Jump to content

Talk:Porpentine (game designer)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Problem- This wikipedia page uses Porpentine's own website as a source. ("Porpentine. "Who Am I". Retrieved 24 May 2013.")50.75.232.66 (talk) 07:23, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if you will look at the guidelines on sourcing a person as a source on themselves:
"Wikipedia:Sourcing: Self-published or questionable sources as sources on themselves"
You will find this is expressly allowed within certain reasonable limits. The citing of Porpentine's website here is extremely narrow. If you can identify any specific points of reliance on the website which are inappropriate, feel free to bring them up. Awk (talk) 20:29, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed figames info after Porpentine left figames, and then figames' dissolution shortly after. http://www.freeindiegam.es/2014/04/goodbye — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.30.243.209 (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not supposed to be limited to current activity. If the figames info was notable before, it still is. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

She also seems to go by "Brenda Neotenomie". Equinox 21:45, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really? This review appears to be stating that one of Porpentine's works is a collaboration with Neotenomie, which would make no sense if they are the same person. Anyway, unless we have reliable sources on her identity, we should just use the name that she uses for her game authorship. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:07, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I think you're right about Brenda being someone else. However, even if her real name isn't notable, the fact that Porpentine is a pseudonym is worth noting; compare Moxie Marlinspike. Equinox 16:50, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Only if we have a source. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:15, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

[1] @David Eppstein, plenty of issues to resolve: Unreliable sources to be replaced with secondary sources or removed: animalnewyork.com, freeindiegam.es. If games can only be sourced to primary sources (aliendovecote.com/slimedaughter.com), then they shouldn't be listed at all (the list of games should not be exhaustive but of all notable games). Same goes for grants and awards—if they aren't reported in a reliable, secondary source, then they aren't worth mentioning. Same goes for the awards: creative-capital.org, xyzzyawards.org, handeyesociety.com. I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response czar 20:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that freeindiegam.es appears to be a personal blog, but animalnewyork.com appears to be a reliable online magazine, independent of the article subject and with editorial control over their content: see this listing of their editors, staff, and contributors. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]