User talk:IceWelder/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Edited pages

The reason i edited those pages it was nothing to do with vandalism i was just reorganinzing those pages not vandalising them and Fox Sports 2 Brazil channel is still active and im very sorry for what happend it was not my intent i was just organizing those pages not vandalising very sorry for the incovenience next time when i do something i will comunicate more sorry for incovience.

Thanks happy new year Espyul (talk) 00:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Please review edits like this. The information is clearly fabricated and no source was added whatsoever. It is not mere reorganization. IceWelder [✉] 12:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, IceWelder!

Happy New Year!

IceWelder,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 03:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I don't think we've met before, so here is to a good year of editing. IceWelder [✉] 12:52, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Mission Studios

According this [1] the studio was acquired in October 1996 but at the main Take Two article it says the studio was acquired in September 1996. Which source should we use here? Timur9008 (talk) 12:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

? Timur9008 (talk) 11:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I've been meaning to respond once I found better evidence. I checked TTWO's older SEC filings and only one gave a date, that being September 1996. However, this was struck off as part of TTWO's reporting scandal and restated financials in the mid-2000s. It is plausible that the acquisition happened in September and was only announced in October, but I have not found a better source for that yet. Maybe I will find the time to go through the restatements. IceWelder [✉] 13:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

According to [2], the acquisition date was September 17, 1996. IceWelder [✉] 14:05, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Timur9008 (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023

Hello IceWelder,

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Street Cricket series

Hello, thank you for trying to help. I must say I'm a bit confused - everything in the article you tagged has a source cited. While I certainly intend to add more sources as I find them, what's there is surely plenty for a stub (which that article is). Is there an issue I am unaware of regarding the Indian publications? Thanks, Londonbeat41692 (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

It is true that all elements feature are cited, but what is there might not be sufficient for notability. The articles lacks proof that the series has been discussed in depth. Rather, all sources dicuss the individual games without respect to the greater series. See also WP:NVG. Furthermore, some of the sources might not be reliable, in particular India Tech Online, Indian Video Gamer, and GameWatcher, as they all appear to be personal blogs / freelancer content instead of professionally run sites. If you can find many more sources on one of the games, I would recommend writing an article for that game instead. IceWelder [✉] 14:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I made the article about the series as a whole, as I felt that the games were not each necessarily that notable on an individual basis (although I do not have easy access to Indian print content), especially as even the developer admits there are few changes between the games, but the series itself has qualities of note (as mentioned in the stub, it's the first gully cricket series as well as the first series of cricket games to be developed in India...and a few of the titles were also featured in console bundles, though I'm looking for good sources in regards to those).

As for the sources, Indian Video Gamer asserts to be run by a group of journalists and also has a company name in the bottom left. https://www.indianvideogamer.com/about GameWatcher also appears to be a company. https://www.gamewatcher.com/staff India Tech Online, while only naming one journalist, appears to have some degree of credibility as well. https://www.indiatechonline.com/about-us.php I really don't know much about Indian media sources, and the bigger news site I checked that was linked from the India Tech Online article doesn't seem to have any archives pre-2018. Do you have any suggestions of Indian game media sources? Londonbeat41692 (talk) 15:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Being first in a niche category does not automatically make an item notable (if that were the case, the first would be notable, not the series). WP:GNG still needs to be passed. Of the mentioned sources' writers, none have any credentials outside of these sites, such as GameWatcher's "managing editor", and the sites likely would not pass at WT:VG/RS. If you believe they should be reliable, feel free to request a review there. In general, if you need a second opinion, please consider elevating the issue to WT:VG. IceWelder [✉] 15:26, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep it in mind. For now, I'll keep looking for other media sources. Londonbeat41692 (talk) 15:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Re: PlayStation 4 homebrew

Just delete it then please. I tried to base and style it as similar, related pages such as PlayStation 3 homebrew but if it's not fit for purpose let's just bin it off and forget about it.

That being said, you may want to give the aforementioned page's citations a check too and also move it to draft as from my perspective it's very alike. – Ozankk 19:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not able to delete pages as I am not an administrator. If you would like it gone, you can tag it with a G7 template. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 19:27, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Data Design Interactive article deletion in 2019

Hi,

I'm doing some research on the company Data Design Interactive and I noticed you nominated the page for deletion in 2019. I think there's a lot of good information that could go into a new article, however, I am not really sure if it is admissible or can be cited in any way.

There are mentions of the company in several magazines from the time, and there is a lot of primary source material like interviews I've conducted with employees of the company and documents and material obtained directly from the company. Would any of that sort of content qualify the company for a new article, or no, because it comes directly from them?

Thank you. MrPinball64 (talk) 23:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Being mentioned in sources is not a notable feat. Notability requires that a topic is discussed in detail in multiple sources. Per the deletion discussion, there are barely any such sources, with maybe the exception of the AWN piece. Wikipedia cannot accept "verbal" sources, primarily because they cannot be verified afterwards, but also bcause of the original research policy. Any other editor should be able to follow the sources and verify that they actually contain the information given. This is why Wikipedia usually relies on reliable secondary sources (such as major video game publications for VG content). For example, if a reputable journalist compiled such information and published it via their outlet, that source could be cited here. IceWelder [✉] 11:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

https://www.cgw.com/Publications/CGW/2000/Volume-23-Issue-3-March-2000-/Legos-Come-to-Life.aspx

Would this source be citable for a new article? It contains some information about Artworld / Data Design (same company).

As for publishing the information, that's difficult, not many people want to cover such a company. But I think it deserves an article nevertheless, I'm just not sure if there's enough information in wikipedia standard for one. MrPinball64 (talk) 09:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory and ET: Legacy project

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia editing and I wonder if it's sufficient to use https://www.phoronix.com/news/MTI0MDY as the secondary source you required? It mentions ETL being based on W:ET's source code and has a link to etlegacy.com for more information. Can I after that use just etlegacy.com in the later information about changes and features... or do these also have to have a secondary source? Thanks! BinaryStar10 (talk) 10:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure, although it would be useful if there were a couple more (I only found a very brief mention in this article). The scope of the section should not significantly overshoot the secondary sources to avoid undue weight being applied to one fan project. IceWelder [✉] 11:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I found two more source:

https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2021/03/play-wolfenstein-enemy-territory-with-the-new-release-of-et-legacy/

https://ubunlog.com/en/et-legacy-instala-este-juego-mediante-flatpak/

"The scope of the section should not significantly overshoot the secondary sources to avoid undue weight being applied to one fan project."

Right, I should probably make the feature list shorter and just mention the map overhauls briefly without too much emphasis on them. BinaryStar10 (talk) 11:40, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Ubunlog likely wouldn't qualify as reliable source, but other than that, this should be fine. IceWelder [✉] 11:46, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Yep, I agree. Ubunlog doesn't look like a professional site on closer inspection. BinaryStar10 (talk) 11:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Fistful of Gun

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Fistful of Gun you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Pink News start date

I don't understand this edit. While it does revert a pre-vandalism state, the old text was uncited. I added a citation but the best I could come up with was a primary source demonstrating it started by 26th July, but not anything about a specific date before that (such as the uncited 21st). I think that unless we can find a source for the 21st July, the text should be reverted by to my edit that is less specific but at least cited. -- Colin°^Talk 10:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Colin: This seems to have been caught in the crossfire of reverting that LTA's hundereds of vandalous edits. You're right that the particular day is entirely unsourced, though the former source is not entirely indicative of July being the launch month either (since it is merely the first website capture). I found a better source that states July 2005 verbatim and added the information to the article. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 10:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Excellent. Yes I know my source wasn't ideal, but was an improvement on nothing at all, and I AGF on the original 21 July being likely correct though more precise than is vital to record. Great that we have a better source now. -- Colin°^Talk 10:36, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Jeff gardiner

Hi! I was wondering are these sources are enough to remove the redirect to Jeff gardiner and the article to pass GNG?

Timur9008 (talk) 17:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

IIRC, interviews generally do not count towards notability. The piece on Game Developer is even written by him. IceWelder [✉] 17:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

nevermind then.(didn't even notice the last part) Timur9008 (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Arkane Studios financial reports

I've noticed you apparently know French. Can you check Arkane's reports [3] and possibly update the main Arkane Studios article? Maybe getting that article to good status as a result. Timur9008 (talk) 13:15, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

If you're referring to the annual reports -- I skipped over a few and they are just boring financials and a bit of legal jargon. They only (freely) go back to 2017 and they have not been published since 2021, probably due to the Microsoft takeover. I don't think there is anything particularly intersting in there, sorry. IceWelder [✉] 14:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for checking either way :) Yeah I was referring to the annual reports. Timur9008 (talk) 14:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hdidiek

Rnrnekrnnrnrndndndrbfbchcbcbcbfbdhdhdhdhbd 182.2.69.82 (talk) 05:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Uysususdjhffnbfnfmfmfmf

Mm 182.2.69.82 (talk) 05:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Limited Run Games § Firing of community manager

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Limited Run Games § Firing of community manager. This discussion is in relation to content you have previously removed from the article. Thanks. Sideswipe9th (talk) 19:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Discussion about Category:Video game companies of Utah

Please explain why you are reverting changes being made to add Category:Video game companies of Utah ? 137.190.80.249 (talk) 16:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

The category does not exist and you are adding red links to articles. If there was such a category, it would have a different name, in line with Category:Video game companies based in California and Category:Video game companies based in Texas. IceWelder [✉] 16:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Pardon that a few items were added to a category before it was created. Reverting changes minutes after they were made is not WP:AGF. I've created the category. Reverting the changes now that they are not going to be red links. —A 16:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@А: Please rename the category to fit into the existing pattern. IceWelder [✉] 16:54, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Based it off of Video game companies of Maryland‎ (which I now see you are gutting). I was WP:BOLD and went with "of" rather than "based in" because it is a better fit for the situation for these smaller studios that are a bit less of a physical presence and are born, live, and die in one spot. —A —A 16:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

The Maryland category is similarly malformed. I initially thought it would be a WP:SMALLCAT, but I found additional articles so I will file a rename request instead. The name of the category does not (and should not) reflect the size of the company. IceWelder [✉] 17:03, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@IceWelder Walking away. I saw a Utah based game company, wondered how many others there were and ended up with a half dozen tabs. Thought it would be useful to others to have a category. If you feel strongly that it should be in the format that you're proposing rather than the one that is more nuanced given the nature of the companies, kudos. Thanks for agreeing to a rename as to not erase the collection that was useful to me and will likely be useful for others. —A —A 17:05, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Friday the 13th game logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Friday the 13th game logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Super Mario Bros box office

Do you see anything for this? per Talk:Super_Mario_Bros._(film)#Box_Office Timur9008 (talk) 13:44, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

@Timur9008: Did you ask the user who added the source, Sudiani, whether they could send you a picture of the page? The article's online version does not contain the figure but the wording suggests the actual top 100 were included in the printed version. IceWelder [✉] 14:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I've left him a message.(Doesn't like he is very active though) Timur9008 (talk) 15:18, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

As IceWelder says the print version of Variety contained a chart of 100 films. Super Mario Bros. was listed 71st with a domestic gross for the calendar year of $20,915,465 and a foreign gross of $17,997,000 for a total of $38,912,465. It was one place behind Guilty as Sin with a worldwide gross of $38,996,215 and above Body of Evidence with $37,938,251. You can see the chart in the image preview at this link but the detail is likely not visible without a subscription or a visit to your local library. https://varietyultimate.com/archive/issue/WV-01-03-1994-40 Like most films of that year and earlier, Box Office Mojo does not have international grosses and this was the first year that Variety published this regular annual chart. Sudiani (talk) 23:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK for A Fistful of Gun

On 23 February 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Fistful of Gun, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Devolver Digital published A Fistful of Gun after its developer jokingly suggested a collaboration? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Fistful of Gun. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A Fistful of Gun), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 07:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Genres of system shoxk

Most dont have to conclude that survival horror is the primal genre. What difference does it uave for 100 to say something if several can and still have a point. Whats real is real , facts are facts.But according to info from internet first game was a survival horror this is the remake. The sources i provided were from professional gaming articles. CBR. Com also provides it to be survival horror alongside fps and action adventure. If its one of the genres whats wrong with putting "survival horror" call in genre section ???

https://www.pcinvasion.com/system-shock-remake-will-launch-in-march/ MrDante1047 (talk) 13:46, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

PC Invasion is not listed as a reliable source at WP:VG/RS. Only the primary genres a game is in should be listed. For example, Grand Theft Auto V is primarily an action-adventure game, even if individual elements could be categorized further, including first-person shooter and racing. As outlined in the other discussion, System Shock is not (primarily) a survial horror game and most commonly characterized as a first-person shooter. If you wish to discuss this with a larger audience, start a discussion on the article's talk page and ask for additional input there. Edit warring should never be the solution. IceWelder [✉] 13:55, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

SEE

Hi, I recall your SEE move request and figured you might find my move of this list interest (in case it's not on your watchlist. Regards IgelRM (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, it's on my watchlist now. IceWelder [✉] 22:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Alpha Dog Games

Hi! I've noticed someone put a notability tag to this page. Is it ok if I remove it? I think because Wraithborne has three reviews [4], [5] and [6]. Also, Mighty DOOM is releasing on March 21 [7] (will also get reviews I reckon) + whatever else Alpha Dog is working on. Timur9008 (talk) 16:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Developers don't inherit notability from their games, so the notability tag is probably placed correctly. You should look into sources that detail the history of the company itself. IceWelder [✉] 16:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've search before but to no luck. Hopefully we will get a Noclip documentary in the future. Timur9008 (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Is this a good source to use? [8] Timur9008 (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Possibly for information, but interviews generally do not count towards notability. IceWelder [✉] 12:52, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I've added it as a refidea. Timur9008 (talk) 13:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Bethesda press articles

Sorry for the double post but I was wondering maybe you have come accross these press articles mentioning Bethesda. [9]. CBS News, Washington Business Journal, The Washington Post. Timur9008 (talk) 07:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I've tried searching via the Wayback Machine but I found nothing. Timur9008 (talk) 12:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

The WaPo one may be this; for WBJ, the only article from that time frame to even mention Bethesda is this, and it doesn't include the quote specified. Maybe its misattributed? The CBS News one seems lost to time, and I would assume it was mentioned in video at some point. IceWelder [✉] 17:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! It's possible the CBS News one is buried. I will try going trough the urls manually but it will take a while. I did find stuff like Daggarfall sales figures for example through link hoping [10] A thing I wasn't expecting to find. Timur9008 (talk) 18:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto: Vice City

Hello. I noticed you reverted what I added the article. What do you mean when you said "Not a significant game element"? Rattatast (talk) 18:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Categories should be defining. When one character mentions that another character has a certain attribute, but this attribute otherwise plays no significant role in the game, adding a category for that attribute is not warranted. It's like including the game in Category:Video games about robots for briefly showing or mentioning any robot. IceWelder [✉] 18:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Media featuring robots is pretty normal and common. By contrast, media featuring LGBT characters is, in some cases, controversial and worth indicating. Rattatast (talk) 18:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Please see WP:CATDEF. Both types of categories should be applied consistently. IceWelder [✉] 18:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Alternative Software

According to this [11] Alternative Software was founded in 1986 but at the main company article it say 1985. Which source should we use here? Timur9008 (talk) 10:07, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

The source says that the limited company was incorporated in 1986, but the company may have launched operations (before registering) in 1985. I found this mag from 1992 that also gives the 1985 founding year. The funny thing is that that this source from 1991 says the company was started "ten years ago", i.e. 1981? 1985 seems to be the canonical founding year, though. IceWelder [✉] 19:05, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey Can you help me?

I want to edit the akella page to add a game to the list here it is https://www.myabandonware.com/game/liquidator-eqj but i dont know how to do that? ArkaneWasTaken (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I found a slightly more suitable source; MyAbandoneware is likely not considered reliable. See this edit. IceWelder [✉] 15:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Frettabladid recently shut down

Just noticed that Frettabladid journalists lost their jobs, and the decisions can change. What will happen to Hatari? 176.33.203.222 (talk) 09:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Fréttablaðið was entirely disestablished, which is most likely not linked to the story on Hatari. Moreover, the paper was not known to fabricate information, so it seems improbable that the story of Matthias' departure is false. Not being officially restated is not grounds to assume the opposite (WP:OR), especially when it was not refuted either. IceWelder [✉] 09:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Is it possible that Klemens and Einar departing Hatari?

I have a question. Are there any chances that Klemens and Einar departing Hatari? 31.141.82.215 (talk) 11:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't know. All information we have is what we can gather from sources. We should refrain from speculation and original research. IceWelder [✉] 15:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Papers please

Hi, thanks for reviewing my edit on Papers, Please. I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with updating the links to point to the new URL and use Game Developer's new name. For instance, The Atlantic Monthly changed its name in 2007 but I wouldn't insist on using its old name for any articles from their archive published before then. However, I'm not particularly emotionally invested in this topic, so if you'd like to leave it as it is (reverted), that's also fine with me.–Ich (talk) 10:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree that it would be much work yet have little impact changing The Atlantic's name for existing instances of older online articles. When I write new articles, I tend to take the contemporary name when I know of it, simply for the sake of accuracy, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to change it everywhere else. However, changing an existing older name to a newer one also seems pointless to me. If we already know and tell the reader that an article was published under that former name, why should we do additional work to take this information away from them? IceWelder [✉] 12:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

If you look at my edit history, you'll see that I'm clearly not opposed to wasting my own time :D . In general, I see two categories of changes here: inline mentions vs. refs only. If the name is mentioned in prose ("Mr. Smith penned an editorial that ran in The Atlantic Monthly", for instance) I would be open to arguments to preserve the then-contemporary name and pipe the link to the current name. When the article is simply citing the publication's coverage, I don't see any problem with changing the reference to point to the current publication name and url. In 5, 10, or 50 years, the old name will likely vanish further into obscurity. If I were researching an article about a 2003 Nintendo game and found a suitable article on the Game Developer website, I would almost certainly cite it as-is, without futilely trying to find a now-dead Gamasutra url in the wayback machine. I haven't spent much time reading video game publications, admittedly, but I had never heard of the publication before this week, old name or new.-Ich (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I absolutely get your point, and I would never force someone to hunt down old URLs just for the heck of it. But as I noted, I don't find any value in changing away from old URLs either. We already have the information about the original location, so we shouldn't proactively remove it. Additionally, URLs aren't permanent, and we wouldn't want to update them again and again if there is nothing to gain from it. In prose, the name should always be the contemporarily accurate one, of course. IceWelder [✉] 07:28, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol \| May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Deck Nine.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Deck Nine.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

you are da best

You 217.27.45.175 (talk) 16:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

This is getting extremely frustrating

Why do you keep undoing my edits? What is all this about “template docs” and “proper parameter usage?” If you are going to undo all of my hard work while telling me to educate myself by reviewing source material, then you should at least offer a link to the template docs so I can read them so I can know what mistake I’m making. Until then, I do not want to have an editing conflict, nor do I want my IP address banned from editing. 96.237.238.203 (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Template:Infobox company:

owner - Use this parameter to list, if applicable, ownership percentages for privately held companies. ... If the company is majority-owned by a single entity and as such is a subsidiary or division, omit the owner field and use the parent field instead. Do not use the owner field to indicate top-level ownership if it differs from the direct parent.

IceWelder [✉] 17:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

What the heck, man?

I've seen your history, you seem to need to argue and force your ideas no matter what. Why are you insisting on using improper grammar on the Mortal Kombat page? Danger (talk) 19:27, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

I see that you keep undoing that person's edits, what is your issue? They're actually correct.. Danger (talk) 19:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

You're adding unsourced information claiming it is in the source, and when someone actually checks the source, you just re-add it without any source. Edits like this simply get reverted. IceWelder [✉] 20:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

So should I delete every paragraph in the wiki that has a Citation Needed tag, then? There are plenty. Some things are widely known, such as how a calendar works, and that Kyle Wyatt is the one who yelled Mortal Kombat. There are interviews with him, and he's credited with it on IMDB.

The info for Mortal Monday was moved to the wrong place, but I moved it back. Tag with citation needed if you want to, but none of these facts are disputed. Danger (talk) 17:20, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:V, virtually everything needs a source. Some articles have old cite debt that should be fixed, but that is not an excuse to introduce new unsourced material, especially when you continiously erroneously claimed it to be covered by the given source. IceWelder [✉] 17:26, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

that wasn't me, I edited that incorrect source. Can you explain why the name of the actor is being deleted? I added a link to his Imdb page proving it. Danger (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

IMDb is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia because it is likewise edited by random people. IceWelder [✉] 17:29, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

unreal. So a YouTube interview? A birth certificate? What do you need? Danger (talk) 17:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Not sure why someone's birth certificate would include their acting roles. Perhaps you should read our guidelines on reliable sources. You could use, for example, a newspaper article. IceWelder [✉] 17:38, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

and if said newspaper article is physical and is not available online, what then? 2001:569:7998:4A00:24D2:4A60:8F2F:884C (talk) 19:15, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Newspapers.com exists. It is available via The Wikipedia Library. IceWelder [✉] 19:35, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

that doesn't answer my question. 2001:569:7998:4A00:24D2:4A60:8F2F:884C (talk) 19:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

{{cite news}}. Not sure what else to tell you. There's literally a million other articles you can cross-reference; the Mortal Kombat article even uses Newspapers.com multiple times. All the time you've spent holding up Soetermans and me could have just gone into googling "Wikipedia newspaper citation" and looking into the guidelines you claim to have read. Alas, I went ahead and looked for an article and created this clipping. Now, you can go ahead and add the citation. All the necessary details -- including newspaper, page, date, title, and author -- are present. IceWelder [✉] 20:03, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. The article clipping I have cannot be found online, that's why I asked about newspaper articles not online. 2001:569:7998:4A00:3150:5D4E:AF8C:CB56 (talk) 16:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Genre of left 4 dead

Left 4 dead by valve inst characterised as forst person shooter they described it as action horror and also on steam it doesnt say its a first person shooter 46.70.111.21 (talk) 11:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

You have been blocked so many times over genre warring, it may be wise to stop that behaviour. Also consider copyediting your messages before you post so they are easier to understand. IceWelder [✉] 15:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Thats because in nowhere does it say. Left 4 dead is a shooter. Self righteousness of wikipedians is simply exhausting and annnoying 46.71.230.246 (talk) 10:11, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

"Block spacing"?

Per this; I am not sure what you mean here. Category:Block spacing templates only has three pages in it, none of which seem related to this, so I am a little confused. What does it mean for a template to "use block spacing"? As far as I am aware, the spaces that come between a parameter and the equals sign do not serve any syntactic function in MediaWiki template transclusion (i.e. {{template|foo=bar}}, {{template|foo = bar}} and {{template| foo = bar}} are evaluated identically). jp×g 09:45, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

The format style is defined as "block" in the TemplateData and it has been that way for years. The category you link is unrelated. I am aware that the spacing style does affect the way templates are parsed, but that doesn't mean it should be arbitrarily changed. This, especially when the spacious format makes it more difficult for mobile users to edit while having little to no benefits for desktop users. The "block" format is also recommended by Wikipedia:TemplateData/Tutorial, whereas there is no formal basis for using the spacious one. IceWelder [✉] 10:00, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

"Block" here presumably meaning that each parameter is given its own line, as opposed to having the entire template on one line? Retaining this makes sense to me, but retaining the formatting of whitespace doesn't. I don't know if there is a formal basis either way (the page you linked gives examples with unaligned whitespace and Help:Infoboxes gives examples with aligned whitespace). I aver that aligning the parameters makes it much easier to edit, since it clearly distinguishes the parameter names from the parameter values, and allows editors to find what they're looking for more easily. For example, if there is part of an infobox that says "Best known for", maybe the parameter is called "best_known_for" and maybe it is called "main_notability" and maybe it is called "note_claim", but if you know that the article infobox has "Yodeling" for that field, you can just see what line says "Yodeling" in the infobox source, et cetera. I am writing this comment on a mobile phone, and even in this case it is much more difficult to wade through a sea of unaligned params.

However, if the above does not convince you, I do not want to keep reverting you, and I think it may be necessary to seek some form of outside resolution, as I hold these opinions rather strongly and believe them to be correct. jp×g 10:12, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Of course, I can mostly only speak for myself, but from my experience, aligned parameters do not impact the ease or difficulty of finding some text. If you do not know which field you are looking for exactly, you would still need to glance over all plausible parameters, as you would also do without alignment. In the case of mobile devices, I had this discussion before, where I cited this example as being less accessible to editors with small screens. Since parameter alignment seems to be a rather common disagreement, perhaps this question should be elevated to a better forum, preferably with users with experience in accessibility. IceWelder [✉] 10:41, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

CDE Entertainment name

Crystal Dynamics – Eidos is the actual used name, in the official description page and in this latest press release. It is not a mere temporary portmanteau. CDE Entertainment is the less used name here, existing only in legal documents and listed as the publisher of some mobile Tomb Raider game. Merko (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

That mobile Tomb Raider game is currently one of only two products the company has released the other being Avatar Generations. The name "CDE Entertainment" is featured in both in the credits as well as in the opening; there even is a logo. It is both the legal name and the trade name. It is also used by sources such as [12] and [13]. The compound name, on the other hand, solely appears in Embracer PR and has never been used by CDE itself, nor is it the common name. IceWelder [✉] 08:57, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Question regarding Press Release

Hi! Is there a way to extract this press release from Midas Interactive website. If you check here [[14]] (August 11, 2002 capture) and go to latest news and scroll below you will see "MiDAS Is set to release Black and White click here for details" and when you click you will get 2 press releases one of which is titled "Midas sign deal for North American distribution with Bethesda Softworks". Is there a way to add the exact URL here? I've the checked the individual URL's Timur9008 (talk) 13:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

The URL is https://web.archive.org/web/20020804005132id_/http://www.midasinteractive.co.uk/news.asp but, unfortunately, the document begins this piece of JavaScript code:

if (top == self)self.location.href="index.asp?frame=/news.asp%3F";

Essentially, if you visit this page directly, it will send you back to the main page with the news page being included as the inner frame. Double-unfortunately, that particular page has never been archived. You can visit the site directly if you first disable JavaScript for that tab (in Chrome: F12 -> Settings icon -> "Debugger" -> "Disable JavaScript"). There doesn't seem to be a way to tell Wayback Machine to not run JavaScript/strip JavaScript tags (although there should be!), so including directly for the common reader may be impossible right now. IceWelder [✉] 19:54, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I've left a note on the Black & White article how to access the press release. Timur9008 (talk) 08:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello IceWelder,

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Orphaned non-free image File:Panic Button logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Panic Button logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol needs your help!

Hello IceWelder,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

You seem to force your ideas

Why are you so stuck ip with your own odead and need to forcr them all the way out. Wikipedia edoters are becoming more and more stubborn its annoying. I showed evidence if robvie reyes being an antihero and showed facta from ign and other articles. You continue to edit it however you seem to want it. 46.71.230.246 (talk) 10:10, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

u3_AhUFOHoKHY8eCLEQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1ftAIqis2mP8TYrCVBbFHh

All these and many i cant post lonks here because wikipedia is blocking these urls . But there is a a lot of info about him being an antihero in articlesmore google articles claim him to be an antihero but you dont care ! 46.71.230.246 (talk) 10:17, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Star Trek: Armada II sales figures

Hi! Do you see any way to access this info? It's mentioned here [15] (under The Eagle-Tribune - Games Maker Has Found A New Home") - "It completed its first game, "Star Trek: Armada II" which was released by Activision and sold over 300,000 copies"

I've tried searching here [16] but I haven't found it. It's possible the date is incorrect. Timur9008 (talk) 09:55, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

It may be misdated, it may be misattributed. I couldn't find the article on a whim, so consider contacting the paper directly. IceWelder [✉] 10:28, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I checked out the other days of 2002 in the archive (which is surprisingly complete) but couldn't find that article. However, all other Eagle-Tribune citations are spot-on, so I think the article was either limited to print or appeared in another local publication and was misattributed. Have you been able to contact the paper? If you do eventually find it, please let me know as it may be relevant for my Rockstar New England article. IceWelder [✉] 12:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed reply. I've messeged them today.(currently waiting for a reply) Timur9008 (talk) 17:57, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Well I e-mailed them but they said their archives only go back to 2013. Timur9008 (talk) 09:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Do they not have any copies of their older print issues? IceWelder [✉] 12:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I guess not Timur9008 (talk) 17:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Vostok Games.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Vostok Games.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:00, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Re Cavedog Entertainment

Hi! Wanted to say thanks for the revert on the talk page of that article. I wasn't sure whether or not it was real(was going trought the news articles/press releases) so I apologize. Timur9008 (talk) 16:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

No worries. I was intrigued by the cite title because I was 99.9% sure that Cavedog had this name until its bitter end. The supposed game name changes gave it away for me, though. IceWelder [✉] 16:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Not related but I found this press release [17] mentions which US sales figures for the N64 version of Mission: Impossible (1998 video game) (over 800,000 copies). Strangely this info is not mentioned in the other news articles unless I missed it. Timur9008 (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Non-government reactions to the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Non-government reactions to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Robbie reyes

Is there a proof robbie reyes is a superhero. Variable sources such as ign and cbr.com qualify him as antihero. I cant post due to wijupedia blocking urls but there is all the j fo there. You wikipedia editors are so self righteous . Show sources how is he a hero. 46.70.19.14 (talk) 01:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

It is somewhat incredible how you were blocked repeatedly for your behavior, yet every time you come back, you exhibit the same behavior but expect different results. Warring and attacking "Wijupedia" editors will not get you anywhere.

Try, for a change, opening a talk page discussion for an article before you make any changes and asking for other users' input in a civil manner. Also, as I said several times in the past, you should make your messages legible so the "j fo" comes across as intended. IceWelder [✉] 09:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I opened up talk pages everytime but no help because i got neglected multiple.of times starting from that freaking atomic heart game. Where i showed sources from very same developers page for example and yet wikipedia editers completely ignored me. Same with l4d game with steam page saying its survival horror fps but yet you continue to pursue what you think it is. As well as there are numerous games ,movies that articles in this very wikipedia showcase more than 1 genre yet , i didnt change manhunt's genre once more and left alone l4d game. Its funny. I cant even own talk pages because youre friend bb4 or whatever his/her name is doesnt acceot my appeal i cant even own talk pages in my profile best i can freaking do is not to get into account and i cabt even post links because of anonymous profile and i dont technically know how to reduce url links so that iys posted.

Now you tell am i wrong for being angry. Should i beg for forgiveness and put rhetoric movie speech so my appeal is accepted ??!! 46.70.19.14 (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

As well as ign is a pretty "legible" and authorized information 46.70.19.14 (talk) 19:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't know who bb4 but they are surely they are not my friend. The examples you cite were all cases where you already scorched the editors involved by warring and then tried to justify your warring via the talk page. You were then banned for warring but often continued to do just that on multiple other pages. When in doubt, your approach should have been to go to the talk page first and ask "The gerne is currently X, but this source it is Y. Should we change it?". In any case, you can also reach out to WT:VG and ask for third opinions. IceWelder [✉] 19:08, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Cyberlore

Do you anymore sources for Cyberlore? + was wondering can you add the logo. Timur9008 (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

A cursory search shows some hits in the Internet Archive. Some are generic listings, others actual articles. Might be worth sifting through. There are also more possible Newspaper.com clippings like [18]. I can take a deeper look when I find the time. IceWelder [✉] 20:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I will have a look. Timur9008 (talk) 16:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Video game Interview sources

Sorry for the double topic but I thought this might be of interest to you [19] Timur9008 (talk) 16:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Cheers for that, I always forget this site existed. I had used it in only one GA, now it's two :) IceWelder [✉] 15:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Also didn't know it existed. Found it randomly through link hopping as I'm going through everything. Timur9008 (talk) 15:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Hatari normalization of references

I used ProveIt to normalize the references. This isn't 'random' as you called it. By normalizing, we are making sure that all references are uniform.

I will bring this up as a discussion in WikiProject Eurovision so everyone can decide how we feel about normalizing references.

Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

The citations were, for the most part, already uniform. ProveIt just changed them into a different format. I'm not sure why this would affect one specific topical project when it is a purely cosmetic code change. IceWelder [✉] 22:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

If it is purely cosmetic then why change it? I am working on making all WP ESC articles use the same reference format. Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:04, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Why? Not all Eurovision-related articles are edited by the same people. If they have established formats, there is no need (or even incentive) to change them. IceWelder [✉] 23:07, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, though no one owns any specific pages. Just because you don't want it changed doesn't mean it can't be. See the WP ESC talk page to further this discussion. Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Claiming that I "own" the article is arguing in bad faith. I haven't significantly edited it in months and there is a lot wrong with it. I reverted your edit because, as you said, "If it is purely cosmetic then why change it?". I'm not saying that it cannot be done, but if there is no need for such a change against the established format, then it should not be done (MOS:RETAIN and all), much less on a whole slate of articles. IceWelder [✉] 23:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I apologize for suggesting you own the page.

I understand your point of view and will not change the format of the references on this page. Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:26, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

As long as all references within a single article are consistent with each other then that is what is important, as per MOS:REFERENCES. What the ref styles are within similar articles is not important. I understand where you're coming from, and of course you're free to continue with this if you so prefer as there's nothing against this in any Wikipedia guidance, but in my opinion it's not needed and it doesn't accomplish anything, especially since there is zero change in visual output as the order of field names within the {{cite web}} template is already pre-determined. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Okay good to know. Thanks for the explanation. Ktkvtsh (talk) 08:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I noticed a ton of these Proveit edits and honestly it wasted a lot of my time reviewing some of them to see what was actually changing. The output on the page looked exactly the same as far as I could tell. So I can understand this better, what was being made uniform by this and what was the benefit to editors/readers? Grk1011 (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Cybermania

Just wanted to say thank you for making the Cybermania article look presentable. Better than how I could have done it. GamerPro64 15:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm suprised I even found that many sources. But I'm sure you could have done it equally well. :) IceWelder [✉] 16:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Todd Howard and John Romero Interviews

Hi! Was wondering have you came across these before? [20]

They weren't saved there but I was wondering maybe you've seen them elsewhere. Timur9008 (talk) 08:42, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

They are archived if you disable JavaScript to avoid being redirected. ;) IceWelder [✉] 09:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! :O Timur9008 (talk) 09:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Do you see any way to archive this source? [21] Timur9008 (talk) 12:04, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Using the Wayback Machine worked fine for me.[22] I usually save with outlinks enabled (requires a free account, I believe), maybe that makes the difference. You can also point to specific pages directly (Share -> Share from page -> Copy). Those individual pages can also be saved with archive.today, albeit non-interactively.[23] IceWelder [✉] 09:24, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Timur9008 (talk) 09:35, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Catechumen (video game)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Catechumen (video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hi! I found this USA Today gaming article [24] which has this sentence "Both Al-Quraysh and Under Siege, which cost roughly $100,000 to make". The games are Quraish (video game) and Under Siege (2005 video game).I'm guessing the cost to make part is reffering to Under Siege? Timur9008 (talk) 16:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

I, too, would have said that it only refers to the latter. However, I found another source (a research paper; you get the PDF via Google Scholar) that states that Quraish cost $100,000 to make. Perhaps it refers to both. IceWelder [✉] 21:25, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! I guess it's fair not to use this bit from the article since theare is no way to tell if its both games or not. Timur9008 (talk) 02:39, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Catechumen (video game)

The article Catechumen (video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Catechumen (video game) for comments about the article, and Talk:Catechumen (video game)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Calculator (Nintendo Switch)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Calculator (Nintendo Switch) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. NegativeMP1 20:44, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Calculator (Nintendo Switch)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Calculator (Nintendo Switch) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 21:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

File:Calculator (Nintendo Switch) icon.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Calculator (Nintendo Switch) icon.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 22:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Calculator (Nintendo Switch)

The article Calculator (Nintendo Switch) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Calculator (Nintendo Switch) and Talk:Calculator (Nintendo Switch)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 23:41, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Calculator (Nintendo Switch)

The article Calculator (Nintendo Switch) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Calculator (Nintendo Switch) for comments about the article, and Talk:Calculator (Nintendo Switch)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 16:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Catechumen (video game)

On 19 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Catechumen (video game), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Catechumen, a Christian first-person shooter, was funded only in the aftermath of the Columbine High School massacre? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Catechumen (video game) (2nd nomination). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Catechumen (video game)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 12:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 12,228 views (1,019.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:29, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Special Force (2003 video game)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Special Force (2003 video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 14:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello IceWelder,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Special Force (2003 video game)

The article Special Force (2003 video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Special Force (2003 video game) for comments about the article, and Talk:Special Force (2003 video game)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 00:41, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

I've noticed that you have recently updated the Rovio Entertainment article. You removed the owner section from it. The owner field is used for higher level ownership. Thank you for your understanding. WiinterU (talk) 21:52, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

No, the documentation says that the field is for "ownership percentages for privately held companies. ... If the company is majority-owned by a single entity and as such is a subsidiary or division, omit the owner field and use the parent field instead. Do not use the owner field to indicate top-level ownership if it differs from the direct parent." (emphasis added). IceWelder [✉] 22:00, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

You misread it. It states that information for situations like we were the owner isn't the parent company of the parent company listed. Since Sega Sammy Holdings is the parent company of Sega, it will be listed as the owner. Many articles on Wikipedia use the owner field to indicate top-level ownership. For example: Universal Pictures, Walt Disney Studios, and New Line Cinema WiinterU (talk) 22:46, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

I certainly did not misread that. The relevant part is in bold. That other articles do it one way is irrelevant here, and in particular, they do it in error and against the existing documentation. IceWelder [✉] 22:49, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

The way that the articles do it is relevant. If you are being correct, then what they are doing is breaking the rules of the documentation. WiinterU (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Probably because they didn't read the documentation. IceWelder [✉] 22:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Again, you have completely twisted the documentation. They have been using the ownership field on infoboxes for top level ownership for over a decade. If they were all wrong then why did no one fix it until now? WiinterU (talk) 12:07, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

You have been on Wikipedia for over a decade. Why haven't you fixed this until now? WiinterU (talk) 12:07, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I'd love to know how I "completely twisted the documentation". I quoted it above, and the phrasing is pretty direct, making for very little wiggle room. While I have been on Wikipedia for some time, that does not mean I read (let alone maintain) its millions of articles. For reference, around 1,800 pages are currently on my watchlist, not including major film studios as they are not in my area of interest. I fixed the few occurences you cited to comply with the documentation, and perplexingly you are the only one to contest this. Did you read the documentation? IceWelder [✉] 12:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Calculator (Nintendo Switch)

On 29 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Calculator (Nintendo Switch), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a $10 calculator was among the best-rated Nintendo Switch games? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Calculator (Nintendo Switch). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Calculator (Nintendo Switch)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 21,140 views (880.8 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Croteam

Hi IceWelder. Sorry about this one. I actually went to Serious Engine, thought I was on a page about the engine, then scrolled down and saw a "Games developed" section that included TTP2 (which uses Unreal Engine). If you know what I mean. Anyway, thanks for fixing by reverting. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:9FC1:E9CF:3AEB:C211 (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I get what you mean. Serious Engine is not currently notable, i.e. there is not enough coverage of the engine itself in reliable, secondary sources. However, since there is still some coverage, we can cover it on Croteam's article, and "Serious Engine" redirects to that section as a result. IceWelder [✉] 17:12, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Special Force (2003 video game)

On 3 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Special Force (2003 video game), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the militant group Hezbollah released a video game in 2003? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Special Force (2003 video game). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Special Force (2003 video game)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 20,364 views (848.5 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

XnGine

Hi! I know XnGine was redirected a while ago but this source(which I showed before) talks about it

https://web.archive.org/web/19970607134759/http://www.pcme.com/intrview.htm

+ this https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-miami-herald/132888984/

If not I will keep looking for more. Timur9008 (talk) 14:53, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Interviews generally don't count towards notability, and the Miami Herald piece is passing at best. Consider covering the engine in a dedicated section in Bethesda's article instead. It doesn't really need a separate article. IceWelder [✉] 15:34, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. Timur9008 (talk) 15:35, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Not related but I've checked Centropolis Entertainmnet's old website hoping there would be a The 10th Planet press release that was on Bethesda's old website(found nonthing).Do you know how can I can contact The Free Library to ask about the press release(s)? Timur9008 (talk) 18:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Farlex (the company behind the site and The Free Dictionary) has an email listed on its homepage. Could be worth a shot. IceWelder [✉] 18:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Just messaged them. Thanks! Timur9008 (talk) 06:36, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Well they did not reply. Was worth a shot. Timur9008 (talk) 08:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crystal Dynamics

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Crystal Dynamics you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Prosus Wikipedia page

Hi there. I work on the communications team at Prosus and see that you have previously updated/made edits to the Prosus Wikipedia page. I'm getting touch because the current CEO mentioned on the Prosus Wikipedia page is incorrect. Bob van Dijk is no longer CEO of Prosus and Ervin Tu is the current interim CEO. Please see links below to news sources from Reuters, Bloomberg and TechCrunch confirming this. Would it be possible to update the page?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/naspers-prosus-ceo-bob-van-dijk-steps-down-2023-09-18/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-28/prosus-s-new-ceo-needs-answers-to-same-old-problems-tech-watch?leadSource=uverify%20wall

https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/17/prosus-naspers-ceo-bob-van-dijk-abruptly-steps-down/amp/?guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLnVrLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIrRFCKMPWfFBq2rDpr_wQHpaeBlJpVpRxG8EgGvZmmFObgi7GDJyHWS4V56T9X8W74HI0wy6sDRerxy7tz-QFrbNXqSZesaQxzdfdE6EYu7STnqGT3W-iql1X1GMrHuuO3kfyBYWSK9oNUcDcEEkyzMb6fmHlbOvzQPAjrzzoI0&guccounter=2 77.102.185.77 (talk) 04:46, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

The reviews template is not required

Please read {{Video game reviews}}, which says "This template is not required." and "If you only have a couple of such reviews which could be used to fill the table, consider foregoing the table". Please do not add it to every article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Could you clarify how I "add it to every article"? You removed the table from one article, citing size as the sole reason. I disagreed with this notion and reverted your edit in this one instance. The template is not required, yes, but it is quite helpful when there are 5+ scored reviews. That the table was, at that point in time, longer than the prose text tells me only that the text was lacking. Specifically, it is currently more of a WP:QUOTEFARM. This is not the table's fault. IceWelder [✉] 14:00, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Serious Sam: The First Encounter

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Serious Sam: The First Encounter you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Serious Sam: The First Encounter

The article Serious Sam: The First Encounter you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Serious Sam: The First Encounter and Talk:Serious Sam: The First Encounter/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Re:BGS Foundation date

Hi! I believe this was mentioned in the NoClip documentary hence the linked source. At least that's where I remember hearing this. Timur9008 (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I thought so too but I couldn't find it in the transcript (and I didn't have the time to watch the whole video for that one number). What it does say is that the two companies were split. Maybe I'll have another look tomorrow. IceWelder [✉] 18:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Serious Sam: The First Encounter

The article Serious Sam: The First Encounter you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Serious Sam: The First Encounter for comments about the article, and Talk:Serious Sam: The First Encounter/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 23:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello IceWelder:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2400 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions (and the ride)!

Dear IceWelder,

I originally planned on emailing you, but this is the only method for me to reach out it seems. Apologies if this is not the place to leave this type of comment. Yesterday your contributions to the CCP Games page indirectly led me and my boyfriend down a befuddling rollercoaster that kept us up until 1 am. To preface, we are not Wikipedians nor are we writers, nor do we even play EVE Online. All we wanted to answer was why on Earth there were 13 citations for a single sentence regarding Sparc. It was a journey, and we just wanted to say thank you for your work!

We will talk about this night for years, so just know your edits from years ago left a positive experience courtesy of the butterfly effect.

Best, Chuddy Chuddy (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

@Chuddy Chuddy: I'm very happy to hear that! :) The edit you reference is almost six years old (time flies!), and I actually added a bunch of hidden sources so I could expand the section later. I guess I never got around to doing that (and someone un-hid the sources at some point) but it seems like a great topic to write about. Maybe you just gave me an idea for my next article project. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 13:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Subsidiaries & Divisions edit.

Can’t help but notice you changed my edit on the XGS page. What’s the problem with using an Ampersand? 320th Century (talk) 12:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Per MOS:AMP:

In normal text and headings, use and instead of the ampersand (&)

Regards, IceWelder [✉] 12:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

GA Notice

GA Notice
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Serious Sam: The Second Encounter in which you've been a major contributor, and has been nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. XTheBedrockX (talk) 19:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
· · ·

Your GA nomination of Serious Sam: The Second Encounter

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Serious Sam: The Second Encounter you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of XTheBedrockX -- XTheBedrockX (talk) 19:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Serious Sam: The Second Encounter

The article Serious Sam: The Second Encounter you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Serious Sam: The Second Encounter for comments about the article, and Talk:Serious Sam: The Second Encounter/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of XTheBedrockX -- XTheBedrockX (talk) 09:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Pitfall DYK

Hey IceWelder! I've added some alternative suggestions for the DYK for Pitfall! if you are able to take a second look. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

C-SPAN source archive

Hi! Do you see any way to archive this C-SPAN source [25] that is used in the Robert A. Altman article? Timur9008 (talk) 08:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

The site is still active, though it seems the video does not play in any archive (I made a new one to make sure). This seems to be a problem on Wayback's side because M3U fragments are not archived properly. Most likely an issue for their support team. IceWelder [✉] 09:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for checking either way! Timur9008 (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wicked Witch Software.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wicked Witch Software.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Crystal Dynamics

The article Crystal Dynamics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Crystal Dynamics for comments about the article, and Talk:Crystal Dynamics/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Shooterwalker -- Shooterwalker (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Date format

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

In Nintendo article, your edit just changed the Use mdy dates with inappropriate reason and without consensus in September 2016. The article has been evolved using predominantly mdy date format, so it looks like your edit violates WP:DATERET. Please change this article to mdy, and then seek consensus on the change to the mdy consensus version, which has been stable for decades even before using the Use mdy dates. WAccount1234567890 (talk) 13:00, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

While I can't speak for my seven-years-ago self, I assume that I implemented the date format based on the company's location (an interpretation of MOS:DATETIES). Regardless of the circumstances, the edit was seven years and more than 2,000 revisions ago, so the issue will have reached implicit consensus by now. If you feel stronly about it, feel free to open a new discussion on the article's talk page to seek a consensus for mdy dates. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 13:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Where do you think your editing doesn't violate the rules? I would like to point out that there's no reason the consensus should apply to the edit that looks like violate the rules. Because do you think every article that has been violated the rules over the years need to be consensus? You have said reason as the based on the company's location (an interpretation of MOS:DATETIES), but why do you think the edit complies the WP:DATETIES? It says articles on topics with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the date format most commonly used in that nation, but do you think Nintendo has a strong ties to the English-speaking country? And implicit consensus applies until it is disputed or reverted, so it is not. Also, you have written your reasons not very clear. I don't see this as one of the articles that should to be changed by consensus. Don't you agree with me? WAccount1234567890 (talk) 16:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not saying that my edit did not break DATERET back then, nor that it satisfies the current wording of DATETIES. Again, this was seven (7) years ago. Since then, that article has seen 1,553 revisions from 459 users with no dispute in this regard. If I changed it to mdy now, it would be no more useful (or consensus-based) than my change to dmy back then; it would solely be bureaucratic. I'm not watching the article, nor have I significantly edited it in years, and I don't plan to return just for an arbitrary date format change. As I said, if you feel this is an important issue, you can always seek renewed consensus. With a strong case, this should be fairly easy. IceWelder [✉] 17:14, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Consider my rationale that change does not require consensus for change, because it violates rules. Do you agree? WAccount1234567890 (talk) 17:40, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

The change has attained implicit consensus over seven years. A revert now, regardless of how the situation arose, would go against the MoS page you cite. The time you spend discussing this with me here is much better spent on the article and its talk page. IceWelder [✉] 17:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

No, the MOS:DATERET says the date format chosen in the first major contribution in the early stages of an article should continue to be used, unless there is reason to change it based on strong national ties to the topic or consensus on the article's talk page.

And here is the first major contributor (or first month–day date format that has been reverted).

So you are would go against the MoS, not me, right? And with that, even in terms of period, mdy has been used longer. Also, Nintendo was a good articles nominee in 2006 with mdy date format. Therefore, this cannot be said to be a implicit consensus because objections have been raised regarding violation of the guideline. Also, consensus always can't come to just by looking.

For this reason, I see no reason to go to the article and seek consensus. It should be changed without consensus. And I'm just hearing your thoughts since you changed this date format. WAccount1234567890 (talk) 18:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I have read the MoS, and it says that the format "should" be retained. I am aware of the article history, and I can see that it was not retained in spite of the MoS. This was seven (and I cannot stress this enough: 7) years ago. This has been a non-issue since. In my opinion, seven years of acceptance is implicit consensus. What you are doing is bureaucratic and does not strive to actually improve the article. I could, at any point, claim to have enforced WP:IAR, but I simply do not care enough for the Nintendo article to want the date format be one way or the other at this time. I will continue to point you to the article's talk page, but you can of course choose to ignore my advice and edit boldly. In the latter case, you may or may not be reverted. Either way, I see no place for me in a continued discussion, especially when arguments just keep being repeated. From my side, I consider this matter closed. IceWelder [✉] 20:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

You keep ignore that: The date format chosen in the first major contribution in the early stages of an article should continue to be used, unless there is reason to change it based on strong national ties to the topic or consensus on the article's talk page. This is very important to prevent WP:EW.

And again, by your maintenance rationald, Nintendo has been used mdy for decades since 2005. With that, even in terms of period, mdy has been used longer. And the WP:EDITCON says until it is disputed or reverted. I'm not doing bureaucractic. I want to emphasize that your date format edit, even with WP:IAR, does not strive to actually improve the article. It doesn't prevent you to improve the article with your reason. If anyone is improving, then that should not be you, but it is me. Policies and guidelines should not be ignored without reason. Also, your edit was made without very clear reason. If there is an objection to this, it seems like a matter to be discussed in the rules. Your rationale is that seven years of acceptance is implicit consensus. This is not, because it is not specified in the rules and mdy has been used for 10 years. Also, Viewing itself is not a guarantee of consensus. You changed it without discussion.

Despite that, You still consider this issue to be resolved through the article's talk page. Consensus should not be required for anyone wanting to revert mdy, because the unilateral edit has been violating for years the WP:DATERET. WAccount1234567890 (talk) 07:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I think I made my opinion clear above. If you think it is a needed chamge, do something about it. Please do not waste our collective time repeating the same arguments over and over. I do not wish to discuss this further. IceWelder [✉] 08:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How do I use consumer feedback as sources?

I used a page highlighting different metacritic user reviews from EA’s recent sports games explaining in detail of their complaints. Do I need to to go to the multiple comments and screenshot it? Or video? I used the reviews of games in which identical complaints were made by consumers regarding those different games. With those games being “identical as last year” and “license needs to expire”. And “won’t buy another ea game again”

I’m not the best at punctuation, and am inexperienced with wikipedia but there isn’t much consumer feedback on the page of “criticism of Electronic Arts” in comparison to other articles like BP or McDonalds. Which I find extremely odd.

How do I format factual consumer complaints about a corporation? Thanks! 2600:8803:7812:6200:14C4:9721:5F9:BB0 (talk) 11:12, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

We generally only do this when it has been covered and qualified by a reliable secondary source. User-generated commentary is rarely cited directly per WP:USERG. IceWelder [✉] 11:16, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

so there’s no way to use criticism from consumers saying the same rhetoric? If so, That’s a shame. especially since customer feedback is important and integral to change. Is a collective metacritic consumer review score not enough? Would just specifying the score be counted as a source rather than detailing the exact same criticism instead? I mean, metacritic is literally the exact same source above my reverted comment. I’m just confused 2600:8803:7812:6200:14C4:9721:5F9:BB0 (talk) 11:38, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Metacritic user reviews are explicitly mentioned by this guideline:

Although review aggregators (such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic) may be reliable when summarizing experts, the ratings and opinions of their users are not.

As I noted, they can be mentioned if covered by reliable sources, as seen at Calculator (Nintendo Switch). These sources not only (usually) provide the appropriate context but are also good pointers as to whether and why such a disparity is notable. IceWelder [✉] 11:47, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

thank you for the feedback. I appreciate your time responding to me. 2600:8803:7812:6200:14C4:9721:5F9:BB0 (talk) 11:49, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Only Up!

Hi there! In your recent edit to the Only Up! article, you added the sentence fragment "They also contacted Aboulicious for the creation of a replacement of the ." Could you please fix the sentence? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that! Should be fixed now. IceWelder [✉] 18:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Serious Sam: The First Encounter

On 24 November 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Serious Sam: The First Encounter, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the production of Serious Sam: The First Encounter, all of its developers were conscripted into the Croatian military? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Serious Sam: The First Encounter. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Serious Sam: The First Encounter), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Serious Sam: The Second Encounter

On 29 November 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Serious Sam: The Second Encounter, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a developer on Serious Sam: The Second Encounter doubled its frame rate by removing one line of code? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Serious Sam: The Second Encounter. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Serious Sam: The Second Encounter), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hi! I was planing to create a page for Project Runway (the Atari game based on Project Runway) Do you know if these sources are reliable?

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/leisure/games/gamesreviews/8316014.review-project-runway-wii-29-99/

https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/whats-on/find-things-to-do/game-review-project-runway---3059361

https://www.commonsensemedia.org/game-reviews/project-runway Timur9008 (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

They are all part of major media publishers, so I think they should be usable. IceWelder [✉] 18:40, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! I went ahead and created the page. Timur9008 (talk) 11:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

About that edit you reverted...

Hey! So I noticed you reverted this edit on Left 4 Dead 2. May I redirect you to The Dark Knight and its notes? There are references, as little as four, contained in explanatory footnotes.

With this, please reconsider that revert. Thanks! Nicole. Oh, she's elegantly clandestine... ✨ 12:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think that the format of some article should have an effect on an unrelated one. In fact, the Notes section you link looks very poor with "tidyings" mixed in with actual explanatory notes. I stand by my prior opinion that the sentence's sources could simply be trimmed, as the claim is not overly complicated and is likely covered by any one of those sources. IceWelder [✉] 13:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

That seems like a more reasonable course. However what references should we trim? Pretty sure one of those sources cover the content of what half a dozen sources couldn’t touch.

What I’m trying to say here is that one source could have the answers that were originally spread out across like six sources. Nicole. Oh, she's elegantly clandestine... ✨ 05:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The easiest way is to just check the claim made and the content of the sources. When I just did this, I was very surprised to see that the article is absolutely loaded with over-formatted quotes from the game itself. In "Overview", for example, there are five quote refs back-to-back. I trimmed a few superfluous refs at the two contentious spots for now, but if this article is ever going to be properly fleshed out, the references will need to fully overhauled anyway. IceWelder [✉] 08:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Rockstar Games article assessment

hi, i've started a topic on the WP:Companies talk page regarding importance assessment for Rockstar Games. feel free to join the discussion. thanks Pdubs.94 (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

December, 7th 2023

I would like to explain something to you. I did a majority of the edits that were reverted in the morning and I accidentally put "end date and age" instead of "end date". You might notice that on the other person's talk page I said it was for readers convenience. Reminder, I had just woke up and forgot what the defunct section said. A majority of defunct pages use "end date and age" so someone might have to fix that. I apologise for the inconvenience. WiinterU (talk) 19:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I cannot see where a majority of pages do that. Surely some do, but other stuff exists. There is no need to apologize, though I would recommend checking why a large swathe of articles don't do that particular think before you apply it semi-automatedly to all of them. IceWelder [✉] 19:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 20:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors

The article Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors and Talk:Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 22:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors

The article Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors for comments about the article, and Talk:Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of NegativeMP1 -- NegativeMP1 (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Found the Flashpoint Productions news article!

Hi! While not the same press release I found it [26] :D Only took a few years :O Timur9008 (talk) 16:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Awesome! IceWelder [✉] 12:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Crystal Dynamics

{{ivmbox |image = Updated DYK query.svg |imagesize=40px |text = On 17 December 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Crystal Dynamics, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Crystal Dynamics was the first developer for the PlayStation outside Japan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Crystal Dynamics. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Crystal Dynamics), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

No nonsense editor barnstar

always time to say thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.25.142.225 (talk) 22:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

thank you and a barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		38 Studios Logo

File:38 Studios Logo.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.25.142.225 (talk) 22:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Merry!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello IceWelder, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024.
Happy editing,
Timur9008 (talk) 17:15, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. Timur9008 (talk) 15:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

NHRA Drag Racing developer

Hi! Can you look into this? [27]. Seems to be conficting info here. According to the sources used in the NHRA article the game was indeed developed by Tantrum [28] Timur9008 (talk) 08:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, there were two "Tantrum"s, Tantrum Entertainment (team-tantrum.com) that developed the NHRA game, and Tantrum (without Entertainment; tantrum.com) that was a division of Interplay. The edit you link seems to correctly separate them. IceWelder [✉] 09:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! That makes sense. Timur9008 (talk) 09:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)