Talk:The Elder Scrolls VI
Background section relevancy[edit]
Is the background section objectively relevant at this point/after the release announcement in an encyclopedic article? Thank you all Grandia01 (talk) 06:22, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Well, yeah, that's part of its history, isn't it? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- thanks for your reply. what i am saying is, everything is part of history, but, encyclopedically we cannot enter everything, only important and relevant events. i think that this section is unnecessary really, especially when the game gets released actually. would be helpful if more editors share their thoughts on this. thanks again Grandia01 (talk) 04:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure I follow. The Elder Scrolls VI#Background is properly sourced. Why do you think it's not relevant? It would be strange to just take it out. Take a look at Duke Nukem Forever#Development, about a game that was announced in 1997 and released in 2011. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- thanks for your reply. what i am saying is, everything is part of history, but, encyclopedically we cannot enter everything, only important and relevant events. i think that this section is unnecessary really, especially when the game gets released actually. would be helpful if more editors share their thoughts on this. thanks again Grandia01 (talk) 04:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
The Duke Nukem article is a good example. Thanks for the clarification and help Grandia01 (talk) 06:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)