Talk:Hollow Knight

The charms in this game make exploring and trying the new charms you find exiting. Just exploring the open world and seeing all the things you could collect makes it feel, beautiful, in a way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.88.249.48 (talk) 13:27, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

so true 2605:59C8:1C3:A210:74CB:80DB:4A6:EC7 (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Soulslike should be removed from the gameplay section in the page. "Hollow Knight is a 2D side-scrolling Metroidvania game..." reads a lot better without the use of another piece of added jargon.

In this article: https://gamingbolt.com/hollow-knight-developers-reveal-their-inspirations-for-the-game/amp , Team Cherry explains that they were not influenced by Dark Souls at all. Contention as to whether Hollow Knight is really a soulslike also exists. For the soulslike page, Hollow Knight is not included in the released list of notable soulslikes but instead stated as having similar death mechanics. TheMaskedChairman (talk) 18:55, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with this. Soulslike is way too niche of a piece of jargon for the general public, especially since there is evidence against using the term. Metroidvania kind of stretches it, but it has been so widely publicized that it's worth keeping in. OutlawRun (talk) 19:12, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Metroidvanias like Castlevania were mentioned as heavily inspiring the Hollow Knight development. Additionally, for soulslike, read the Gameplay section in the article. All of the elements it mentions are key parts of the game. ― TUNA × 22:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

as it stands, it seems the article ended in "the critics say it, but the devs don't mention it"

i think it being mentioned in the reception is cool and good, but don't think it warrants the category

should i remove it? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 20:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with Hollow Knight characters redirects and has thus listed them for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 20 § Hollow Knight characters until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Randi Moth (talk) 15:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

she deserves it 163.53.144.33 (talk) 08:54, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:BEBOLD. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The introduction states that the player characters name is the Knight, which is not confirmed. The main character doesn't have a confirmed name, most characters in the game refere to it as "Little shadow" or "Vessel" or something in line of that. I suggest to changing the text from "The player controls the Knight, an insectoid..." to "The unnamed main character controled by the player, is an insectoid..." sorry for any mistakes Kamnse (talk) 03:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I am looking into improving this aspect of the article now, I will soon begin searching for sources so the article can retain a high quality for such a special game FranticSpud (talk) 12:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

I've changed a few words and the wording starts to become unclear so I suggest for those who also wish to fix this issue to keep in mind the flow of the sentences and article when words such as "player" are used often FranticSpud (talk) 13:34, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not need an official name confirmation based on WP:COMMONNAME, and even so it was mentioned as "the Knight" by the developers on the Kickstarter page (no link because Kickstarter is blacklisted). The name is common enough that it's the top result when you search "The Knight" on Google (WP:GOOGLE). I think it's acceptable to use "The Knight" as the name rather than just referring to it as the unnamed protagonist. Ant1ngAround (talk) 22:31, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

The claim of 6.4 million sales was baseless and false :

1. The only source in that article was VGInsights, a site that merely estimates steam sales (which means, it doesnt factor in console sales) based on the data it has access to and can be grossly inaccurate in many cases, it cant be used as a proper source

2. Theres practically no way 6.4 million is true based on the developers' word : They gave away a sales figure of 2.8 million back when the game had about 1/8 as many reviews as it does in present day 191.10.148.253 (talk) 17:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

oh, that explains it

sources i found put it at... all the numbers. at the same time. then again, google's willingness to give me usable results is comparable to the amount of flaws within zote's character (which is to say nonexistent), so don't really quote me on much here consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 17:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@A.Aghabarari 1998: I reverted your edit because it didn't cite any sources. However, I recognize the information you added was correct (I've played the game ). We just have a requirement here on Wikipedia that everything needs to have a source. Feel free to add the same text back once you've found an article that mentions this! See this referencing for beginners guide for more information. Gracen (they/them) 15:09, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 January 2025 and 16 May 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SoysBean (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Mary Luna.24.

— Assignment last updated by WikiEdit7205 (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Team Cherry (developer) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19 § Team Cherry (developer) until a consensus is reached. Parcynthia (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Zote the Mighty has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 § Zote the Mighty until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:32, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

I am of the opinion that a section titled "Speedrunning" should be added to the article. Speedrunning is a quite prominanr part of a game like hollow knight and it is a fact that much of the content related to it, is strongly speedrunning related. ~2025-31979-39 (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:07, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Quirrel (Hollow Knight) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 15 § Quirrel (Hollow Knight) until a consensus is reached. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:17, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Wandering Husk has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 22 § Wandering Husk until a consensus is reached. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would Like To edit the plat forms that this game can be played and add Nintendo Switch 2 NOERAL (talk) 22:26, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: While Hollow Knight can be played on Nintendo Switch 2 through backwards compatibility, it doesn't appear like there's a specific version of the game for the console. IsCat (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Team cherry Logo Red.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:51, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to propose adding "The Hollow Knight & Silksong wiki" (https://hollowknight.wiki) at the bottom of the External Links section, which I believe would be a useful link that passes the Wikipedia:External links policy, being a trusted source of both Hollow Knight's and Silksong's community. I also believe it does not fail the WP:OPENWIKI test.

I am posting here without the edit request template because if I'm understanding the WP:ER policy correctly I need to establish consensus first before making an edit request of this magnitude. AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the DLC count to 5 5th DLC is Hollow Knight: Refreshed ~2025-41616-54 (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

It is an update. I forgot it wasn't DLC. It is update 1.5.12301.

~2025-41616-54 (talk) 15:30, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 16:04, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Append link with text "Unofficial Hollow Knight wiki" linking to https://hollowknight.wiki at the bottom of the external links section, in a line after 'Team Cherry website' (the actual place in the section is unimportant, I am only specifying because edit requests have to be unambiguous)

I had made a topic on this talk page before and received no responses, so I believe this is uncontroversial AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) 07:55, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

if it's unofficial, why would we link to it? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:19, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Regardless of it being unofficial it has a large number of editors (current stats list it at 156 active editors) and it is a stable and accurate source about the game that has been trusted by the game's community (see, for example The reddit post announcing the wiki has migrated off of Fandom getting a large amount of activity, and this article covering it, something which would not happen if the wiki was not notable to people). Most articles on Hollow Knight are filled out, without missing much information and stable in their content (not sure what I could link to to demonstrate this, but if you look at a random article, and look at its edit history you will almost never see an article that has drastic changes often). The open wiki policy makes no statement on wikis having to be official. AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) 12:01, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

The quality of a fan wiki makes zero difference to Wikipedia. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:29, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Where is the policy stating this? the WP:EL page says that "Links to websites that are not considered official websites may still be justifiable under other sections of this guideline" and the WP:OPENWIKI section makes no statement to an open wiki having to not be fan made. The Terraria and Rain World pages have links to wikis, despite them being fan run (the 'official' part comes from them being endorsed by the developers, not from being controlled by them, neither wiki is hosted on developer infrastructure or has developer administrators which makes them fan wikis per WP:ELOFFICIAL). The Terraria page is a featured article and the Rain World page is a good article, currently Featured Article nominee, with both wikis being part of the page before the FA review (the current Rain World review did not cite the wiki being linked as an issue). I admit this is kind of a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument as checking the External Links section is not a part of the FA Review, but I want to highlight that linking to fan wikis has not been a problem in other cases. AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) 13:48, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

See WP:ELNO #12, "Open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors" are not allowed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:21, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before creating an edit request. Until there is agreement that the wiki has a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors, the link should not be added. Chess enjoyer (talk) 02:23, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to propose (again) to add the (unofficial) hollow knight wiki at (https://hollowknight.wiki) to the External Links section of the page. My previous attempt at proposing this received no responses, while the edit request I made for the edit did. Edit requests are not for discussion so I am making a section here.

I believe the wiki has "a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors" as is required by the WP:OPENWIKI policy. I am not sure how to demonstrate the history of stability point with a link, but if you look at a revision from 2020 for any random page under the Hollow Knight category or one of its subcategories you will see that the pages do not differ significantly in the information contained within them compared to their current revisions. The wiki (including the Silksong part) is also stable in regard to uptime, not keeping vandalism and the quality of its pages. On the substantial number of editors point, the wiki stats currently say it has 154 active editors, though it is likely this number is inflated from the influx of editors who came after the release of Silksong and who will probably not stay active. The wiki nevertheless has a decent amount of active editors who look as if they are going to stay active for quite some time and a base of editors who were active before Silksong's release.

As for why the wiki should be linked despite not being an official link, the WP:ELOFFICIAL policy says that "Links to websites that are not considered official websites may still be justifiable under other sections of this guideline". The wiki should be linked as it contains "neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to amount of detail" (reason for inclusion per WP:ELYES). The material in the page contributes to an encyclopedic understanding of the game's content as it provides complete information of Characters, Enemies, Areas, Items etc. in the game including their location in-game, their role in the story, characteristics such as health and the attacks they use (for enemies) etc. Game wikis have been external links in other cases such as in the Featured Article Terraria and the FA nominee Rain World.

Finally, I would like to correct and apologize for a point I made on the edit request. I made the argument that wikis which are unofficial per the WP:ELOFFICIAL policy have nevertheless been used as external links giving the Featured Article Terraria and the FA nominee Rain World as examples. I thought this was the case because the wikis were not hosted on an official domain and did not seem to have administrators who were studio employees. Although this is true, it seems in the case of the Terraria wiki at least that the game studio has a higher degree of wiki control than I thought, seeing as the move of the wiki to a different host was announced on the game's official forum by a developer. I am not certain what the relationship of the Rain World wiki is with the game's studio, but it is possible it is closer than I thought given this. I apologize for making a point I had insufficiently investigated.

Pinging Zxcvbnm and Lee_Vilenski to see this, as they were the people who objected to the wiki being added to the Article's external links section on the edit request. -- AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 11:47, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

If it's not immediately obvious to everyone in the room that it should be there, it probably shouldn't. Usually fanwikis are pretty small compared to the biggest Wikis out there, with something like PCGamingWiki having almost 50k active users. I think it's a bit ridiculous to call 150 active users huge.

When we say it's not having a substantial number of editors, it's in comparison to all Wikis, not just the fan wiki community. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Having a substantial amount of editors does not have to mean that a wiki is huge. The discussion which created the WP:OPENWIKI policy was created because of a dispute over whether the Memory Alpha wiki should be an external link on Star Trek related pages. In the end that wiki ended up being linked. I don't know how many active users that wiki had in 2006 when the discussion was created but I can find this discussion from 2019 where the wiki had 180 active users and I can see that it has 183 active editors now with 63,897 articles and in total it has had 5723 editors.

I believe that whether a wiki has a "substantial" amount of editors is about whether a wiki has had a lot of eyes on it and whether the amount of users can meet the demands of maintaining a wiki about their topic. The Hollow Knight wiki has had 3192 users with edits in total and currently 154 active editors maintaining 1110 articles which is a way lower active editor to article ratio than the Memory Alpha wiki. As such, I believe that more than passes the requirements for having a substantial amount of editors. -- AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) 18:37, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Realistically, this fan wiki isn't going to be substantial and important enough to be included here. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

But similarly sized wikis like the Memory Alpha have, why is this any different? -- AccountimadetohidemyIP (talk) 20:40, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I have little thoughts on that Wiki, other than that I don't think unofficial wikis should be included Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:41, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

There is such thing as WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. It's possible that some people believed otherwise, but you can't point to something like that and then force Wiki-wide consensus in that manner. Editors can believe different things between pages. I guess you can take it to the Village Pump if you think that there needs to be a more clear guideline on this, but I doubt it would go over well from a new editor as being on a crusade to add a single site to Wikipedia would appear like WP:NOTHERE. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:58, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I suggest to remove "created by a god known as the Radiance" from the general description of the game. It's true that the game has been around for a while, but this is a major piece of information that's not revealed until very late in the plot, so I don't see why spoiling it for potential new players who visit the page for general info. ~2025-43738-34 (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

This is more of a gameplay section, featuring 0 important plot points from this expansion. The gameplay should be moved to the Dlc section, and a more plot focused paragraph should be written in the Plot section. Fireflame888888 (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Just wondering why, no hard feelings Person3141 (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Person3141 You need to provide a reliable source that shows that Overcharming is a feature in the game, preferably one from the WP:VG/S page. Aside from that, it seems like a bit of a superfluous detail since the gameplay section is already quite detailed and the Overcharmed feature isn't a vital mechanic to the overall gameplay, so I don't think that it needs to be mentioned. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

OK I'll see if I can find a source Person3141 (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm sure someone could find a higher res image. I coul count the pixels. Fireflame888888 (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)