Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 177

Recently, on 6 November, Andrew Gower (programmer) released an early access of a new game titled "Andrew Gower's Brighter Shores". Previously, Andrew Gower was only publicly known for his role in cofounding Jagex and creating RuneScape, a project he was involved with until 14 years ago in 2010, after which he left Jagex's board of directors and has had no involvement since.

In 2021, it was decided that the page Andrew Gower should be made into a redirect pointing at Jagex with this AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (5th nomination). This was described as a "relatively controversial" decision, but done "mainly over the depth of coverage actually about the article's subject" and because "Content can be merged [into Jagex] from history".

It would be fair to say that Jagex as a company might view a dedicated section to Andrew Gower on their Wikipedia page as over-representative and an unfair focus compared to their achievements since his departure in 2010 (the valuation of the company ballooning several hundreds of millions of dollars in acquisitions since) as well as diminishing the contributions of the hundreds of other programmers that have worked on Jagex properties. Perhaps for this reason, no biographical information about Andrew Gower has actually been (inappropriately) merged onto the Jagex page since the 2021 AFD decision.

Now in November 2024, Andrew Gower's Brighter Shores is enjoying quite a bit of early success, though it would be fair to say that it remains to be seen how popular it will be in 2025 onward. The problem this presents is that at the moment Andrew Gower (programmer) is a redirect pointing at Jagex, which is not a company he has any official affiliation with any more (since 2010), and Brighter Shores is not a Jagex affiliated game, contrary to what the redirect might imply.

Whether or not Andrew Gower (programmer) meets the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability, the redirect should not persist with a target of Jagex now that he is actively and publicly involved in a new project unaffiliated with Jagex, putting his own name in the game's title, in the same style as Sid Meier's Civilization.

I first raised this issue at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 25#Andrew Gower (programmer), but it was not obvious if this was actually the correct place to begin discussion of the redirect, given its prior AFD history.

Quoting myself, these are the specific official recommendations for redirects on Wikipedia that I feel Andrew Gower (programmer) as a redirect is currently most in opposition of:

Per WP:RFD#DELETE, my opinion is that this redirect violates conditions 2 and 10.

• It has potential to cause confusion that Andrew Gower is still affiliated with Jagex, and that Brighter Shores is a Jagex game.
• The current target article Jagex "contains virtually no information on the subject", and as evidenced by the redirect's long edit history, "could plausibly be expanded into an article".

Per WP:RFD#KEEP, the redirect should also not be out-right deleted, since it includes a "potentially useful page history" for an article about a person who has made "unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment."

Andrew Gower has been a continued subject of public interest for decades. Despite being apparently inactive for 14 years, the "Andrew Gower" brand was enough to launch Brighter Shores to significant reception both in player count and in media coverage. I would personally like to see a consensus reached that Andrew Gower (programmer) is able to be an article, but if no consensus can be reached that this is possible or is likely to ever become possible, the redirect towards Jagex must still be rectified as it is misleading and problematic given his current public activity.

— Hubcapp (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

The most critical issue is: What has changed, if anything, about Andrew Gower's notability? Although a redirect was the outcome of the deletion discussion, the core consensus is still "Not notable enough for an independent article". While there is a lot of valid procedural argument about about whether the redirect's current state is valid, there is no argument being made towards whether Gower is notable, and if so, presenting any sources to show that.

Andrew Gower doesn't get an article just because a suitable redirect target is difficult to determine. Andrew Gower must pass WP:N. -- ferret (talk) 01:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

This is correct, and perhaps a third solution exists besides either deletion of the page (and its history) or the creation of an Andrew Gower article (such as changing the redirect to something currently more suitable). I have reached out to the editor who created the Brighter Shores page for comment, since they express on their user page they would like to create an Andrew Gower article. I'm personally not prepared to present an argument that Andrew Gower is or isn't able to pass Wikipedia:Notability, most concerned with the current issues of the page as a redirect pointing at Jagex. — Hubcapp (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Is redirecting to Brighter Shores an acceptable interim solution? Gower is heavily mentioned there and the article (and the sources) heavily trade on his role in developing RuneScape. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I would say it is preferable to the current situation, but only as an interim solution. Changing the redirect from Andrew Gower (programmer) to target Brighter Shores resolves the concern that there is "potential to cause confusion that Andrew Gower is still affiliated with Jagex, and that Brighter Shores is a Jagex game."

However, it shouldn't be allowed to persist as a permanent solution for two reasons:

• It is possible that this redirect target could be seen as placing advertisement for Brighter Shores on the Jagex and RuneScape articles. I'm not sure if the Brighter Shores redirect target is really acceptable as an interim solution for this reason, though I am not personally opposed to it.
• It is likely still the case that Andrew Gower is most well known for his involvement in co-founding Jagex and creating RuneScape, at least as of now in November 2024 when "Andrew Gower's Brighter Shores" has been in early access for less than a month.

Perhaps a better interim redirect target could be Andrew Gower (disambiguation) and his description there changed to something of the effect

• Andrew Gower (programmer) (born 1978): Co-founder of Jagex (1999), original creator of RuneScape (2001). Co-founder of Fen Research (2010). Since 2014, developing Brighter Shores, released in early access 2024.

Not sure if that's too many years or too much detail for a disambiguation page description, but as long as the redirect target points to articles on both of the endeavors for which he is publicly well-known, it can function as an uncontroversial redirect until such time that a consensus can be reached that Andrew Gower (or The Gower Brothers as a trio) can pass Wikipedia:Notability, regarding the availability of independent more-biographical sources. Perhaps RuneScape: The First 20 Years does qualify as one independent source that did not exist at the time of the 2021 AFD. — Hubcapp (talk) 06:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Broadly speaking, redirects are not endorsements. Redirects are not advertisements. In fact, nothing on Wikipedia is an advertisement. And practically speaking, the average reader does not know why or even notice when they get redirected to another page. Our goal as editors is to make the redirect process as invisible and and unastonishing as possible. They should find the information they are reasonably looking for at the target page. If that means redirecting to Jagex (or Brighter Shores, or wherever), then so be it. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying this. I think redirecting to Andrew Gower (disambiguation) as described above would be the least astonishing redirect, given that readers may click that link from either RuneScape / Jagex or from Brighter Shores / Fen Research. If a redirect to a disambiguation page is acceptable, I would definitely recommend that. — Hubcapp (talk) 15:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I think redirecting to Andrew Gower (disambiguation) is a fine interim solution. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I stumbled across this after seeing the redirect page and tried to catch up with the conversation as best I could. From my perspective, I think the temporary solution of changing the redirect from his name to Brighter Shores from Jagex is the best way (currently) to avoid barriers in getting readers current and accurate information.

Whether or not he is warranted an individual page could still be discussed, but I think the more likely next step would be to link to a Fen Research page instead, if/when that company has released something other than Brighter Shores. The one caveat I have in mind is if Brighter Shores manages to explode in popularity and become comparable to Runescape level growth, then revisiting a page for him as an individual who has created two massively successful MMORPGs through separate, self-started companies would make the most sense.

I am far from experienced regarding any of these wiki policies, but just felt the urge to weigh in on the conversation as an outsider who cares about this particular topic and preserving an accurate history. JOOOOOOOOOSH (talk) 10:05, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there a possibility to create an article on Andrew and Paul Gower? A glance at Google Scholar suggests there may be more sources there, and while most are leading to Runescape and Jagax's founding, there's possibly more with that. --Masem (t) 02:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, this seems possible and acceptable. There is some biographical information about the Gower brothers' early life, before their work on RuneScape, published by Dark Horse Comics in the October 2021 book RuneScape: The First 20 Years, on pages 12 and 13. I'm not sure what scholarly sources you were able to find that might additionally supplement that. I would suggest that Ian Gower could be included in a "Gower Brothers" article, since he collaborated with Andrew and Paul on both RuneScape and Brighter Shores. — Hubcapp (talk) 03:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

A disambiguation page can be reasonable, but what isn't is recreating the guy's bio when there's nothing in it that demonstrates additional notability versus the AfD, according to the version that was recreated. All that's new is the mentions of Brighter Shores; there's no additional SIGCOV, barrel-scraping of using credit lists and the like to try and verify facts, and still using unreliable sources from the AfD. Write a draft of what you think would pass AfD again, Hubcapp, first, before trying to recreate the page. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 16:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the redirect doesn't seem particularly appropriate given that Gower hasn't been part of Jagex for ~14 years. I had a thought to write an article about Andrew Gower anyway before this discussion, though I wasn't aware of the previous AfD and hadn't begun to look into whether he is independently notable enough to warrant one.

Having had a look, I think Andrew Gower does now meet WP:GNG and is notable enough for an article in his own right. There are many sources (from publications listed on WP:RSP and WP:GAMESOURCES) which focus on Gower's involvement in Brighter Shores and which were not available at the time of the 2021 AfD discussion. Indeed, the whole reason Brighter Shores is being written about in the first place is because of Andrew Gower's notability (in the colloquial sense).

• https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/runescape-creator-andrew-gower-drops-trailer-for-new-game-brighter-shores-3600703
• https://www.eurogamer.net/original-runescape-designer-unveils-cosy-free-to-play-mmorpg-brighter-shores
• https://www.pcgamer.com/games/mmo/runescape-creators-new-mmo-has-an-unorthodox-solution-for-the-inevitable-waves-of-bots-giving-you-a-legitimate-way-to-bot-the-game-yourself/
• https://www.gamesradar.com/runescape-creator-says-his-new-game-is-not-a-traditional-mmo-where-you-play-get-to-the-endgame-and-thats-where-the-game-actually-starts/
• https://www.polygon.com/24099403/runescape-andrew-gower-brighter-shores-new-mmo
• https://www.pcgamesn.com/brighter-shores/new-mmorpg

This is the only article I could find specifically focusing on Andrew and Paul Gower's role in founding Runescape:

• https://web.archive.org/web/20100704175930/http://www.develop-online.net/news/34613/Jagex-duo-ascend-UK-rich-list-with-138m-fortune

An Evening Standard article from 2011 discussed Andrew specifically as the beneficiary of RuneScape's income:

• CALLING all parents forking out [...]. Evening Standard, 14725223, 1/25/2011

I don't think the following award is well-known enough to qualify for WP:ANYBIO point 1, but the Develop awards in general are well respected in the UK games industry, and receiving the "Industry Legend" award goes some way to demonstrating that the Gower brothers are significant figures in the industry.

• https://mcvuk.com/development-news/develop-awards-gowers-crowned-industry-legends/

If we don't think he passes WP:NOTABILITY yet, I think the disambiguation page suggestion is the most appropriate, fitting people who are searching for his role in both RuneScape/Jagex and Brighter Shores. Quuxbazbarfoo (talk) 21:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/runescape-creator-andrew-gower-drops-trailer-for-new-game-brighter-shores-3600703

• "Routine coverage", doesn't really say anything about Andrew Gower as a person, except that he has released a trailer for Brighter Shores in March 2024.

https://www.eurogamer.net/original-runescape-designer-unveils-cosy-free-to-play-mmorpg-brighter-shores

• Quotes "Andrew Garfield"'s [sic] (really...?) announcement and says nothing else

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/mmo/runescape-creators-new-mmo-has-an-unorthodox-solution-for-the-inevitable-waves-of-bots-giving-you-a-legitimate-way-to-bot-the-game-yourself/

• This is a good article about Andrew Gower's design aspirations for Brighter Shores, but not biographical

https://www.gamesradar.com/runescape-creator-says-his-new-game-is-not-a-traditional-mmo-where-you-play-get-to-the-endgame-and-thats-where-the-game-actually-starts/

• This is maybe the best article, it includes an actual interview by the reporter (Austin Wood) with Andrew Gower. In the interview, Andrew recounts that LucasArts graphical point-and-click adventures were an early influence on him, and he also says he is "glad there are no publishers or investors breathing down my neck", (not stated here, but this is in contrast to the pressures that lead him to step down from his role at Jagex). This source is biographical in that sense.

https://www.polygon.com/24099403/runescape-andrew-gower-brighter-shores-new-mmo

• This article is short and handwavey, doesn't say anything. The journalist characterizes the departure of the Gowers from Jagex incorrectly, and generally seems unfamiliar with the story. This is "Routine Coverage" of Brighter Shores.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/brighter-shores/new-mmorpg

• Routine coverage of Brighter Shores, doesn't say really anything about Andrew Gower.

The Gamesradar interview is good (though the interesting biographical bits about Andrew are brief). All together, these citations show that without Andrew Gower (or Fen Research) contacting most of these publications (or else Eurogamer would have at least got his name correct...!), Brighter Shores was able to attract a lot of media coverage and general public attention, despite being an indie game with no publisher.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100704175930/http://www.develop-online.net/news/34613/Jagex-duo-ascend-UK-rich-list-with-138m-fortune

• This "Rich list" type article was specifically criticised by DDG in his 2021 AFD, and I think is why DDG incorrectly categorised Andrew Gower as a businessman^[1] "The new rich list places the Gower family as the 483rd richest in the UK" (quote from the article), but doesn't talk about the Gowers biographically. The citation is quite stale, from 2010, not even reflecting the Gowers' current wealth, though I'd speculate they must be doing alright to have been able to develop Brighter Shores with no external funding for over a decade.

https://mcvuk.com/development-news/develop-awards-gowers-crowned-industry-legends/

• I'm not sure of the notability of this award either, though it can definitely be mentioned if your opinion that the award is "well respected in the UK games industry" is "correct". In my opinion, Andrew Gower would deserve some kind of award, and wouldn't have to have one made up for him. His early use of Java Applets in the web browser as a mechanism for game distribution (no download required), as well as the Free-to-play model he chose, were genuinely very innovative and inspirational for the games industry. Perhaps if someone notable stated as much, that could be used as a source.

I would personally like to see your draft of an Andrew Gower article, and could help contribute towards it after you do a first draft, but actually if you can include Paul Gower (per Masem's suggestion) and Ian Gower (my suggestion) for a more broad "The Gower Brothers" article, I think that does have a chance to be less controversially WP:N.

The biggest problem with "The Story of Andrew Gower", and why so much of the coverage is wrapped up in RuneScape, is because his general life timeline looks like this:

• 0 to 7: Child in England
• 7 years old: began programming at an early age
• College
• Immediately out of college, and actually a bit before he left college, he was working on RuneScape. His graduating thesis (May 2000) described the mechanism of RuneScape's game engine (though it was not called RuneScape yet, the code would be used as its foundation). I state this to say: There were no adult years of Andrew Gower's life that weren't involved with RuneScape until 2010.
• 2001 to 2010: Very involved with RuneScape.
• 2010 to 2024: Developing tooling and game technology at Fen Research. Gower wrote the game engine for RuneScape from scratch, and although it can be said there were later many valid choices for pre-built Game Engines (both in 2010 and now), Andrew still preferred to build his own. The studio released two smaller games that were not Brighter Shores during these years, and stated they would like to offer to license the in-development Fenforge engine, though it wasn't ready yet.
• 2024: The "Top secret game" (as teased on Fen Research's website) was finally announced as "Andrew Gower's Brighter Shores". It was released on Steam in early access this month.

Some biographical sources do cover Andrew Gower as a child (such as the previously mentioned October 2021 book RuneScape: The First 20 Years) but after that, his story is the story of RuneScape's first decade. After 2010, he seemingly enjoyed privacy and doing his own thing, only recently interacting with the public again through involvement in Brighter Shores. I'm not currently aware of any sources that can state what Andrew has been doing since 2010 in a biographical sense, except that he has been "developing Brighter Shores for over 10 years". It is still very early, and we may need to wait a while for a new book titled "Brighter Shores: the first 20 years" if there aren't more biographical sources available.

— Hubcapp (talk) 15:14, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed the redirect per discussion above. His disambiguation bullet currently links to RuneScape and Brighter Shores, given no current article for Fen Research and these being the two games for which he is currently most well known. — Hubcapp (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

List of longest-running video game franchises. I'd like input. It's obviously a massive unsourced, WP:OR mess. But is it salvageable, or should it be sent to WP:AFD? Sergecross73 msg me 23:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

AFD. Its not a notable way how video game series are tracked, and definitely brings OR to mind. All you need is an old game, and one modern remake, and suddenly you have a franchise at the top of the list? Nope. Most games, perhaps, best-selling, definitely (though that has a lot of OR in terms of what contributes to a franchise), but longest-running by absolute time is not. Masem (t) 23:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree. There's not much here and what does exist is OR or something that fails Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE. It's entirely non-notable. There's a lot of listicles for this stuff, but those are top ten rankings that fluctuate depending on the author. There's no clear consensus, and what can be gleaned is something that doesn't need to be an article. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

This is where I was leaning too, but wanted to make sure. I'll probably be the "big bad mean admin" for this one, as I'm pretty sure newbie editor is using the article as an OSE excuse as to why "sources aren't needed" on Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 15:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I would also endorse deletion - any franchise that hasn't been obviously cancelled is arguably still "running" regardless of game release, so this is no better than misinformation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:20, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. There's a lot of misleading stuff like that in there when you look close and think about it. Is it a "30 year franchise" when they release 2 games 30 years apart with decades of inactivity in between? And if it is, what's the importance of that? What's the worth of comparing it against a franchise with 30 games in 30 years and, without context, they look like equals on this chart? Sergecross73 msg me 00:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I thought they didn't allow for large gaps in releases? Did they change this? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 05:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

The page does specify that it needs to have "regular releases, with no more than 10 year-long gaps in-between, for at least 25 years" to qualify, which might help with excluding certain entries but does seem to be created out of whole cloth to make the page viable. Harryhenry1 (talk) 06:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks like the lead does mention that. But still, sub out 30 for 10 and my point still largely stands. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree with other editors that this is mostly WP:OR. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm stuck on mobile for the next few days. If anyone wants to nom it, go for it. Otherwise I'll take care of it next week or something. Sergecross73 msg me 18:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of longest-running video game franchises. Have a good weekend everyone. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I missed this discussion, but just wanted to say thank you - this article had bothered me for years, and I'm glad something was finally done about this. It's a potentially interesting topic, but there's just no reasonable way of handling it as a list on WP.--Alexandra^IDV 04:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Neo Geo Pocket Color still open and in need of opinions. Sceeegt (talk) 04:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

With the Call of Duty series now over 20 years old, I'm thinking it would be beneficial to add retrospective rankings of the games, i.e. from worst to best. As a CoD player myself, the CoD community has specific ideas on what are some of the best games and some of the worst. Additionally, reception to the games themselves has changed a lot over time; even critic and fan reception on launch is different than the end of every game's life cycle (especially in recent years). I was interested to see what critics and publications think so I did a little research and there are plenty of sources that rank the main games and/or pick the best ones. Here's a few:

• https://www.gamespot.com/gallery/best-call-of-duty-games-ranked/2900-3802/
• https://www.ign.com/articles/best-call-of-duty-games
• https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/every-main-call-duty-game-210059835.html
• https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/best-call-of-duty-games/
• https://www.nme.com/features/call-of-duty-games-ranked-from-worst-to-best-3344922
• https://www.gamesradar.com/best-call-of-duty-games/
• https://www.denofgeek.com/games/every-call-of-duty-game-ranked-worst-to-best/
• https://www.thegamer.com/ranking-every-call-of-duty-game-from-worst-to-best/
• https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/a/dan-wenerowicz/every-call-of-duty-game-ranked-worst-to-best
• https://www.si.com/videogames/features/call-of-duty-games-ranked
• https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/every-call-of-duty-game-ranked/

I'm sure there are more but you get the gist. Basically, I think it would be beneficial to start adding retrospective rankings into the respective articles, as the majority of them only have initial reception, which can change over time. It would be nice to see in prose how these games hold up years down the line and how they are viewed within the franchise as a whole. I'm willing to get a start on this but I wanted to see what others thought first. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 17:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

It would be good to add some retrospective reception to the articles on individual Call of Duty games. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Seconded, although I recommend only using a few of these lists at a time to try and avoid repetition, and also attribute who exactly ranks the game at that place. λ NegativeMP1 22:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I basically agree with the other editors. Offering a different take on NegativeMP1's advice, I recommend that we avoid having one sentence per source (e.g.: 10 sentences / one long paragraph). I wouldn't mind including most or even all of the sources, but they could probably be summarized in fewer sentences. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

You'll probably want to avoid things like "John Doe ranked X as the 7th best game in the franchise, while Jane Doe ranked it as the 8th best game." However, something like "Both John and Jane ranked X as an average game in the franchise in a 2024 retrospective" would be good, preferably of course with matching reasoning. When multiple writers point out the same things, then that's definitely worth including. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Most of console game is a heavy WP:OVERLAP with video game console or simply video game in general. All in all, there is nothing particularly distinguishing about a video game when it is played on a console as opposed to a PC, save for select - usually Nintendo - consoles that utilize non-standard control methods that are not a typical controller. I also feel like PC game and gaming computer suffer similar WP:OVERLAP issues, with a large chunk of the PC game article being about hardware tech. I would like to solicit feedback about a potential combination of the articles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:37, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

I could see part of that serving as a starting point for History of video game consoles which would try to be agnostic to the generations and focus on the larger trends. And other parts could be shuffled elsewhere. — Masem (t) 17:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, the console history page definitely needs a rewrite. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

This looks like a good case for a merge. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I have created an official merge discussion, so interested parties can comment at the page itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I have nominated Appy Awards for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. GamerPro64 03:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

On this note, can I get some eyes on my FL for another video game award, the Nuovo Award? I'm slightly concerned myself that the sourcing is too bare-bones for a FL, though perhaps I'm being too hard on myself. I'd just like some opinions on whether or not it is good enough to retain or whether I should nominate it for FLRC. Fathoms Below (talk) 15:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I wanted to create a page based on the Zen Studios game Pinball FX (the new version not the original). I dont really know how to build pages so I was wondering if more expierenced editors might help me. (Creating an info box, setting up citations etc.). I created a chart listing the tables but that's really it. Its about as barebones as you can get. Here is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pinball_FX_(2022_video_game) Any help via editing would be appreciated.Wikieditor9117 (talk) 15:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

As a quick comment, in the first column of the DLC you have links that are mixing links to notable pinball tables (eg the Williams ones) with links to just general fiction franchises or similar works. I know it seems simpler to have the single column for that but given that there are real-world tables included in the game, you may need an indicator for identifying the physical tables brought into the game. Masem (t) 15:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

JSYK, the game seems to be borderline notable, I found only 2 reliable reviews for it: Push Square and Digitally Downloaded. --Mika1h (talk) 16:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

That's odd. Pinball FX, Pinball FX 2 and Pinball FX 3 all have pages. That's why I was trying to create a page for this game (which is essentially Pinball FX 4).Wikieditor9117 (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Template_talk:Infobox_video_game#Early_Access_dates look for more opinions on fixing template doc in line with MOS:VG -- ferret (talk) 01:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Clannad (video game) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 18:05, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Apologies if this has already been posted. I stumbled across this while searching for for something else, Ubisoft maintain a list of all their server shutdowns by title and platform stretching back to 2013. Might be useful if anyone need to check a date. The list is in two parts A to M and N to Z - X201 (talk) 11:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

After researching about Street Fighter, I started this section in order to see if we should change the infobox of the Street Fighter characters since Capcom and Capcom USA give different names to what style they use: Ansatsuken or Shotokan. If a bigger expert in the series knows it, please join. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 21:49, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 15:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Articles deleted/removed: Guren Island, The Quest for Thelda, VoxelStorm, Arachnotron, ArchVile, Hell Knight, Mancubus, Pain Elemental, Revenant (Doom), Weekday Warrior, List of Cuphead speedrunning records, Red Alert (video game), Chef RPG, NoFrag, Yoshi's Island series villains, List of longest-running video game franchises, Luigi Circuit, WePlay Academy League, WePlay Ultimate Fighting League, Yalla Group (company), Atomas, Kim Hyung Tae (video game artist), PLAY: The Games Festival, Blast Monkeys, FloodSim
• Drafts deleted/removed: Draft:Godskin Noble, Draft:Lego Cube, Draft:Spilled!, Draft:Zotac Zone, Draft:Kevaniii, Draft:Slap Happy Rhythm Busters, Draft:MikeyCarry, Draft:Thrack-The-Fox, Draft:Country Clash RP, Draft:Doom: The Dark Ages, Draft:Squad Busters, Draft:Cry, Xcry, Draft:Wayward Compass, Draft:Endless Wander, Draft:Silent Hill: Townfall, Draft:Spinfinty Interactive, Draft:Super Pionero, Draft:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Last Ronin (video game)
• Articles redirected: Simon Minter, Yoshimitsu, Drawn to Life (video game series), GameRevolution, Pokémon Trading Card Game Live, Music of Doom (2016), Tetris Zone, Joysound Dive, Stardew Valley Guidebook, Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters, Command & Conquer: The Ultimate Collection, Purple Francis, Saint Seiya: Soldiers' Soul
• Articles moved to draft space: Hasbro Retro Arcade
• Categories deleted/removed: Homebrew video games, Hunting in video games, Video games in East Asia, Physics-based puzzle video games, Tactical video games, Action horror video games, Blizzard Entertainment antagonists, Capcom antagonists, Final Fantasy protagonists, Fire Emblem protagonists, Koei Tecmo protagonists, Konami antagonists, Konami protagonists, Mario (franchise) protagonists, Microsoft antagonists, Microsoft protagonists, Namco antagonists, Namco protagonists, Nintendo antagonists, Nintendo protagonists, Pokémon protagonists, SNK antagonists, SNK protagonists, Sega antagonists, Sega protagonists, Sony Interactive Entertainment antagonists, Sony Interactive Entertainment protagonists, Square Enix antagonists, Square Enix protagonists, Team Fortress, The Legend of Zelda protagonists, Transmedia storytelling, Ubisoft antagonists, Ubisoft protagonists, Video game antagonists, Video game protagonists, Wikipedia categories named after video games, BattleTech games, Mario (franchise) locations, Asia-exclusive video games, Germany-exclusive video games, Point-and-click video games, Region-exclusive video game hardware, Russia-exclusive video games, Cancelled massively multiplayer online games, Falling-sand games, History of video game consoles
• New categories: Neal.fun games — 0x16w (newly tagged - originally created 9 months ago), Video games by developer — QuantumFoam66 (newly tagged - originally created 1 month ago), Funsoft GmbH games — Mika1h, Funsoft games — Mika1h, Gears of War characters — (Oinkers42), Mother (video game series) characters — Kung Fu Man, Pac-Man characters — Kung Fu Man, BattleTech video games — QuantumFoam66, Video games based on Starship Troopers — QuantumFoam66, Video games designed by Chris Sawyer — Mika1h, Esports competitions in Belgium — Gray eyes (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Esports competitions in France — Gray eyes (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Esports competitions in Spain — Gray eyes (newly tagged - originally created 1 year ago), Video games about religion — NeoBatfreak (newly tagged - originally created 5 years ago), Video games developed in Sri Lanka — Phediuk (newly tagged - originally created 3 years ago), Video games set in Sikh Empire — JazzyBsolarjatt (newly tagged - originally created 2 years ago), Coconut Island Games games — Waxworker, Video games with terraforming — Vitaly Zdanevich (newly tagged - originally created 15 days ago)
• New templates: {{F1 Esports driver results legend}} — Zwerg Nase (newly tagged - originally created 4 years ago), {{2025 Call of Duty League standings}} — Brandon Downes

Skipped a week, so here's a double-update! --PresN 15:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Seeing an article like Fortnite Ballistic makes me think it's possible to do an article on OG Fortnite. Not the game mode, like the concept and culture surrounding Fortnite as it was back in the day, and its many comebacks since. Panini! • 🥪 00:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Seriously, no. You need development (beyond basic release info) and a good reception separate from the main mode, and since OG is just the battle royale mode on a different island, just like Reload, it makes no sense for a separate article. Masem (t) 00:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

No, what I mean is all of the OG Fortnite stuff. For example, a history of how Fortnite has evolved in comparison to "back in the day", its garnered criticism from new additions and gameplay alteration, and why that resulted in various "OG" stunts. The concept of "OG Fortnite" and their many attempts to capitalize on nostalgia, and how it just keeps working. Fortnite: OG, Fortnite Relead, and this new OG game mode all in one article, for example.

Although from a quick search there doesn't seem to be too much sourcing that connects this stuff together into one concept. But it was a good idea, ya bully. Panini! • 🥪 00:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Sad news. When I try to look up the GBA calendar search under "2004/4", all of a sudden I get a 404 error shown here. In face, all the video games that Famitsu had from NES to the Nintendo Switch have been completely erased from history along with their calendar schedules from their website! I suppose that means we won't have to look up any Japanese video games for their Famitsu scores anymore. Now what? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 00:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I would appreciate some assistance in creating this draft and bringing it up to a respectable standard. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 10:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

There's already a much more developed draft in existence. See Draft:Unnamed Nintendo console. I'd recommend working on that instead, though either way, you're not going to be able to move it out of the draft space and publish it until it's actually announced/revealed/named. Sergecross73 msg me 12:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Even with that, when Nintendo makes the announcement, the bulk of that info will be immediately outdated by the actual details Nintendo provides and the new sources that report that. The only aspects that even in the current Switch article that would be kept would be when word of the next console was being announced, none of the rumors detailed of its specs and features. Either of these draft articles are immediately going to be out of date when that announcement comes so it seems like doing a lot of work for no gain at this point. Masem (t) 13:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, that's the very reason why I haven't personally contributed hardly anything to the draft myself. I specifically recall trimming 90% of that sort of content from the 3DS and Vita articles after they were announced and released back in the day. But still, if either were ever to actually get published, it'd certainly be the longer, better sourced one. Sergecross73 msg me 13:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Cheers, I was not aware of the other draft. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 21:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

No worries. That's the tricky part of doing drafts for unnamed things - you never know under what name someone may have made one. Sergecross73 msg me 22:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Any tools that could be used to check for this sort of thing besides manually trying to find them? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

If there are, I'd like to know. Though then again, half the hassle is others not being aware of the draft too. I always hate the thought of working on a draft for months, only to be away from Wikipedia when something is announced, and people rushing together a junky stub instead of publishing the long-term draft... Sergecross73 msg me 00:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I suppose you could do a wildcard search through draft space for "Nintendo" or something.. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

If there was an announcement regarding the official unveiling date, it would probably then be the time to move it into the main space and link it in the Nintendo Switch page infobox so that anybody looking to get bragging rights moves the established article instead of making a new one. Fantastic Mr. Fox 18:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Game Science § RfC on controversy and game's launch. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Anarchy Online has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

See analysis at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Games#"Theme"_category_problem_started_by_Category:Games_by_genre_or_theme (posted there as the issue affects few more WikiProject-related cats). TL;DR Category:Video games by theme should be renamed to Category:Video games by topic. Please comment there, not here. TIA. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:18, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Greg Martin (artist) was created today and I'm unsure if it meets WP:ARTIST. The existing sourcing is bad, but I did find IGN and Engadget. I don't know if I'd consider them "substantial" sources, which is why I'm wondering if ARTIST would apply. Thoughts? Woodroar (talk) 00:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

He is an artist though? Charliephere (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

That's not what he's asking. Did you actually read WP:ARTIST? Sergecross73 msg me 00:42, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Doesn't seem notable to me. There should be something else besides reports of his death. --Mika1h (talk) 01:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't really think NARTIST alies here. I think NARTIST only really applies if someone significantly contributed or is mostly responsible for a really, really important work. I don't think the cover art for Sonic the Hedgehog counts as a really, really important work. I And even if he met an SNG, I don't think an article should exist if there is literally zero significant sources forethat subject to work off of besides a few sentences. I cond Mika1h's comment. λ NegativeMP1 01:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you all for the advice! The article is now at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Martin (artist). Woodroar (talk) 19:50, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I hope y'all are having a good day. Earlier this month, I nominated Hotline Miami at FAC after working on it for quite a while, and so far it's only gotten one support and might be archived within the next few days due to inactivity. If anyone would be interesting in reviewing the article and leaving comments, that would be greatly appreciated. I'm also open to review exchanges if requested. λ NegativeMP1 22:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

While reassessing Stub articles, I've come across a few things that probably need the attention of someone more active and more familiar with the processes.

• MBCGame StarCraft League - no sources cited, so no notability established. Should probably be merged with StarCraft in esports
• File:Hoshiuta heroines.jpg - removed from Hoshiuta as it was redundant with the cover image (i.e., conveys the exact same information and thus is an excess non-free image). It is now an orphan file and should probably be deleted.
• Last Epoch - too many non-free images. I removed most and those are now orphan files
  • File:Last Epoch Loot - Item Tooltip.png
  • File:Eleventh-Hour-Games.png
  • File:Last Epoch KeyArt.png
  • File:Last-Epoch-Harbingers-of-Ruin-1-1.jpg

It's been over a decade since I've initiated a merge, FfD and many other administrative processes, and I don't remember the details. As I'm also on very sporadically, I honestly don't think I could properly watch over them. Is someone available to help with these? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 01:06, 22 December 2024 (UTC))

The orphan images will get cleaned up automatically after 7 days. -- ferret (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Guyinblack25. I'm not very active. So someone else here will have to do the honors. Looks like the images are on Commons. The Last Epoch's editor Judd cobler may be an employee. So we got a probable wp:coi. However, assuming the article's subject is notable, then perhaps Judd Cobler can contact the Commons VRT so we can use the relevant images. « Ryūkotsusei » 17:43, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. That explains the state the article was in; they at the least didn't know how to edit an encyclopedic article. It looks like it has since been cleaned up to a better state. The images have been tagged as missing evidence of permission, so looks like they will be dealt with soon. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 04:47, 28 December 2024 (UTC))

Came across an article that should probably be merged with its series (JumpStart) or deleted: JumpStart Adventures 6th Grade: Mission Earthquest. It has been tagged for not citing sources since 2015. I did a good faith search for sources: general google search, Google News, Google Scholar, Google Books, Google Newspaper, and JSTOR. Only found a MobyGames page, a review on a defunct Mac website (Mac Reactor) and a mention in an issue of MicroTimes magazine, which I cannot find a digital copy of the issue. So it clearly doesn't meet Wikipedia:Notability. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 04:42, 28 December 2024 (UTC))

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Gran Turismo (series)#Lead section regarding which of the two proposed lead sections would be better. Input in the discussion would be appreciated. Carfan568 (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Our Christmas cards get cheesier every year... happy holidays everyone! Glad to be a part of this great project. Panini! • 🥪 23:53, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah me too with my first good article nomination passed and been contributing to as many as hundred articles with most of them relating to video games. NatwonTSG^TALK 02:28, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Looks awesome! Aaron Liu (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays! Sergecross73 msg me 17:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays everyone! :D Timur9008 (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy holidays! Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy holidays! It's been a pretty good year. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:51, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays to all that read this! I can only hope things get better for all of us. CaptainGalaxy 20:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy holidays everyone, and thanks for the productive year. Shout outs to @Pokelego999 for their work on Pokémon-related topics, @Kung Fu Man for their character work, @NegativeMP1 for their help this year, and @Panini! for their awesome work and spirit. Everyone who was a part of this project did an awesome job this year! Fathoms Below (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy holidays! ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:54, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays everybody. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays to all, from my holiday apartment in Milan. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holi- oh my God. (and a Happy New Year!) TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 21:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I have nominated Characters of God of War for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 05:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 20:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• Articles deleted/removed: Evernight Games, Battle Frontier, Battle Subway, Battle Tower, Gigantamax, Hidden Machine, Pokemon gym, Pokémon League, Polaris (2024 video game), Special attack (Pokémon), Technical Machine, Paul Steed
• Drafts deleted/removed: Draft:Plasma Interactive, Draft:Twentyone, Draft:Amber (developer), Draft:Lost in Cult, Draft:RADAL
• Articles redirected: Amuze, Pokémon Home, Sky (video game), Tekken Hybrid, Cossacks (video games series), List of downloadable songs for the Lips series
• New categories: EZ Web games — TrademarkedTWOrantula, I-mode games — TrademarkedTWOrantula, Science fiction role-playing video games — AHI-3000, Video games about fairies — AHI-3000, Video games about the Yakuza — Mika1h, Vodafone games — TrademarkedTWOrantula
• New templates: {{MPL Philippines}} — WIZ*ONEI (newly tagged - originally created 6 months ago)

The 1.0 bot fell down for a while due to some template/category changes, and I'm not going to be home for the next normal run day, so rather than make some mega-post on the 13th I'll cut it in half and post some of it now. --PresN 20:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Deus Ex (video game) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I have nominated List of major Super Smash Bros. Ultimate tournaments for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Witsako (talk) 23:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Given Shadow of the Erdtree's treatment as a "game" at the Game Awards, I'd say it's more deserving than most of its own page due to its outsized notability. However, I want to be sure that consensus is there before I bother trying to potentially make it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:30, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I am surprised it doesn't have a page yet. All three Skyrim DLCs have their own pages, so I don't see why Shadow of the Erdtree can't. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Shadow of the Erdtree was treated as DLC at the Game Awards - they made it clear all DLC, expansions, remakes, and remasters can qualify for any of the awards.

Given that the only real in-depth coverage would be in reviews - nothing about new gameplay or development aspects - it doesn't make sense to have a separate article. Masem (t) 00:04, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Could there be discussion of the game's plotline? (Oinkers42) (talk) 00:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I'd say it depends entirely on coverage; we've got plenty of DLC articles I think we probably shouldn't have, and plenty I think justify themselves. (From the above mentions, I'm not sure that the Skyrim expansions really justify themselves, likewise The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt – Hearts of Stone and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt – Blood and Wine basically have nothing there indicating separate notability. Versus BioShock 2: Minerva's Den, which has the benefit of more development info, as well as an outsized influential legacy on other games, it wasn't "just" another DLC.) I would say that Elden Ring is pretty lean at 3400ish words, so there's not even potential page size issues to consider. I think it makes a lot more sense to build out the info in Elden Ring and then decide on a split. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 00:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

The other factor to keep in mind is that per WP:NOPAGE, just because a piece of DLC may be notable due to reception, is there enough unique content that requires a separate article from the main game, or is the DLC better covered under a comprehensive article? For what's there for Erfdtree, one article seems the best solution, unless there is a massive amount of development information that hasn't been found yet (doubtful) Masem (t) 01:19, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

"I think it makes a lot more sense to build out the info in Elden Ring and then decide on a split." I wish more people followed this guideline instead of assuming notability when starting these articles with barely any content. Gameplay for a DLC is not usually not going to be much different than the base game's even with a couple of new things introduced to it, which just leaves the development, plot, and reception sections. Those could easily be summarized in a paragraph or two within the base game's article, and if it does start to expand, then we'd could make the decision to split it. For some reason, we've always had this issue with the Souls games, with articles created on locations, bosses, NPCs, and concepts like bonfires that usually just feature passing mentions cited from game reviews, some of which having merged by consensus and then brought back in almost the same exact state. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 14:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, agreed, the Souls area has been a particularly bad area for unnecessary article spinouts. Sergecross73 msg me 18:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I'd advise staying on focus to Erdtree for now; if any split-outs (Or the topic of how much should dictate a split-out as a whole) are under question, then I'd suggest forming a separate discussion for this, given this is outside the smaller scope of this discussion and would impact a lot of articles. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Erdtree and other DLCs are no different here. I was simply bringing up the fact that the Souls series in particular has always had the problem of having spinoff articles created before they were expanded upon in the article of their respective games. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 23:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Exactly, it's a recurring issue in the subject area, spanning many years of discussions and some of the same overzealous editors. Sergecross73 msg me 23:25, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Now Blighttown was just created. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Bloated and bombarded to maximum levels to try to create the illusion of being a necessary split, I see. Sergecross73 msg me 20:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

There is consensus here that is largely against these Souls spinoff articles. Should we nominate all of them for deletion/merging? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Unless there is at least one dedicted article to covering it (at bare minimum) , yes these should be merged. Masem (t) 22:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

From what I can tell, this seems to be a "consensus" of only two or three editors. I don't think that's enough for something that would impact several articles. I also don't think it would make sense to only discuss Souls spinouts when several other video games have something like this, whether it be levels, items, weapons, and more. I feel as if a larger discussion on spinout articles for video game elements in general (not just Souls) would be necessary, rather than singling out one franchise. Either way, I think a larger consensus would be needed than this discussion. λ NegativeMP1 22:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Some of them were already merged in the past and brought back, so there is precedent for this sort of thing. And while WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for other series, it's particularly a problem for the Souls games. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I'd recommend nominating a couple of the worst offenders, and then proceeding from there depending on how that plays out. Sergecross73 msg me 22:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, some of them are probably decent enough to keep but certainly not all/most. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────────────────────────┘
Another new one today Northern Undead Asylum — Masem (t) 18:50, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@PrimalMustelid: I could at least understand Blighttown as it received reception for its poor technical performance, but how is the tutorial level notable? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:43, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm only making two Dark Souls locations, both of which I've done based on significant sources. The Northern Undead Asylum is pretty significant in that unlike many other video game tutorials, this particular tutorial has been credited with carving a unique path by not hand-holding the player along the way and throwing a fairly challenging tutorial boss into the mix (at the time, definitely not your average tutorial). It, along with the Asylum Demon, have been credited with preparing players for the wider difficulty of the game, and first impressions are especially important in video games like this. PrimalMustelid (talk) 20:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Your "significant sources" for Northern Undead Asylum include a greatest bosses list, two strategy guides, and a top ten tutorial levels list by a generally unreliable source (Dualshockers). Even if the other sources are valid, there's no reason why this couldn't be a paragraph or two within the Dark Souls article. Seriously, what is with this series that compels people to try and justify as many spinoff articles as possible? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Those aren't what I consider "significant sources;" they're more supplements to the overall article. What I'd consider significant sources are those written by NME and Goomba Stomp Magazine primarily since they both wrote analyses for the Northern Undead Asylum, with Arcade Sushi communicating similar commentary on the significance of it as a tutorial level. I would consider the main problem with an attempted merge into the main Dark Souls articles to be that it's a bit difficult to insert into there. If this helps, there aren't any other individual fictional elements that can be spun off into their own articles because of the fact that they lack significant commentary in relation to specific game designs. I do think that a list article for locations in the Dark Souls series could potentially work as long as there's a development section and reception section for the technical and philosophical aspects of game design, but I'm not really interested in creating list articles at the moment. PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:17, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I really don't think "Goomba Stomp Magazine" is a reliable source. Certainly not one to indicate notability... Sergecross73 msg me 22:50, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

How about this: in the video game sources page, there should be a consensus on whether Goomba Stomp Magazine can be considered a reliable source or not. If not, I will happily redirect or merge the article somewhere into the Dark Souls article (and maybe the locations list if it ever comes to fruition). I’ll leave the source evaluation up to you guys, although I can initiate the discussion if you guys want. PrimalMustelid (talk) 22:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Sure, but looking at their About Us page, I think it'll be a short discussion... Sergecross73 msg me 22:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

That’s fine with me. If and once there is official consensus that it is not a reliable source, I will merge or redirect the article, no questions asked. PrimalMustelid (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Discussion started Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources#Goomba Stomp Magazine. Sergecross73 msg me 23:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Putting notability of the asylum aside, I honestly wasn’t aware that there was a discussion regarding Dark Souls element articles and may have put fuel to the flame by creating the Blighttown article. Bad timing on my part I suppose.

I suppose that the character articles are a matter of debate, but is having a few spinoff articles really that bad in practice? I can see a few articles like Anor Londo passing on the grounds that it has a good amount of significant coverage and therefore would fit awkwardly into the 2011 video game article. I also see someone argue that the bonfire article’s sources supposedly only have “passing mentions,” but a lot of sources in the reception section literally indicate otherwise from the title to the full text. Again, I don’t mind a merge of some of the Souls articles, but some articles have significant coverage to justify independent notability in my opinion. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Also, I decided to redirect the Northern Undead Asylum into the 2011 video game article. I’ll figure out what to do in a “merge” process, but it’ll probably entail being part of a “retrospective review” subsection of the overall game from after the 2018 remastered version release. PrimalMustelid (talk) 06:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

On that note, I would just like to mention that I've always been annoyed by the tendency to make a new article on an element of a game without adding any of that relevant content to the game's article. For example, we have an article on Shiori Fujisaki from Tokimeki Memorial, but neither the franchise page nor the individual game pages mention the character at all, leaving the article effectively orphaned except for a navbox that doesn't appear on mobile. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:27, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm always surprised by that. I personally always try to link to my article creations as much as I can (within the realms of being appropriate) to help the odds of people actually viewing/reading it. Sergecross73 msg me 17:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

You haven't really advanced any argument for it. "more deserving than most of its own page due to its outsized notability" is just a long way of saying "WP:ITSNOTABLE". Sergecross73 msg me 01:39, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

If it's something to the scale of Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned and Grand Theft Auto: The Ballad of Gay Tony, I don't see how a separate page for the Elden Ring expansion would hurt. Command & Conquer: Yuri's Revenge may be notable on its own, but idk if the Red Alert 3 – Uprising expandalone would be worth a separate article as it only mildly covered the game and not divulge much on its development and impact. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Looking at the lost and Damned, for example, shows a ton of unsourced gameplay content, very little development, and very little reception that I question it's need to be sepearate. Masem (t) 00:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I'd honestly merge and/or redirect a lot of the listed titles unless some more substance can be found. As it stands they're not showing much independent notability of the subject. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

To be clear: the DLC passes GNG already, and this feels like you are implying that it's not notable (since you are citing an AfD argument after all). I was never trying to ask whether it was notable, which is rather obvious on its face, but saying that its high degree of critical acclaim merited its own page.

As for the in-universe articles, Souls simply happens to be a very critically acclaimed and analyzed series - it inspired an entire genre after all - with an outsized amount of notable things in their universe. Bonfires as a concept inspired a host of games to implement identical or similar game mechanics, even by testimony of their developers. I don't want to point fingers or anything or reignite the Pokemon test, but I don't see people griping this much about Galarian Corsola or Klefki despite them arguably being an order of magnitude less important in their respective games than Torrent or bonfires. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I simply said you hadn't advanced an argument, because...you hadn't advanced an argument. Sergecross73 msg me 18:49, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah. Subjects can pass notability but still be covered exclusively in other, larger articles. That's what Wikipedia:NOPAGE is all about. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I would not oppose to a spin-out article for the DLC, if it has a development section that is extensive enough. Right now I think we can develop the content in the main article first before considering a WP:SIZESPLIT. OceanHok (talk) 11:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree. @Zxcvbnm, I might have a crack at drafting too to help and see if in that process I can generate good sourcing. The WP:NOPAGE argument is a little funny to me because we're talking about a very well-covered, award-nominated expansion to one of the biggest games of the past decade. If we're honestly saying the copious amount of coverage out there in terms of its gameplay additions, potential development history, reviews and discourse around its award eligibility is not independently notable or preferable, I would honestly say that the vast majority of expansion articles in this WP should be merged immediately. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 03:29, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing here to request help with some source title translations. I am currently working on implementing the suggestion on the FAC for List of generation II Pokémon and one of the suggestions is for the non-English sources to have translated titles. I currently have all the non-English sources on this sandbox; containing 28 Japanese sources, 3 Spanish sources, 1 Finnish source, 1 French source, 1 Brazilian Portuguese source and 1 Indonesian source. If anyone is able to provide help with this that would be very much appreciated. Hope to hear back, CaptainGalaxy 12:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi. So, I want some confirmation and possible discussion regarding edits made last year to Tomb Raider (1996 video game), Tomb Raider II, and the main series article. A LOT of wordy information was added by ERAGON citing a book called "The Making of Tomb Raider" by someone called Daryl Baxter. IMO, it seemed to me to simply repeat stuff that was already present. I did edits on the OG game's article to incorporate the info on an assumption of good faith (I was in a bad mood that day, explanation for some edits that appeared on TR2's article).

My questions are: is this book a reliable source of development information, and if so could the information be incorporated into the articles in a less wordy way? I don't want to do anything on my own beyond what I already did on the OG game. ProtoDrake (talk) 17:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi ProtoDrake. I would say that the book is a reliable source; it is a series of interview transcripts between Baxter and former Core Design staffers. Outside of the book he has interviewed people from the team before for podcasts; there's one of those available here. If things are too wordy we can of course edit down. ERAGON (talk) 10:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I was relieved to see such as strong consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gameplay of Pokémon. It's not that we can't find sources, but that it duplicates the same types of content you'd see at Pokémon (video game series). With that said, I wanted to check if anyone felt similarly about Gameplay of World of Warcraft or Gameplay of Dragon Quest. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm generally against any of these gameplay/reception/awards type article spin outs. These two examples are much better written and sourced than the Pokemon was, but I'm still not certain a separate article is required... Sergecross73 msg me 19:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

At first blush looking at the above, I'd lean towards saying "no" to standalone articles. From base principles it's highly unlikely the gameplay of a game is notable independent of the coverage of the game itself (or a lot of the coverage leans into WP:ROUTINE-type stuff) but also I don't see where the level of coverage makes sense for a general encyclopedia. I don't need a blow-by-blow of all the quest types in WoW, for example. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 19:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. I was surprised someone felt the need for the Dragon Quest spinout too. They're fine games, but they're pretty straightforward, "meat and potatoes" type games. Sergecross73 msg me 20:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Looks like someone wrote it in 2010 and it hasn't gotten much more than 50 edits of any kind in the 15 years since. --PresN 20:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I do believe those are probably better off merged/redirected back to the target. I'm not seeing much in the way of a valid split-out rationale for these that would indicate their gameplay is standalone notable. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Gameplay of Hearthstone devotes a ton of space/text to covering every expansion. The rest of it is a more detailed version of Hearthstone#Gameplay. It's possible to retool the former as a List of Hearthstone expansions if we decide that's something we want. Otherwise, it seems to suffer the same issues as the rest of the articles at Category:Gameplay of specific video games. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

It kind of echoes my feelings on Development of Mother 3. So much of it is redundant to what's already present at Mother 3, and it feels like it'd be better served being merged back into it, or have the EarthBound 64 stuff expanded upon. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I am very fond of these types of articles and the amount of depth they lend to angles on these works. "Gameplay of" articles do tend to be terrible to source tho, and the "Gameplay of Pokémon" article never reached the quality I would hope for it. "Gameplay of Dragon Quest" is particularly odd to me, as it hardly explains mechanics unique to the series and it's pretty short. At least Pokémon has a swath of fairly unique mechanics that I believe would be really useful to describe in-depth. Perhaps it'd be more of a Wikibooks kind of deal tho, if that project ever worked out. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

• I'll defend Gameplay of Overwatch as save for a few areas, I've made sure it is sourced to reliable secondary sources talking about these gameplay elements to a reasonable depth (of course, most of the that came from the period while there was attention with the Overwatch League and helping viewers understand rules); it also helps alleviate size issues. I consider it compariable to Magic: The Gathering rules which due to similar attention via tourneys has had its rules/gameplay evaluated in depth. For those reasons, I think Gameplay of World of Warcraft is a reasonably fair split from the main WoW article (which covers more of how big and significant it is to the industry) and just needs a bit more sourcing to make it better. But key on these is the use of secondary sources to show that the gameplay or rules have been discussed beyond simple coverage of the whole game itself. The Pokemon gameplay article had problems with very little sourcing along those lines (though you'd think that should be possible with how big the franchise is). The Dragon Quest case, that seems rather more difficult given the niche of JRPGs. (Common features of JRPGs and CRPGs in general, however, are absolutely fair game in the genre articles). Masem (t) 14:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Dynasty Warriors 4 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Steam (service) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 14:16, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

On the Nicalis page, we've had 90s Super GP listed for twelve years. There has been no official word from Nicalis since 2015, with only subtle changes, (like the title itself), made. It's still listed on the Nicalis website, but having been in the industry myself, I can attest that the creator is no longer involved and the last expo presence or even rumored stages of development were made in 2019. Do we even list this vaporware at this juncture? BOTTO _(T•C) 00:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Only if a reliable source calls it vaporware (or cancelled.) I understand your concern in this instance, but if we let editors make this call personally, then we get these overzealous/pessimistic editors declaring games like Metroid Prime 4 or Shin Megami Tensei V as vaporware or cancelled games. Sergecross73 msg me 01:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: It's good to see you again, Sergecross73. We have a bunch of articles like this one that pragmatically ask the question, "What the hell happened to '90s Super GP," but none that explicitly calling it "vaporware" or "cancelled". I'd compare it to Half-Life 2: Episode Three, except Valve recently acknowledged that it wasn't going to happen. BOTTO _(T•C) 02:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

This intrigued me, so I made the article at '90s Super GP.

From what I saw, it's indeed vaporware but not officially cancelled. Such games can resurrect at any point, and the game was even referenced in a subsequent game by that developer. Unless it sees a full cancellation it should be listed as such. BTW, the Nintendo Life article does say it is in "development hell", akin to vaporware. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm: Wow, great work! It certainly is one of the most infamous cases of both predatory indie publisher practices and development hell. There's nothing saying it won't ever be released, so maybe we'll eventually see it pushed out eventually? BOTTO _(T•C) 20:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

after all, we got Metroid Dread... Andre🚐 05:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Roco Kingdom (game). Abandoned by the student creator, since the course finished. We have three very bad, AfD-asking, articles on related media (animated films) that may be deleted without redirecting if there is no main article for this to be redirected to: Roco Kingdom: The Desire of Dragon, Roco Kingdom 3 and Roco Kingdom 4. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

It's going to probably need a Chinese speaker. Andre🚐 05:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Likely; I've also posted to WT:CHINA. Sadly, I don't speak Chinese, but the topic seems quite important - it seems like a rather big franchise, with many games, movies, etc. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Eh, I'd say it's of low importance to the video games articles scope as a whole. In zh:洛克王国 it seems to have a moderately low number of incoming links. There's also an article in Korean that is pretty short. Though, that may just be the article on the first Roco Kingdom game. Tencent is a big company but a lot of this looks like mobile/web games which don't really interest the English-speaking world quite as much. And there are films at the Chinese box office, but I can't find anything about an international release. Andre🚐 05:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Fair, but considering how big China is, even a China-only franchise, that is reasonably big there but has little international impact, is probably mid-importance for the world. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

China being so big means there are a lot of game franchises, some of which may have a bafflingly large interest inside China and little impact outside of China, which makes it hard to write about them because there aren't a lot of English sources that are reliable. Especially Chinese web/mobile games made by Chinese companies with few products or customers overseas. Also, keep in mind the video games project covers not only all the video and computer games ever but all of the people, companies, and in many cases fictional things inside the games. That's a pretty large scope. And since the nature of many web/mobile games in terms of the content and the quality of the material, especially ones made by large Chinese companies such as Tencent, is that they're probably of limited interest for the mainstream AAA game, indie game or retro game communities in the Anglosphere. For example, I checked out the Roco Fandom site and I noticed the following badly translated text, "Rock Kingdom is a web game. Come and complete the task, chat with friends, and upgrade for your pets." These virtual pet games are a dime a dozen. It might be of interest to the gacha game community. It doesn't even have a public subreddit, and it seems that the game itself might not even work outside of China. Yet the film Roco Kingdom 4 grossed 10 million yuan in presale making it the top domestic animation ever in pre-sale. That's pretty crazy. Andre🚐 07:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

It is Tencent after all, indispensable to the lives of literally E-V-E-R-Y single one Chinese from the young to the elderly. It will be a surprise if the spin-offs become box office bombs. MilkyDefer 14:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I forgot to mention the popularity of Tencent games among Chinese people especially those young (should I mention Honor of Kings?). It is not hard to imagine children, during their summer breaks, begging their parents to bring them to theatres for the film. MilkyDefer 14:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, your fellow Chinese speaker is always available. MilkyDefer 13:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 18:02, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

• Articles deleted/removed: Alex Shrub, Brawly, Brawly (Pokemon), Brawly (Pokémon), Byron (Pokémon), Candice (Pokémon), Fantina (Pokémon), Flannery (Pokemon), Flannery (Pokémon), Gardenia (Pokémon), Gardenia (fictional character), Kyo (Pokemon), Kyo (Pokémon), Maylene (Pokémon), Phoebe (Pokémon), Roark (Pokémon), Roxanne (Pokemon), Roxanne (Pokémon), Sidney (Pokémon), Tate & Liza, Tate and Liza, Volkner (Pokémon), Wattson, Wattson (Pokemon), Wattson (Pokémon), Winona (Pokemon), Winona (Pokémon), Games for Good, Heroic Games Launcher, Nebulae (video game), Rainbow Computing, RealFlight, Samsung SPH-B5200, Wings of Vi, Just Dance 6, Christian Allen
• Drafts deleted/removed: Draft:Beyond All Reason, Draft:3lb Games, Draft:Mordhau Server Kings And Men, Draft:Mutation ( videogame ), Draft:Bopl Battle, Draft:Horizon (upcoming TV series), Draft:Palsu 3D, Draft:The Phantom Fellows, Draft:.45 Parabellum Bloodhound, Draft:Pretendo Network, Draft:Honor Of Nations, Draft:Oopdreams software, Inc, Draft:Untitled Resident Evil Village sequel, Draft:Don't Even Think, Draft:Falsora
• Articles redirected: Gameplay of Dragon Quest, Star Wars Republic Commando (series), David Gordon (software entrepreneur), List of Pokémon volumes, Red Barrels, Disney's Animated Storybook: 101 Dalmatians, Real War (video game), Amuze, Pokémon Home, Sky (video game), Tekken Hybrid
• Categories deleted/removed: Amuze games, MMORPGs by status, Massively multiplayer online games by status, Roller coaster simulation games, Video game video content, Works featuring video games
• New categories: DreamWorks Pictures video games — Vinnylospo, Red Lemon Studios games — Waxworker, TamTam games — Waxworker, Maxis user templates — Catfurball, Pikmin user templates — Catfurball, Real-time strategy video game user templates — Catfurball, Strategy video game user templates — Catfurball, Turn-based strategy video game user templates — Catfurball, Czech video game composers — Mochgamen1 (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Irish video game composers — MagicMason1000 (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Polish video game composers — MagicMason1000 (newly tagged - originally created 4 months ago), Team .366 games — Waxworker, Triband games — Waxworker, Triad video games — Mika1h
• New templates: {{Psyonix}} — WikiPediaAid (newly tagged - originally created 28 days ago), {{Dofus}} — Nall