's early career would be left.

Do you agree that the LinkedIn and PogChampsChess references are OK as-is, and how do you feel about the YouTube and TwitchTracker references?

LongJohn42 (talk) 22:09, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

LongJohn42, WP:LINKEDIN requires that a LinkedIn profile can be reliably identified as belonging to a subject, which usually comes by way of in itself reliable sources. For PogChampsChess, I feel to see the relevance if only primary sources can be used for the matter. Dito for YouTube sources (rule of thumb: use primary sources only if they help cover holes that need to be covered, not to include selective but unnecessary info). TwitchTracker is very similar in this issue but is also a tertiary source. I'm mostly going with the standard AfC rules in this regard but you can feel free to put TwitchTracker and PogChamps before the reliable sources noticeboard. Another thing to mention is that several statements in the article are not sourced or inferred from original research. For example, there is no single secondary source that covers her former channel but the draft still makes a connection without a source and then compares their states with third-party data trackers. Try to model your draft after other well-maintained pages like Dream (YouTuber). Regards, IceWelder [✉] 22:46, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey IceWelder,

I am reading the guidelines so trying to understand the correct use of external links. Is it because is a database website and not a news page ? Sorry if I caused any trouble — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao13Pinto (talk • contribs) 11:36, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Joao13Pinto, the primary issue here is that you were spamming links to your personal website. See also WP:CITESPAM. That the site is not considered a reliable source is a separate but still relevant issue. IceWelder [✉] 11:55, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Entertainment Software Association members has been nominated for listification

Category:Entertainment Software Association members has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:52, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Typical Gamer Declination

I see you have denied my draft on Typical Gamer. It took 5 months to get reiewed and I made some new edits. Could you please take a little time to reviw and edit it and gve some feedback? Thanks a bunch, 1xKingVampTalkToMe 04:52, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

1xKingVamp, sorry your draft did not get reviewed in time. It was stuck in quite a long backlog that I completely cleared out recently. Your recent changes allow me to take a more informed look at the sourcing. One rather worrying segment is this part in the "YouTube career" section:
He continued to play games throughout the years but found little viewership. In 2013, when YouTube Livestreaming was created[11], he started playing Grand Theft Auto V and became one of the pioneers of the streaming service. It was playing Grand Theft Auto V that gave him his first taste of major success. He continued on this path until he reached his next major break with the game Fortnite. He started playing Fortnite in 2017 but the major viewership came later. When Fortnite reached an extremely large player count of 350 million players in the middle of 2020[12] and it combined with 2020 being the biggest and most successful year for YouTube Gaming, his viewership skyrocketed to an all-time high.[13]
Typical Gamer is not mentioned in any of the sources used here (apart from two instances with unrelated information in the YouTube Blog article) and they mostly discuss YouTube in general. Hence, none of the statements can actually be verified. Other instances are:
  • The birth date, birthplace, and current residence are not sourced.
  • Rebelo registered a YouTube account under the name "Typical Gamer" on August 24, 2008, while YouTube was in an early stage and he was still a teenager.[8] -- The source does say 2008 but not a specific date and without comment to his or YouTube's status at the time.
  • This success contributed to Twitch creating their own similar feature known as "tipping".[16] -- The source suggests that Twitch added their tipping method a year before YouTube did.
  • On March 3, 2020, he registered a second YouTube account under the name "TG Plays" which focuses on Fortnite content. -- This also needs a source.
Sourcing issues are what usually bars drafts from passing into mainspace, so this will need to be amended. On the prose side, I would recommend merging the "YouTube career" and "YouTube contract" sections as their statements are deeply related.
Once you think your draft is in an amicable state and passes all base criteria, submit it again and consider dropping a line at the respective WikiProjects (WikiProject Video games, for example). AfC reviewers are discouraged from reviewing the same draft multiple times so I will likely not be there to accept it unless it gets stuck in the backlog again.
Regards, IceWelder [✉] 06:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

XDEV Studio Changes

Hello IceWelder,
I referred to Sony's Corporate Report of 2020 in my recent edit. (https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/IR/library/corporatereport/CorporateReport2020_E.pdf) On pages 28, 29, and 30 it has XDEV as one of the fourteen Worldwide Studios, and a game-production studio at that time.
Looking through the previous history of the SIE Worldwide Studio page. On March 22, 2016 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SIE_Worldwide_Studios&oldid=711385733) XDEV was listed as a studio with various sources. When a new list was created on March 29, 2016 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SIE_Worldwide_Studios&oldid=712472621) it left out XDEV with no reason as to why. Possibly because at that time rather than saying "Other Divisions" it said "Other studios and associates".
Thank You,
Masterpandaking (talk) 09:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Masterpandaking, XDev is part of WWS but does not actually do any development, it rather organizes development with external partners (hence 'external development'). Since it is already listed in the "Other divisions" section, I think it is unnecessary to also have it in the studios table. IceWelder [✉] 22:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Editing an image summary

Hi IceWelder, I wanted to improve the rationale slightly for the screenshot taken from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered, but I've no clue how to do this; when I try and edit the summary it just comes up with an older revision that has since been updated? Thanks. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 20:43, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikibenboy94, you're probably looking for the |Purpose= parameter. Cf. files like File:Serious Sam The Random Encounter screenshot.png (which got a Purpose as a GA requirement). Regards, IceWelder [✉] 22:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder I know it's the Purpose parameter but what I meant was when I click Edit it's not the same prose as what is shown in the Summary i.e. the Purpose for Serious Sam has a paragraph of text, but editing it shows it as "This screenshot is used in the "Gameplay" section of the article to visualize the game's combat system, level layout, player characters, enemies, graphics, and heads-up display.", like it's an older revision or something. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 08:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Wikibenboy94, that's not an issue with the template. The "Purpose of use" part in the table is put together from the |Use= parameter, some phrases regarding "critical context", then the content of |Purpose=, and finally a sentence regarding non-competition. #2 and #4 are fixed in the template code and cannot be changed. IceWelder [✉] 15:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
IceWelder Ok thanks, I think I've got it. However, if the sentences on "critical context" and non-competition cannot be changed, why have I seen Purposes of use in other examples that don't include this information and just consist of one sentence? Wikibenboy94 (talk) 16:04, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Wikibenboy94, the fixed text isn't shown when |Use= isn't used, though this will also cause a less specific text for "Replaceability". Some files might also use a template other than {{Non-free use rationale video game screenshot}}. I do think that the default text provided by the NFUR template is useful. IceWelder [✉] 16:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Fake voice actress from HobbyKids Adventures.

HobbyButterfly did not voiced by Stephanie Sheh. But JillanTubeHD did voice of HobbyButterfly. Look at the video. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LDJRve6DQJs And you also look at that video. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts8vjyZFG-8

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello IceWelder:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 2200 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Why are you so lazy?

Roblox having 1,234 employees is verified and public information.

You reverted it to an outdated number without doing any research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.40.18.21 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

You were asked several times to provide a source, yet you refuse to do so. The 1,054 is properly sourced and dated in the article. IceWelder [✉] 14:46, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations

The Featured Article Medal
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this special, very exclusive award created just for we few, we happy few, this band of brothers, who have shed sweat, tears and probably blood, in order to be able to proudly claim "I too have taken an article to Featured status". Gog the Mild (talk) 10:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Promotion of Rockstar San Diego

Congratulations, IceWelder! The article you nominated, Rockstar San Diego, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Congrats on your first FA, it has been great seeing the article progress over the years. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 16:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
The Video Game Barnstar
Congratulations on the promotion of Rockstar San Diego to FA! Your hard work has paid off; it's genuinely inspiring to see how far the article has come. – Rhain ☔ 23:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
@Gog the Mild, Spy-cicle, and Rhain: Thank you all! I hope I'll be able to reciprocate. IceWelder [✉] 22:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pirates of the Caribbean Online.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pirates of the Caribbean Online.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Games

I meant to leave a revert summary but it wouldn't let me. There's nothing wrong with delineation; the majority of video game company are written in the same way. ♦ jaguar 14:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Jaguar, how do you infer that most VG firm articles are written this way? My experience has been the contrary: UK constituent countries instead of "United Kingdom" and no use of counties where not required.
The status quo for countries in infoboxes that I am aware of is to only list the country, even if that country is a constituent part of a larger sovereign state. This applies not only to the UK. For example, with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, you would write "Oranjestad, Aruba" and "Amsterdam, Netherlands", not "Oranjestad, Aruba, Kingdom of the Netherlands" and "Amsterdam, Netherlands, Kingdom of the Netherlands". ("Oranjestad, Kingdom of the Netherlands" would be ambiguous.)
In terms of counties, I feel like there is no need to disambiguate Guildford when it is not ambiguous. Just adding "Surrey" appears to add nothing helpful to the reader (and you cannot assume every reader to know Surrey). In the same vein, New York City and Los Angeles are also not ambiguous, so I would not use the superfluous "New York City, New York" or "Los Angeles, California" disambiguations.
Your thoughts on this would be appreciated. A definitive solution should be put down in a MOS at some point, somewhere. Regards. IceWelder [✉] 09:49, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi IceWelder. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:00, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

LUGNET

Hi! I did not understand your rationale for reverting my See Also edit on LUGNET. I explained my rationale on the LUGNET talk page. I would really appreciate it if you could enlighten me. Thanks. Slimy asparagus (talk) 14:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:SEEALSO requires that all articles listed are related and relevant to the topic at hand. BrikWars, a wargaming system, is not related to LUGNET, an internet forum. Something being discussed on an internet forum does not create a relation between the two. Otherwise, many more pages would need Reddit, Facebook or Twitter in their "See also"s. IceWelder [✉] 14:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't agree that this statement of the situation is entirely accurate. LUGNET is not an all-topic forum like reddit or twiiter; it is about LEGO. BrikWars is not a typical miniatures wargame that comes with lead figures and pots of paint. It is played with LEGO minifigures. They are both strongly connected to LEGO. As such I made the link in good faith. I can see that it is a matter of judgement whether that was a sufficient reason for a link, but I did have a reason. Slimy asparagus (talk) 23:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
I see your POV, but revolving in any way around Lego is not quite a relation. Otherwise, LUGNET would be under every Lego-related article and vice versa. IceWelder [✉] 09:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
That's a fair point. Slimy asparagus (talk) 12:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Neon Giant

Yes I know that but it has 24% of the company by Amplifier Game Invest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nabasile (talk • contribs) 17:52, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nabasile: The table is for subsidiaries, i.e. major holdings. It does not (and, frankly, should not) include minority holdings, nor does it currently include any. IceWelder [✉] 17:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

About the Template:User Twitch template

Hello. I have recently come to mind that the userbox hasn't followed Twitch's new logo or brand identity. Can you consider changing the logo to the new one. And if you have time, can you also tweak the color a bit? If so, thanks.

Doctorine Dark (talk) 18:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Doctorine Dark, should be fixed. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 18:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Defiant Development

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Defiant Development you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 18:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)


Could you please see Draft:Mev_Dinc

Hello Ice, I got the article to a level which I think is passable. Sorry for the initial draft, I had copied his bio, which of course is a bit promotional. I removed non-exncylopedic sentences and fixed some. I have added a bunch of citings. I know its not perfect yet, however,I am hoping the future visitors will take it over once I get something basic out.

Would you mind having another look so I can avoid rejection? Thanks.Rainbouw19 (talk) 17:50, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Rainbouw19, sorry, but the draft is currently not in a passable state. Half of all content is not sourced and it sometimes relies on MobyGames (an unreliable, user-generated site) for information. I found this article which should help you immensely in writing the article. I don't have the time right now to help you with writing but can pass the draft when it appears ready. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 09:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Ice, thanks for the pointer, I am on it Rainbouw19 (talk) 19:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello again, I have worked more on the article per your advice, removed all Moby Games refs and added further refs. I would appreciate if you could take another look when you got time, thank you Rainbouw19 (talk) 01:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
There is still a lot of content that does not have any sources. All statements on Wikipedia need to be sourced or removed. Please compare the draft with articles like Phil Fish in regards to sourcing, sections, and writing. IceWelder [✉] 14:28, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Dear Ice, I added/fixed a lot of cites. I made it into sections similar to Phil Fish. The language is rather basic since I am trying to establish "what" can be written before "how". I expect someone would jump in, or if not I would invite someone with better literary skills to finish it. I feel it is passable except for the "writing" part for which I'd like to ask and wondering; does it look passable as is now? Would it be OK to try to pass it first and invite someone who specializes in writing when citings and other problems are fixed? (To give an editor proper material and no problems) I would really appreciate it if you can mark non-acceptable citings to help me figure where to focus. Thanks.Rainbouw19 (talk) 14:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Rainbouw19: I see you have put a lot of effort into your draft. I have now published it and, using the sources you added, rewrote the article slightly so it reads more like other Wikipedia articles. I have merged Dinc's companies, which did not have enough sources for an article, into the new Mev Dinc article. This way, everything can be found in one place. I also nominated some of the images you uploaded for deletion because of some copyright issues. The main photo you took of Dinc can stay. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 17:01, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Dios mio! Ice, it looks beautiful, that's a lot of work, hats off. thank you very much for your time and guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rainbouw19 (talk • contribs) 14:24, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
You're welcome. IceWelder [✉] 14:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Userscript for moving files

I noticed you move files manually and update the filenames in articles manually as well. As updating filenames is a drag I created LuckyRename some time ago, you may want to give it a try. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 11:24, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Alexis Jazz, works great, thanks! IceWelder [✉] 19:02, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Guidance on Fanatec submission

Hello, I wondered if I could get any guidance on how notability can be demonstrated for the Fanatec article. I can't see the big difference compared to articles such as Thrustmaster or Saitek. Sauer202 (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:42 is the essential summary: Multiple, independent, reliable sources that provide in-depth coverage of the topic. The secondary sources currently used in the draft only feature passing mentions of the company—usually in relation to a product or partnership the company is involved in—as part of routine news reporting. This is not in-depth coverage of the company, therefore not demonstrating notability. I cannot speak to the quality of the Thrustmaster and Saitek articles; from a first glance. they run afoul of the same issues and could be considered deletion targets. At least for Saitek, I can quickly find some reporting directly about the company, albeit mostly part of routine coverage. IceWelder [✉] 19:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Defiant Development

The article Defiant Development you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Defiant Development for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

I was eager to get that FA done, and I appreciate your help getting it wrapped up in time for the anniversary. If you need another FA review or similar, just ping me on my talk page. Happy to reciprocate. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Any time. No need to reciprocate as you helped me with Rockstar San Diego and Defiant Development already. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 07:00, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

What are notability issues with pure databases?

While I can see the problem with blogs and some other sources that can be edited by others (basically like linking another free edit wiki to my draft or something, or other Wikipedia pages itself), I do not see what is not considered un-notable for some articles, specially when the information must be considered accurate like the name of a game, voice actors, companies who funded development/studios, additional crew who worked on the game (information should come directly from the publisher for some content, as a third party writing information about a movie/game/media is less likely to be accurate than the people who made/filmed the content or were directly involved, financed, and knows more about a game/film/media, as far as making those involved sign NDAs to prevent them from leaking info to the press/media.

Also, the only other place that this information could be found is in a online database (which is supposed to be a type of source that you said is not exactly reliable. So, I am stuck for this), illegitimately obtained and scanned scripts of the production, wire-tapped phone calls and messages/emails, or CCTV footage with audio of individuals who were accepted/invited to be VAs of the characters. Those might fall under personal source, thus not exactly reliable anyway.

Not every VA is listed for their work on a production outside the official credits, sometimes uncredited, and if they are just starting, even less likely to be featured on any news articles, their names not even mentioned. This could be the same with the official publishings, so that would put both sources in questionable reliability tbh.

I checked the notability article, and there is nothing about databases being not notable. You are correct, that some of my chosen sources are unreliable and thus should be replaced, but I would like to know how databases/generated articles that are not authored by human beings are not considered notable. The notability page does not mention databases in it, or says that it must be authored by a living person/self-conscious AI who works for the press or some news site. It would be the same as removing IMDB as a reliable source, as well as any database sites that are used for reliable sources.

I would like to know which ones are reliable, which ones are not, so I can run a search for potential replacements in other sources. Per individual line.

I am rarely available (just saw this today) so I might take a week or two to read any replies. Misser420 (talk) 17:12, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I assume this is about Draft:Tagatame no Alchemist? You might be conflating notability and reliability.
  • Reliability concerns Wikipedia's knowledge that a site's information is correct or destined to be correct based on the site's staff, policies, or reputation. There are quite a few sources known to be reliable, see for example WP:RSP and WP:VG/RS, the latter concerning specifically video game sources.
  • Notability is a topic's viability to have an article on Wikipedia based on several factors. WP:42 is the essential summary; in short, a topic needs to have in-depth coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources. There also is WP:NVG specifically for the notability of video games.
For all intents and purposes, databases do not constitute in-depth coverage and therefore do not count towards a topic's notability. However, this is decoupled from such a site's potential reliability; for example, Metacritic is a reliable database for review scores and an aggregation thereof, wherefore it is frequently cited. But simply having a Metacritic page does not make a game automatically notable. Then there are IMDb, MobyGames, MyAnimeList, and similar sites, which are user-edited and therefore fall into the "unreliable" category.
A quick breakdown of the sources:
  • The websites for The Alchemist Code, Fuji & gumi Games, and Satelight are primary sources; they might be reliable but would never add to notability.
  • Tracxn, eiga.com, and MyAnimeList are user-edited and unreliable. AniList appears to fall into the same category with all "data mods" seemingly being volunteer users as well.
  • SensorTower and Yahoo! Movies JP might be considered reliable but are auto-generated databases, therefore not providing notability.
  • Famitsu is well known to be reliable and it does provide in-depth coverage.
  • Online Fanatic used to be a blog but it currently redirects to a scam site. Needs to be removed in any case.
  • Appzin appears to be self-published as well (and is tagged as such).
  • 4Gamer.net, Natalie, and Crunchyroll are reliable but each only provide short news stories, not in-depth coverage. Spice is similar but I couldn't establish this site's reliability given a lack of a staff and policy pages.
In summary, Famitsu is the only source that provides in-depth coverage of the game. As stated above, our guidelines require that there are multiple such sources and no unreliable sources. The best way forward would be to remove the sources pointed out as unreliable or questionable and add a few more reviews from reliable sites. The video games WikiProject has a search engine for only reliable sites at WP:VG/SE that could help you with this. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 10:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Help with details

Hello,

Thanks for the notes on the submission. Would it be possible to help sort out what sort of sources wikipedia needs? This is my first actual addition that was not to a previously published article, so I am not sure what is needed.

It is a magazine I purchase and find all the time in the shops here, so it seems it should have a page, and tried to add the info other sites and magazines have, so I welcome your input, especially since you seem to know a lot about how articles and additions should be structured. I looked at PCGamesN and Polygons page before making this one, so wanted to try and include similar information. I included aspects about the magazine being one of the judges for Gamescom, E3 and other events. This is my first created page, so I want to ensure I do thing right. I know I have seen them as experts here in Canada on channels like CTV and CBC, and referenced in news papers around here. I am excited to hear your input, and thanks again for all the details and notes.

Thanks again, and appreciate all the advice. I am excited to add more to wikipedia going forward! Zune4ever (talk) 13:33, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

As I noted, there needs to be in-depth coverage about the website. This means that there should be reliable sources that go in-depth with the site's workings, history, staff, etc. This is what Wikipedia calls "notability" and you can find a good summary of what it requires at WP:42. Currently, the draft is composed almost entirely of some websites referencing the site, e.g. as part of a review round-up, review aggregation, or jury panel. This applies to dozens (if not hundreds) of sites, which are all not automatically notable. If there are sources that would make the site notable as described before, model the draft after existing pages like Polygon (website); this includes sections like "In Other Media" being completely removed. I'm also pretty sure that the "Review system" section plagiarizes the site's "Review Policy" page. IceWelder [✉] 14:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

So removing review round ups since they are not useful to the wikipedia readers.

Would details about being part of major European and US jury panels be important to include? I have seen that on other magazines pages when they are part of events etc.

Thanks for all the info, that is very helpful. For the review section, should I sum up what they have there to make it easier for the reader?

That makes a lot of sense! I will give the Polygon page a look and refine what I have done.

I will ensure future creations are more refined. Zune4ever (talk) 14:33, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

The page should not be overly dependent on primary sources, so if details like jury inclusion and review policies are not at all covered in reliable, secondary sources, they should not be included. Otherwise, cover them in at most the detail that the secondary sources do. The current state has a too heavy emphasis on individual scores and presents no overarching concept. Again, I recommend comparing it with Polygon and how briefly its review system is covered and the lack of inclusion in jury panels (despite also being on the two E3 award boards cited in CGM's draft). IceWelder [✉] 14:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

That makes a lot of sense, I see exactly what you mean. Looking at why it is interesting and notable rather then just a list of metrics is more useful and overall more valuable to readers of Wikipedia.

I will give Polygon a look and use it as a model! Thanks for being so helpful with the process! Zune4ever (talk) 15:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

About Xenia and notability

Hi, I was looking at the history of the Xenia article. It was previously deleted and currently stands as a redirect, the main problem being the lack of coverage. Well, since May 2020 and now there's been a report about Xenia as well as references to it in the gaming press. At least two sources marked as reliable, PCGamesN and Kotaku, have written articles either about or referencing Xenia. There may be more but I couldn't find any. Kotaku wrote an report specifically about Xenia titled "Xbox 360 Emulation Is Coming Along Nicely". It's not very long, it's not very detailed, but it is a reference in a major media outlet which does count toward notability. Other references include a passing remark in an article about a leaked GoldenEye remake and a more direct reference about the emulator being modded to support said leaked remake better. This may not be the best, but it's better than what existed at the time of the AfD.

Do you think this is enough to bring the article around? It's a real shame it was being held back by the coverage problem considering every other 7th generation console emulator has their own respective article, Xenia is the odd one out. For some reason the gaming media didn't report on it as much as Cemu or RPCS3. 64.43.142.41 (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The Kotaku Australia one isn't an in-depth report; the article merely takes note of the video it references as part of the site's ongoing coverage of how well Xbox games can be emulated, previously focusing on Xemu. The article text is barely over 100 words and boils down to "Xenia now supports 4K". Yes, it is a shame that Xenia gets insufficient coverage, but I am still of the opinion that you could not get a proper article without significant gaps when just using reliable, secondary sources. I wouldn't mind being proven wrong through a draft. IceWelder [✉] 08:42, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

07/09 Próton Bus Simulator

Wait, wait, this page exists in three other languages. Because here on Wikipedia English cannot have this type of page. Need fonts on obvious stuff? YellowFrogger (talk) 18:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The draft/article needs to follow English Wikipedia's notability rules (see WP:42 for a summary). Wikipedia in other languages might have laxer rules, but I doubt that what is currently in the draft is considered a proper article where it comes from. IceWelder [✉] 18:45, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Rebellion Developments logo.svg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rebellion Developments logo.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:42, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Request on 01:35:45, 10 September 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Lanson.hoopai


Hi, thanks so much for your review. I understand that the article requires external, secondary sources. Could you give me some advice on what appropriate citation would look like, or what sort of sources would qualify for citation of game mechanics? It seems to me that the best sources for game rules would be from the game designers themselves.

The live Teamfight Tactics page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teamfight_Tactics), for example, contains several large portions of externally uncited rules-related material.

Lanson.hoopai (talk) 01:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Sources for such content are usually taken from previews and reviews in reliable sources -- the same that you would use to prove that a game is notable. WP:VG/RS contains a list of sources for video games that the project has already deemed reliable or unreliable, so you can check potential sources against that. Teamfight Tactics is a good example for a bad article source-wise, and I have marked it accordingly. Look to known good content (such as League of Legends) instead if you want to model your draft after an existing article. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 06:16, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey, curious!

Hey, just curious to know why are you removing all the AFK gaming sources? Warm Regards---Abhay EsportsTalk To Me 21:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

The source is considered unreliable per a recent discussion at WT:VG/S. One user has been using it disruptively, so I removed the source from most articles to avoid a precedent for further misuse. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 06:50, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

38 Studios and Bethesda Softworks

Hi! Was wondering is it possible to get these two articles to good or even featured status. I would need your help here. I think there is enough information to get them there. Timur9008 (talk) 20:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Both are definitely worth exploring, granted both will need comprehensive rewrites due to poor writing, poor sourcing, or both. 38 Studios will definitely be the easier one as all of its sources should be readily available online. I'm avoiding large writing projects at the moment because I am a bit preoccupied with personal stuff, but I should have plenty of time in October. IceWelder [✉] 17:45, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! I should note the sources needed for the 38 Studios article are already on the talk page(including the Jason Schreier article). Timur9008 (talk) 21:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:New World Interactive.svg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:New World Interactive.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Infobox format

I should point out that aligned formatting is the standard format for infoboxes, as you see on Template:Infobox settlement, Template:Infobox person, Template:Infobox film, Template:Infobox musical artist or any major infobox. Also, you referenced a tutorial, not a policy, and one that doesn't even say infoboxes should have that format. Thirdly, "It does not make sense to have VE user (who don't see code spacing) add extraneous spacing." That's why it's meant for source-code editors and not VisualEditor users. Plus, maybe you're forgetting that the source editor also inserts templates according to their format specified in TemplateData.

The aligned format exists and is used because it makes it easier for source-code editors to navigate and edit infobox parameters, so there doesn't seem to be any reason why you're reverting it on this one particular infobox. · • SUM1 • · (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I disagree. The wide-space format (let's call it "roomy") was never the default. In fact, in three of the four examples you cite, the format was changed away from block (as the original format) without consensus.[12][13][14] The fourth of these was also introduced by one of the two users changing the formats.[15] For {{Infobox company}}, the initial format was block as well.[16] Whether the roomy format makes it "easier ... to navigate and edit infobox parameters" is debatable; I, for one, find it more distracting than anything. However, that format also creates accessibility issues for users on smaller screens, particularly mobile users. I previously used this example to show how cluttered and disorienting (on what is already a pretty large mobile screen) the text becomes due to this spacing. I cite Wikipedia:TemplateData/Tutorial because it contains the following guidance:

with the block option each parameter will take a single line (...) This option may be preferable for very complex templates like infoboxes

Yes, it is a tutorial, but it provides a formal recommendation. There is no policy that speaks for or against any particular format, so the use of roomy formats does not appear to have a basis outside of personal preference. IceWelder [✉] 20:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I didn't say it was the "default", rather an accepted standard or convention on several major, widely used templates (I've never seen or had this format be reverted before), and the block format being the original doesn't make it automatically better. You could equally argue that trying to edit infoboxes in source mode is cluttered enough as it is on mobile. The changes you linked were fairly old (in TemplateData standards); general users had basically accepted the aligned format on these very widely used, major infoboxes for years, without any major dispute, so an editor making such an edit (which I wouldn't even class as "bold") basically already had consensus. Rather, it was your removal that was challenged, by me. I'll just take this as the first dissenting editor I've seen make their voice heard about this. · • SUM1 • · (talk) 11:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
The changes did go against MOS:VAR, replacing a format that had implicit consensus before. No format is objectively better, but I have presented arguments as to why a simpler format may be preferable. Being "cluttering enough" is not really an argument for a format that is even cluttering. Alas, a big part of my concern is that Visual Editor users automatically apply the set format for every infobox they edit. Most articles I've seen use block format, so VE users change it roomy for no apparent reason (and likely without noticing). The same obviously applies in reverse as well. If VE was to recognize, not change, existing spacing formats, I think this would be a non-issue. IceWelder [✉] 17:40, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello IceWelder,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Doubt regarding a tag

"Some of this article's listed sources may not be reliable." I have noticed a tag placed by you, does this tag means to replace low quality website reference with a higher quality reference.when i visited reliable sources Page I don't find specific information regarding what to do when this tag is placed. 007sak (talk) 07:52, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

007sak, you are probably talking about Mumbai Gullies? The article lists sources like Sportskeeda, PCGameBenchmark, and GameFAQs that are known to be unreliable. Many of the others look like personal blogs. These sources should be removed and replaced with reliable ones. There is a list for video game sources at WP:VG/RS that you can use. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 08:55, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FNAFWorldlogo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:FNAFWorldlogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Star control 3 video game

Ok I guess I'll leave it like that. Ffffrr (talk) 14:52, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Mojang Studios

Hi, I have seen that you reverted my edits in Mojang Studios. I understand that it makes sense to put it in the category for canceled games however I think that there should be a neat and organized table of canceled games like there is for released games. Thanks in advance, -Gifnk dlm 2020 If only Middle English Wikipedia could be saved(talk) 16:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Global Esports Federation

Hi there, thanks for the notes on the submission, pertaining to notability and self-published sources. I have since replaced the self-published sources with independent secondary sources, and the only self-published one that remains is one that links to the organization's Constitution, which is available on its website. As for notability, the citations on the article are from secondary, reliable and independent sources and I do believe there is significant independent coverage from reliable outlets on the organization. Thanks much. -Comehuatmay (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Contra Hard Corps.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Contra Hard Corps.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dr. Mario 64.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dr. Mario 64.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mario Kart 64.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mario Kart 64.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shinobi III Return of the Ninja Master.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Shinobi III Return of the Ninja Master.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Streets of Rage 2.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Streets of Rage 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Halfbrick.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Halfbrick.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Rockstar San Diego scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 4 November 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to comment on the draft blurb at TFA. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

DICE (company)

Where is it told? Article is under DICE. Why make mess with 3 different names? Eurohunter (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies)#First sentence:

Regardless of the article title, the first sentence of the article should normally begin with the full legal name of the company

Template:Infobox company#Parameters

name – The full, legal name of the company, correctly reproducing punctuation and abbreviations or lack thereof. The full legal name of the company may be different from the common name used for the article title.

The current format is the most common one to neatly combine the legal name and the trade name (which happens to be the common name in this case). The |trade_name= parameter also accounts for trade names used across legal names, e.g. "DICE" was already in use for "Digital Illusions CE AB" and continued under "EA Digital Illusions CE AB". Regards, IceWelder [✉] 20:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
It's missleading. Eurohunter (talk) 20:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
How so? IceWelder [✉] 20:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
3 different names where you would expect the same name. Eurohunter (talk) 14:15, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
There is no single name for the company; there is the legal name "EA Digital Illusions CE AB", the trade name "DICE", and multiple former legal names. That the company has changed its name multiple times in the past is not our fault. The layout we use just makes it understandable and uniform across the project. IceWelder [✉] 14:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Video game cover changes

I have reverted your file changes of the video game covers back to the preferred png file format per WP:BRD since there was no consensus for these changes. If you still feel they should be changes, you should start a discussion that could reach a consensus. Normally I would suggest the article's talk page, but since there are seven articles involved: a centralized discussion should be started at either Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games (more experienced editors involved with video games or WP:FFD (more experience editors involved with files.) Aspects (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Aspects: You make it sound like you are reverting purely because it wasn't discussed. Editors are not expected to seek consensus for every change. If you are reverting because you yourself take issue with it, that's fine. As I explained at MUSHA, they are officially distributed images, so should be preferred to unofficial PNGs. Given this information, do you understand why the JPGs are preferred? Of course if any PNGs are official, those would be best. TarkusABtalk/contrib 23:49, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
@Aspects: You were the only one to object and you claimed that PNG is the "preferred file format". However, as I noted, all seven PNGs are only converted JPEGs, originally with high compresion and still containing very visiable compression artefacts. Such conversions are unnecessary as the quality lost to compression is not restored, only the file sizes are increased. In your above comment, you did not address any of the concerns I expressed.
Even aside from the compression artefacts, the PNGs are of lower quality than the JPEGs. The PNGs are poorly done scans that were saved to JPEG with high compression before being converted to PNG. The JPEGs, on the other hand, are the original cover art files released by Nintendo in August. They have low compression and are digital-first, not printed and then scanned. Scanning produces many noticeable artefacts, such as the high brightness variation seen on the Contra: Hard Corps, Shinobi III, and Streets of Rage 2‎ covers you reinstated. Especially the Streets of Rage 2 cover is so dark and blurry that I am surprised it even made it to Wikipedia in the first place. On the Mario Kart 64 cover you reverted to, Mario is orange, even though he should not be orange. There are many such issues but the covers released by Nintendo resolve them all.
As TarkusAB noted, there should be no discussion necessary with this particular set of files. Since your objection merely centres around the use of the PNG file format, I could -- in theory -- convert Nintendo's JPEGs to PNG and overwrite the existing files. This would boost the quality of the PNGs, no doubt, but the quality would be no different from the existing JPEGs; just the file sizes would be larger. If you dropped your opposition, BRD becomes a technicality and we could use the high-quality covers with no hassle, which would be very helpful. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 09:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
For reference, this pertains to:
I noticed that MUSHA has already been handled separately by TarkusAB and KGRAMR. IceWelder [✉] 18:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Contra Hard Corps.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Contra Hard Corps.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dr. Mario 64.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dr. Mario 64.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mario Kart 64.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mario Kart 64.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shinobi III Return of the Ninja Master.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Shinobi III Return of the Ninja Master.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Streets of Rage 2.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Streets of Rage 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:49, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Visual Concepts (2018).jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Visual Concepts (2018).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
  • On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Cloud Imperium Games

Hi IceWelder - I work at teh german Article from Cloud Imperium Games. Now I have a question regarding the fondingdate that you had changed it to 2010-12. Did you remember what was your source for this? I find only the year 2012 for this event. And what is meaned with 2010-12? December 2012? or Year 2010-2012? --Calle Cool (talk) 19:43, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

@Calle Cool: I did not actually edit the founding date. The page already stated it to be 2010 but I noticed that the LLC was only incorporated in 2012. Therefore, I added that the former name of the company was "Cloud Imperium Games" (without a legal suffix) from 2010 to 2012; "2010–12". However, the page was poorly written anyway and should not be used as a reference point. For example, the founding year was not 2010, it was 2012 (as confirmed by CIG's website). Hope this helps. IceWelder [✉] 20:20, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Yes thats was helpful. Thank you for this. Regards --Calle Cool (talk) 21:34, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

John Madden Footbal(1988)

Not sure if I read it wrong but apparently, the game sold 37 million copies by 2004. And it looks like it's U.S only sales? I'm going to add this to the games page and the list of best-selling video games page if that is the case. [17] Timur9008 (talk) 11:22, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I think "the game" here refers to the entire series, which is marketed as multiple editions of the same game. IceWelder [✉] 09:23, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Unrelated but Is the Tiburon generating more than $1.5 billion for EA by 2004 worth mentioning on the EA Tiburon page?(from the same source) Timur9008 (talk) 11:37, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Sure. IceWelder [✉] 09:50, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

TFA

Thank you, and the many you gave credit, today for Rockstar San Diego, "about the video game developer Rockstar San Diego, formerly known as Angel Studios. Rockstar San Diego is one of the best-known Rockstar Games studios and has produced highly acclaimed games, such as Red Dead Redemption (2010). It has a 35-plus-year history beginning as a work-fore-hire animation studio, turning into a video game studio, and being acquired by Rockstar Games."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Precious

defiant development

Thank you for quality articles such as Rockstar San Diego, Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing, Super Mario Bros. 35, I Hate Running Backwards and Defiant Development in teamwork, for uploading illustrations, for "No format is objectively better, but I have presented arguments", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2666 of Precious, a prize of QAI. Enjoy your first TFA! You are to modest about your language skills ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:23, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Good Job!

Alt text The Good JAlt textb! Award
Congratulations on the featured article! Our video game company articles go unnoticed by the video game community, so I'm glad that someone focused their attention on one for a change. Panini!🥪 12:58, 4 November 2021 (UTC)


Hey There

I've gotten back into gaming a little bit, although not much. I've just edited through the Atari (ex-Infogrames) pages and replaced all mentions of just Atari (as the page is about the brand) with Atari, Inc. (publisher). (some had Atari, Inc. (Atari, SA Subsidiary) on them but as that's a redirect now i've changed them as well).

Also, i've been wondering why the Unreal 2 page was changed from Infogrames to Atari, as I told you years ago that any Atari branded product from before May 2003 is still an Infogrames product. Is it likely due to the fact the Xbox port was released after the rebranding?

Other than that, I hope you've been doing fine! Luigitehplumber (talk) 23:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

The previous wording suggested that the PC and Xbox versions were published by separate entities. This is not accurate, both were published by Infogrames, Inc., one under the name "Atari" and one after actually renaming as "Atari". I changed it to Atari for simplicity, and this is what sources support. IceWelder [✉] 11:37, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I previously listed Infogrames considering they were the publisher of the PC version but I guess the rebranding (and the fact the Xbox version was released after that) is what led to you changing it back. Reminds me of our Enter the Matrix fiasco a couple of years ago where I argued that the game was published by Infogrames despite being released after the rebrand because it went gold before that took place. This is why I am not a huge fan of branding strategies sometimes because it leads to total confusion. Luigitehplumber (talk) 02:47, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:EA Sports.svg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:EA Sports.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Mud Duck Productions and Vir2L Studios published titles as well as James L. Leder and Cindy L. Tallent

Hi! 2 questions

1) Where do we put games like Malice (2004 video game), High Rollers Casino, etc. Do they go to List of Bethesda Softworks video games or should I create some other page for these(games published by Vir2L and Mud Duck?

2) I brought this up before but ZeniMax Europe lists both James L. Leder and Cindy L. Tallent [18] as replaced by other people. Can we remove them from key people from the main ZeniMax article? or should we wait for confirmation. Although I haven't checked the credits for Deathloop. Timur9008 (talk) 13:13, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

  1. These games don't really fit on the list of Bethesda's games, and the two companies are not notable enough for their own listicles. A nav template could be considered - but generally not everything needs to be on a list.
  2. The UK Companies House changes are not indicative of changes in the real world. The directors are the legal persons who can file new documents, and in this case these are the legal counsels for Microsoft. This is a formality most companies go through after their acquisition. Whether Leder, Tallent and co. are still in their positions should be determined in another way. IceWelder [✉] 16:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

LJN

Hi, I've seen you reverted my recent edits to the LJN page. Which of the used sources do you consider unreliable and why? KtosKto64 (talk) 18:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

While Ringside News may be reliable as part of USA Today, the remaining are not. Hopes&Fears, Mental Floss and Inside the Ropes all appear to lack the hallmarks of WP:RS, showing no policies and many of them not having masthead pages. Destructoid is handled as "situational" per WP:VG/RS. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 21:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification KtosKto64 (talk) 04:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Rezidor Hotel Group. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You cannot preform logout edit that way (as 112.203.58.250)

I had told you the company is both a subsidiary and listed company so please make a sense explanation why you remove listed from the parameter |type= in the infobox.

The previous name does have legal suffix AB in it. Company usually cant possible does not have legal suffix in their name. If you insist there is "no source", please read the hard copy of International Directory of Company History in the library of your town Matthew hk (talk) 07:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

The press release do have a even longer name " Rezidor SAS Hospitality Group AB (publ)" BTW. Matthew hk (talk) 07:59, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
And the prospectus do use A/S instead of AB. Matthew hk (talk) 08:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
@Matthew hk: Thank you for finding a source on the matter but I do not think that a warning is warranted here. This, especially since you appear to confuse me with 112.203.58.250, the vandalous IP I spent literal hours on to track back and revert or fix.
As with all other cases, I was restoring the WP:STATUSQUO or fixed the user's common mistakes, removing any unsourced information that they added. In this case, this included the legal suffixes. You restored these suffixes without providing a source, seemingly in good faith to the IP but contrary to WP:BURDEN.
I have absolutely zero interest in the topic - let alone the 100 other hotel articles I had to clean up after this IP - but Wikipedia chose to notify me of your edits anyway. In good faith, I took additional time out of my day to check with online registries whether they knew of these exact names and turned up empty-handed, hence reverting again. As your later edits show, the AB suffixes were likely indeed incorrect, so it was actually right to remove them - again, not warranting the above warning.
If you are interested in hotel articles, please make sure that people like the IP stop producing false information en masse. This would be much more productive than going after and arguing with small fish like me over some stupid legal suffixes on a topic I have no care in the world for.
On a final note, "(publ)" is only an informal suffix commonly found in press media of public Swedish companies targeting global investors. It is rarely included in the official corporate name at the trade registry. The "A/S" suffix is only found in Norway (aksjeselskap) and Denmark (aktieselskab), so you might want to check whether the company was originally registered in either of those countries and then moved to Sweden. IceWelder [✉] 10:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
@Matthew hk: Ping in case you haven't seen this. IceWelder [✉] 19:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Garry's Mod

I disagree with your decision to remove the list of games mountable in Garry's Mod, but I want to hear your side of it. As per WP:GAMEGUIDE, I think having a bulleted list of mountable games is entirely within the scope of a brief summary. If you'd like, I could remove the games which don't have WP articles, but most of them do. As far as "unsourced," I made it clear that this information was available from the game's main menu. I'll admit that I don't know how to write that up for a reference, but that's not the same as it having no source at all. Additionally, I did provide a formatted citation for the Zeno Clash model pack. Tisnec (talk) 21:39, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

WP:GAMEGUIDE states:

Avoid lists of gameplay concepts and items unless these are notable as discussed in secondary sources in their own right

Even if not strictly defined as the same, I think "mountable games" fall under these "gameplay items". No secondary source discusses these exhaustively, so including them appears superfluous. We do not include a huge "list of popular games" as there was in the past for the same reason. Saying that the mountable games do not need to be sourced because they can be found in the menu only invites original research. If you disagree, feel free to extend the discussion to WT:VG. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 21:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Sure, I'll write up a thing over there. Tisnec (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
It's up here if you want to add your own comments. Tisnec (talk) 22:10, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey again. I only ever got one response to my query. It suggested that my whole list wasn't necessary, but mentioning the mountable games aspect in passing would be reasonable. Mind if I do that in a sentence or two? Tisnec (talk) 00:00, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

No opposition from my side towards a short sentence at a point where it makes sense. I do believe, though, that there should at least be one reliable secondary sources that at least mentions this feature. The rest of the article is sourced in the same way. IceWelder [✉] 19:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ZeptoLab.svg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ZeptoLab.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi! Do you know what this means? [19] "sub-licensed RoboCop Versus The Terminator to Virgin for console games"

I am going to add that to the RoboCop Versus The Terminator article but I wanted to make sure I read that right. Timur9008 (talk) 16:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

This just sounds like corpo-speak for licensing a licensed product. I think using regular wording (like "X published Y in Z") should suffice here. IceWelder [✉] 09:46, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Your reversions of my OS edits on Football Glory

Reverted 1 edit by Bumm13 (talk): MS-DOS is a specific line of OSes, "DOS" is just the general term for disk-based OSes. Some people use the terms interchangably but that is no reason for Wikipedia to do it wrong.

That's nonsense. This is Wikipedia and we don't just go by "what some people" do. Did you even look at the DOS article? It says this: "DOS is a platform-independent acronym for disk operating system which later became a common shorthand for disk-based operating systems on IBM PC compatibles. DOS primarily consists of Microsoft's MS-DOS and a rebranded version under the name IBM PC DOS, both of which were introduced in 1981. Later compatible systems from other manufacturers include DR-DOS (1988), ROM-DOS (1989), PTS-DOS (1993), and FreeDOS (1998)."

It is not talking about "just any microcomputer disk operating system". Also, you do realize that old MS-DOS game software will work under the aforementioned variants (espcially IBM PC DOS)? It is more accurate to state "DOS" (as Wikipedia uses the term in its "DOS" article) to cover all operating systems that will run pre-Windows x86 PC games. Your reversions of my edits are extremely pedantic, to say the least. Bumm13 (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

The game was designed and distributed specifically for MS-DOS. It being compatible with related systems has no bearing here. Otherwise, every Windows game would be a ReactOS game and every GameCube game a Wii game.
I would not exactly call my reverts "extremely pedantic" when you first masked your changes as "formatting fixes" and then performed a summary-less rollback, not explaining your position in either edit. IceWelder [✉] 18:24, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 

Index: pl ar de en es fr it arz nl ja pt ceb sv uk vi war zh ru af ast az bg zh-min-nan bn be ca cs cy da et el eo eu fa gl ko hi hr id he ka la lv lt hu mk ms min no nn ce uz kk ro simple sk sl sr sh fi ta tt th tg azb tr ur zh-yue hy my ace als am an hyw ban bjn map-bms ba be-tarask bcl bpy bar bs br cv nv eml hif fo fy ga gd gu hak ha hsb io ig ilo ia ie os is jv kn ht ku ckb ky mrj lb lij li lmo mai mg ml zh-classical mr xmf mzn cdo mn nap new ne frr oc mhr or as pa pnb ps pms nds crh qu sa sah sco sq scn si sd szl su sw tl shn te bug vec vo wa wuu yi yo diq bat-smg zu lad kbd ang smn ab roa-rup frp arc gn av ay bh bi bo bxr cbk-zam co za dag ary se pdc dv dsb myv ext fur gv gag inh ki glk gan guw xal haw rw kbp pam csb kw km kv koi kg gom ks gcr lo lbe ltg lez nia ln jbo lg mt mi tw mwl mdf mnw nqo fj nah na nds-nl nrm nov om pi pag pap pfl pcd krc kaa ksh rm rue sm sat sc trv stq nso sn cu so srn kab roa-tara tet tpi to chr tum tk tyv udm ug vep fiu-vro vls wo xh zea ty ak bm ch ny ee ff got iu ik kl mad cr pih ami pwn pnt dz rmy rn sg st tn ss ti din chy ts kcg ve
Prefix: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia

Portal : Agama
Agama
Portal : Bahasa
Bahasa
Portal : Biografi
Biografi
Portal : Budaya
Budaya
Portal : Ekonomi
Ekonomi
Portal : Elektronika
Elektronika
Portal : Film
Film
Portal : Filsafat
Filsafat
Portal : Geografi
Geografi
Portal : Indonesia
Indonesia
Portal : Ilmu
Ilmu
Portal : Lingkungan
Lingkungan
Portal : Masyarakat
Masyarakat
Portal : Matematika
Matematika
Portal : Militer
Militer
Portal : Mitologi
Mitologi
Portal : Musik
Musik
Portal : Olahraga
Olahraga
Portal : Pendidikan
Pendidikan
Portal : Politik
Politik
Portal : Sastra
Sastra
Portal : Sejarah
Sejarah
Portal : Seni
Seni
Portal : Teknologi
Teknologi