Talk:Acquisition of Mojang by Microsoft

Reason for a standalone article?

Given that Mojang Studios is only 2300 words (37KB prose size), I'm curious as to the reasoning for this article existing? The "short" summary in the current parent article is three paragraphs long, it's only in total around 200 words longer here, and much of that is recycling background information. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 20:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I was wondering this same thing.--Alexandra^IDV 20:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I created it because it is a notable event. It gained WP:SIGCOV for the deal from independent and reliable sources. But only one of the three paragraphs in the section in Mojang Studios talks about the acquisition itself plus a paragraph in the lead, despite the title of the section being 'Microsoft subsidiary'. The two of the three paragraphs in the section describe, well, what the studio has done since the acquisition. There is more here, even if things are repeated. ngl, it stings that @Alexandra IDV removed what I consider a big part of the article claiming copyvio and that I had repost[ed] entire blog posts (lolwut?), then come over here to affirm the question of 'why is it so short?'. Well, you made it shorter. If you want to lengthen it, please go ahead. There is more to add. The sources are all there, and so is the edit button. SWinxy (talk) 21:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Very long quotes do entail copyright violations, yes - and copyvios would not be taken into consideration when we talk about article length regardless of if they've been removed yet or not. I apologize if I've appeared antagonistic to you, this has not been my intention.--Alexandra^IDV 00:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)