Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 22

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Discussion

Find video game sources: "TrueAchievements" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "XboxAddict" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Generación Xbox" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Xbox Tavern" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "TheXboxHub" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

So...related to Flying Tigers: Shadows Over China and the AfD, there are multiple websites with questionable reliability. Posting here for a clearer consensus on whether any of these sources should be used. Xbox Addict seems to consist of two people right now [1], Generacion and TrueAchievements don't even have staff pages. Tavern has a staff page here [2] and XboxHub here [3]. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Reliable/Situational Google Searches

I feel that these have gotten a bit ragged and it should be noted that they have limitations and don't represent the extent of either type of sources listed on this page. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 02:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

How so? --Izno (talk) 11:12, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

At least from what I can see, the searches do not include all of the sources that are in the reliable sources or situational sources lists, and the search misses a lot of sources in my experience due to the inability for it to display more than 10 pages. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 15:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

"inability for it to display more than 10 pages" This has to be an issue on your end. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I've never had it display more than 10, in multiple browsers. --Izno (talk) 15:58, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I think my words were confusing; I meant 10 Google pages, 10 per page. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 16:26, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Google limits custom searches to the first 100 results. czar 17:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, my bad, I misunderstood. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 18:27, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Computer Entertainer magazine

Hi guys. I have discovered a new old source called Computer Entertainer magazine, including from the dinosaur days of video gaming when there were almost no industry magazines, and video game reviews were often done in newspapers! It ran from at least 1981 to 1990 I think. That's the range of scans that are said to be archived at archive.org. The only problem with that recent archive is that it hasn't been archived properly with inline page-flipping and OCR search yet, but rather as a couple of huge PDFs to download and scroll through. A quicker glance of a few articles is seen at this site.

Until then, I'm creating new citations for each issue but reusing that same url like this: <ref name="Computer Entertainer July 1985">{{cite magazine | magazine=Computer Entertainer | title=Computer Entertainer | date=July 1985 | volume=4 | issue=4 | url=https://archive.org/download/ComputerEntertainer/ | accessdate=July 2, 2019}}</ref> I have recently cited the magazine in my recent major expansion of the NES launch and R.O.B., which you can find if you search those articles for "computer entertainer". You'll see other modern sources I added about the NES launch.

Computer Entertainer has major, broad, competent coverage of the entire home computing and video gaming industry. Every issue I've seen has at least one page each on Atari, Apple II, Macintosh, Commodore 64, console games, and others. It has thorough individual software reviews with a rating system. Very notably and uniquely, they attend CES with aggressive coverage including rumors and preannouncements, so we can better sort out the murky facts such as the different NES launch libraries in test markets and in nationwide full launch. Their writing tone is professional and sometimes also touched by the fanatical, passionate, and humorous—like when they welcomed the launch of Computer Entertainment magazine which seemingly aped their name.

So I wanted to let you all know about this wonderful source, the recent article expansions, and ask experienced vetters if we can add it as a VGRS which I assume is a certainty. What other magazines cover the 1980s crash era, especially the NES launch? There's the Japanese Beep! which covered some AVS and NES but isnt in English and there's this Video Game History Foundation archive of NES launch. Thank you. — Smuckola(talk) 09:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

• Support per nom. I'd also support Beep! being reliable, even though it was pretty niche and not in English like you said. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support per nom. BEEP! looks reliable as well. Namcokid47 (talk) 18:01, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support per norm as well. I've used BEEP! as well in various articles so, its a reliable source of information like Computer Entertainment. Roberth Martinez (talk) 21:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Easy Allies

Find video game sources: "Easy Allies" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

This has previously been discussed in May 2016. Back then, there appeared to be a broad consensus (as they'd only recently been formed) it was worth waiting to see how things panned out. Lack of a website (reviews were only published on YouTube) was also listed as a concern. Since then, the publication has been included as a member of the game critics voting jury for The Game Awards, the E3 Game Critics Awards, and has been listed by OpenCritic as their Most Trusted Publication. These demonstrate that the publication has gained a reputation as a reliable source within the industry. The publication now also has a website, to which full review texts (alongside a review score) are published, which mitigates the previous concerns regarding it being a YouTube-only publication. On this basis, I think Easy Allies should be considered reliable instead of situational. Domeditrix (talk) 13:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

References

• Support - I'm in. Zero Serenity ^{(talk - contributions)} 14:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support per nom. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:15, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support; add to this that their staff entirely consists of former editorial staff from GameTrailers. I do think we may need to add a caveat that not all their material is usable here, as it's more of entertainment than anything else (such as their show Achieve it Yourself and certain podcast segments). Their reviews, impressions, previews and interviews should be usable, useful material, however.--Alexandra IDV^talk 13:31, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

MobyGames

Find video game sources: "MobyGames" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Bringing this from discussion at Template talk:Video game reviews. For those who are unaware, MobyGames now has weighted review aggregation separate from its user-generated scores. This could potentially be useful if no GameRankings or Metacritic score exists. For instance, Knuckles' Chaotix has no score on GR or MC, but it does on Moby ([4]). JOEBRO64 20:56, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• Tentatively support the review aggregation scores, but it is still unreliable in all other aspects. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
• Note that the reviews are all user-curated, just like everything else on MobyGames, so the score presented is heavily influenced by user interaction, not on the site's own doing. I would believe that this is something we generally would not want. For whom it might matter, this feature has been in use for at least a decade, though was formerly referred to as "MobyRank" (as opposed to the user review-generated "MobyScore"). Lordtobi (✉) 21:40, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• If this is true and it’s user generated, then that’s going to make it a really hard sell for anyone... Sergecross73 msg me 23:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• IIRC the site checks the scores provided, so it wouldn't be a USERG issue. Here's the FAQ. JOEBRO64 23:52, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

• Of course they do, but last time I checked they go through the same approval process as all other contributions, meaning that users check what other users contributed. The real difference is that the external reviews might be linked from MobyGames, unlike any other claim made on the site. Yet, the contributors control which reviews appear on the site, as MobyGames itself does not gather them on its own. Lordtobi (✉) 00:07, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

• Yeah, that sounds similar to Gamefaqs. They do “check” submissions, but more in a “confirming it’s not just submission that is just a text file with the word ‘poop’ in it” more than doing the review work of a professional editor. Sergecross73 msg me 00:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I worry about the opportunities for sampling errors to exist with such a system. A little-known game could have a couple positive reviews submitted by publicists, while negative reviews are not submitted. As it's a pretty niche site, it's unlikely that such tactics would attract much heat or necessarily be picked up, especially without editorial scrutiny. Domeditrix (talk) 08:24, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

• MobyGames has been very helpful for finding reviews for video games, mainly arcade games, but everything else about the site I'd consider unreliable. Namcokid47 (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

• I think it should be identified as unreliable, but also note that it could help lead people to reliable sources that would be otherwise hard to find, either due to the format of the sources or the platform. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 15:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
• Yeah, Moby is a useful tool for finding reviews, cover art and screenshots, but is not an RS on its own, similarly to how we wouldn't call Google a reliable source.--Alexandra IDV^talk 13:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Gamest/Monthly Arcadia

Find video game sources: "...site name..." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · URL... LinkTo

Gamest was a long-running Japanese magazine that covered arcade games, notably those by Sega, Namco, Konami, Capcom and SNK. They've also done interviews with development teams and given out awards for games. Began in 1986 and abruptly stopped around 1999 when the publishing company went bankrupt — most of the writers for Gamest would then go to Enterbrain and create Monthly Arcadia, which as far as I know still continues. Lots of old Gamest issues are present on the Internet Archive, so I think it would be helpful for sourcing more obscure arcade games. I'd say both of these are perfectly fine to use as sources, but I want to hear other's opinions on it first. Namcokid47 (talk) 17:45, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Namcokid47:Um, Arcadia went kaput on February 28, 2015. Either way, Gamest may be one of the best Japanese gaming magazines from the old era. I would recommend anybody interested in seeing more issues of the magazine to support Retromags user JimmyD with his titanic task of scanning issues of Gamest and Neo Geo Freak: https://www.patreon.com/japanese_magazines_scans_project Roberth Martinez (talk) 19:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes on Gamest. Not too familiar with Arcadia but most printed magazines of their caliber are reliable and with the connection you made to Gamest, I wouldn't have any concerns using them. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 21:07, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@TarkusAB:Arcadia is the spiritual successor to Gamest, as many editors from the latter moved on to the former. Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Player.One

Find video game sources: "Player.One" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Part of IBT Media and formerly a sister site to Newsweek.[5] EIC profile can be found here; he was formerly an editor for Newsweek and IGN. Lordtobi (✉) 21:54, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

• Support per nom. They are more esports focused than most other gaming news sites as well, which helps since we generally lack that on VG/RS. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
• Looks pretty weak to me. czar 20:25, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
• If my understanding is correct, IBT is considered an unreliable source for use on Wikipedia, so being part of IBT Media doesn't sit that well with me. The Newsweek and IGN connections are a bit reassuring, but I think this needs a stronger case. JOEBRO64 01:28, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Too strict on AppSpy and 148Apps?

Find video game sources: "AppSpy" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "148Apps" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I think there are notable smartphone video games out there but it's becoming harder to verify or to improve them because we're not allowed to use certain sources dedicated to their coverage. I think we are asking for a lot from them based on editorial or review policy. Some of that information may not be readily available to the public. And I've never seen someone question IGN or GameSpot's policies or staff. I find this relevant because a former IGN reviewer was caught plagiarizing. And this wasn't that long ago. These sites also existed for a long time and policies may have been updated and changed.

I do think it has some merit that AppSpy and 148Apps are endorsed by the same parent company, Steel Media, and some of the key staff of Pocket Gamer are credited as editors. AppSpy has good decent coverage on their staff, but 148Apps is incomplete and only has the current ones. But even though they dont have a complete list readily available, the older reviewers are still credited and accessible. Unlike IGN where their older content is listed as just "IGN Staff".

Also, Pocket Gamer features content from both sites.[6][7]. (hopefully i dont look like a total idiot)Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 08:15, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

148Apps isn’t marked as unreliable/unusable. It’s situatiomal. Sergecross73 msg me 13:13, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

"Also, Pocket Gamer features content from both sites." Pocket Gamer is also owned by Steel Media. Its like how Giant Bomb and GameSpot are both owned by CBS. GamerPro64 13:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: yes, I'm proposing we label them completely reliable, and remove the situational (until proven not to be reliable). So what's stopping us from considering these completely reliable? And if it is proven to be situational, shouldn't we establish what to avoid? The "Other" sections look like they're used for sources without any consensus and were inconclusive. These sources were challenged by Czar and since then, i've hesitated using them. Even though they have content that could benefit these articles.

@GamerPro64: I still believe it holds merit considering every sister site seems to be considered reliable too (IGN/GameSpy, Giant Bomb/GameSpot, Eurogamer/USgamer, Hardcore Gaming 101/Gamasutra). And i'm aware Giant Bomb is situational, but only for user generated content like its wiki. The key staff for Pocket Gamer is also involved with these sites, and not as mere writers and reviewers but as editors. What is your opinion on that?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

What about these sources makes them reliable for statements of fact? Sharing a parent company with another source is not an affirmative reason. The parent business has no bearing on the site's editorial content unless there is evidence of such. Media companies can own publications that range from serious journalism to clickbait rags. czar 19:54, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I still have other points too already mentioned.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:59, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Czar: I think the biggest merit these two sites have is that both of these sites have editors by the main contributors to Pocket Gamer. So even if its not the exact same editorial policy, they may have similar standards, if the key staff of Pocket Gamer is involved.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 01:43, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Reliability rests in editorial chain, not individual contributors. Someone with a BA in journalism and prior work experience at a newspaper might write more reliable copy, but if they're working at a blog that does not check or retract work based on accuracy, their qualifications ultimately mean little. It has more to do with the publication's own standards and the company of its peers. czar 04:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Can you provide an example of any reliable sources in the list that show off editorial chains/policy, so i know what to look for? For example, IGN, GameSpot, or EuroGamer? Or maybe since these share the same parent company, Pocket Gamer would be the ideal source to take a look at their editorial policy/chain.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 04:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Eurogamer (announcement); IGN; note that even Pocket Gamer's, in comparison, doesn't offer much. We don't have an explicit checklist for RS but consensus usually forms around several factors: the pedigree of the editors, the publication/staff's industry reputation, and editorial/ethics policy. Really hard to see how AppSpy or 148Apps holds a candle in either regard. czar 20:17, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

And if an editorial policy would be present, we would consider it reliable?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 21:27, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Not necessarily. As I said, it's usually a balance of several factors. E.g., an editorial policy won't automatically make a hobbyist blog's contents reliable. It's basic hedging of risk: no source gets it right all the time, but what sources have systems of trust in place to be the most reliable for statements of fact? Those are the high-quality sources to which we defer as an encyclopedia. czar 04:20, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Czar: can you make your comment a bit more comprehensible? I didn't understand the your last two sentences.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 04:32, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

All sites make mistakes but some sites are more reliable than others and since our credibility as an encyclopedia is as good as our sources, we try to use the most reliable sources. We look to some markers of reliability—editor pedigree, industry reputation, written policy—as general signs of trustworthiness for statements of fact. There isn't a checklist for qualities a site must have—the assessment is holistic. czar 04:56, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

For Editor Pedigree, all three websites share the same lead editors. Pocket Gamer has more editors i admit. For industry reputation: what industry reputation could we look into? I dont necessarily think the smartphone video game industry and the console/PC video game industry are the same. The only space i see these sites being used regularly is in aggregated scores, and reviews from the app stores too, if that counts for anything. The only thing i believe is missing is just a well-thought out editorial policy.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 05:21, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Gaming Trend 1

Find video game sources: "Gaming Trend" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

The staff is here [8], and review system here [9]. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Inside Gaming Daily

Find video game sources: "Inside Gaming (Rooster Teeth)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Inside Gaming (Machinima)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Also known as just "Inside Gaming". There was a previous discussion before about this source here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 10#A few sites for Sonic X, a current FAC which i believe provided great evidence for it to being at least being reliable situationally.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 22:03, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

I dont really mind if its considered reliable or not, but i just need an answer for my ongoing GA review for Mercury Hg.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 09:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

"Navigating Wikipedia’s Politics For Video Game Sources"

• D, Billy (August 11, 2016). "Navigating Wikipedia's Politics For Video Game Sources". One Angry Gamer. Retrieved September 1, 2019.

From the peanut gallery. I don't think it does a very thorough job but alas, if you're interested in reading something in-between a critique and a report, I just happened upon this and haven't seen it posted before. czar 20:21, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, pretty poorly done, but I’ve come to expect no less from any person or website with the words “Angry” or “Gamer” in it. Still, thanks for posting, I always find it interesting to see how the outside world views Wikipedia, even stuff like this. Sergecross73 msg me 20:28, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

There's kernels of good observations, but it sure is bad otherwise. I've come to expect it from places like AOG, The Quartering, and Niche Gamer, though lol - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 21:01, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey, remember when a translator made an obvious joke on Twitter about how he would make the characters "twice as gay" in Amagami, and One Angry Gamer reported on it as if it were real and as if there really were a localization of a PS2 game in development in 2019? That site is not above making things up for the sake of outrage clickbait, and is not usable as a source for anything.--Alexandra IDV^talk 00:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Gaming Street

Find video game sources: "Gaming Street" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Relatively new website authored by seasoned journalists (including Escapist Magazine, The Verge, and Destructoid) and industry specialists. Has a high emphasis on business analyses. Lordtobi (✉) 17:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

HLTV

I think that this website should be reconsidered as a source for CS:GO (I am the person who drafted HLTV, just as a disclaimer). It's by far the most used CS:GO website for news. They are also very often the only source which still exists of news dating back to the 2000s. As for their writers, they are paid to write, and not contributors from the form. One of the, MIRAA, was a part of the Esports Hall of Fame nomination board, which consists of trusted people from the community such as Paul Chaloner and Richard Lewis (journalist).

As for the actual content of the news, they almost always report uncontroversial facts. Many of the articles cited by users on Wikipedia are news articles talking about a match result, something which can't really by lied about. Their ranking is used by some tournament organisers, and CS:GO analysts consider them to be the "official rankings." This doesn't have much to do with their whether or not their news is trustworthy, but they are trusted by Valve as the matches on HLTV are integrated into the official CS:GO game.Lxxl (talk) 04:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Shmuplations

I want to suggest that Shmuplations be considered a situational source - that is, one that can be used if direct Japanese magazine sources are not accessible. I feel that the owner has demonstrated the ability to read and translate Japanese adequately, and has demonstrated access as well. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 17:27, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Considering that Japanese print sources for old video games are a very difficult thing to find, and that I've used it many times in the past for articles, I don't agree that it should be listed as "situational". Namcokid47 (talk) 22:51, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

I think what Abyrn is saying is that we shouldn't use Shmuplations if the original source can be found (which is not always going to be the case). I would agree, but it should be noted in the source that a Shmuplations translation was still used. JOEBRO64 23:09, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I must have misunderstood. Full support! Namcokid47 (talk) 23:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

I've used Shumplations as additional aid when the sourced interview/article is found (which is not easy BTW, as it is most likely in magazines such as Gamest or Micom BASIC Magazine). I would still recommend using Shumplations as a source until the respective original citation is found and placed into the article. Roberth Martinez (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Support for the situations provided above. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:02, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Neo Geo Freak

This was brought up in an earlier disucssion by KGRAMR, so I became a bit curious and decided to look at it. Neo Geo Freak was a popular Japanese magazine from the mid-1990's that focused on Neo Geo games and other SNK hardware, featuring interviews and other developer info that would be really useful for articles. Lasted from 1995 to 2000, although there was a short revival in 2005. Many of the writers are from Gamest and its successor magazine Monthly Arcadia, and some of them would later leave to write for both of those magazines. Like Gamest, many issues are available on the Wayback Machine. I'd definitely consider this to be reliable, although I am interested to hear other's opinions on it. Namcokid47 (talk) 23:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

• No problem with it. Seems fine to me. JOEBRO64 23:31, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
• Reliable. Lots of great exclusive SNK info and interviews. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 23:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
• I was planning on using NEo Geo Freak too. I also consider it reliable as it has a lot of exclusive content.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 07:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
• Reliable. It has lots of interesting Neo Geo content that is not commonly seen in other Japanese gaming magazines. Roberth Martinez (talk) 16:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Talking about Neo Geo, is there a chance somebody knows if there is creation information in regards to the character of Terry Bogard? The article doesn't have much but considering his current importance due to him being a Smash character, there might need to give him more coverage from any of those magazines. I tried checking the SNK wiki and there they didn't have anything.Tintor2 (talk) 01:50, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Gamester81

Find video game sources: "Gamester81" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I am considering reviewing First generation of video game consoles for GA. I am pinging Crimsonfox, the nominator, to let them know that. I checked some of the sources to assess their quality, and one of them, Gamester81, caught my attention. I have never heard of the website or the person running it, so I am already skeptical of the website's credibility. The reference in the Wikipedia article links here, and I found no evidence of ethics, credentials, etc., either by clicking on About or on the name of that article's author. I say the source is unquestionably unreliable. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ 18:08, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, I'd missed it when checking. I completely agree with the fact the source isn't reliable. CrimsonFox ^talk 20:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable per nom. Namcokid47 (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Nours / Miraiken Blog

Find video game sources: "...site name..." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · URL... LinkTo

Nours was an old Japanese gaming magazine published by Namco that began in 1993. Covered many of Namco's arcade and home console games, commonly having developer interviews and other useful information that I think can be used for articles. Was renamed to B-Nours in 2005, later to Side-B and then Side-BN following the formation of Namco Bandai Games. Became Side-876 sometime in the late 2010's, and continues to this day. Almost every issue of the magazine is on Bandai Namco's official Japanese website], so finding issues will be easy. I'd say this is a good primary source, and would be great to use for stuff like release dates and development info. Namcokid47 (talk) 03:27, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

• I would also like to bring up another BN-related source I found, "Miraiken Blog". Began in July 2007 and went kaput in April 2014, and was ran by an official Bandai Namco spokeperson and other Bandai Namco employees. Covers news on upcoming titles and development info much like Nours does, mainly for stuff relating to Tekken, Pac-Man, Galaga and Idolmaster. Seems pretty alright to me for use as a reliable primary source. Namcokid47 (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Some sources I've gathered.

• Nerd Much - I've noticed articles from Janet Garcia, who worked on Kotaku and IGN. Editorial policy notes that they have an editorial team that works towards accuracy and vetting of sources: [10].
• Mic and [11], both of which are owned by Bustle Digital Group. Websites under its umbrella are stated to undergo efforts to maintain that content is accurate and verifiable: [12].
• Retronauts - Owned and contributed to by Jeremy Parish, who has written for Electronic Gaming Monthly, USGamer, 1UP, and others. Checked in with Parish, he notes that there is no submission process for other writers, so it should be marked as situational for articles by Parish.

Just wanted to throw up a few sources that I think are good. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 02:18, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Definite support for Retronauts (in fact, I'm rather confused they haven't already been listed as one yet). Not really sure about the others, so I'll leave that up to other editors. Namcokid47 (talk) 23:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Didn't notice this comment, thanks for leaving one. Hoping to get more input on all three. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 06:44, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

GameDaily.biz

Find video game sources: "GameDaily.biz" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

A successor site to GameDaily (a reliable source) launched in 2018 by Greenlit Content. Key staff includes editor-at-large James Brightman, who also founded the old GameDaily and was the editor-in-chief of GamesIndustry.biz, another reliable source. Lordtobi (✉) 18:59, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment on reliability of VG Chartz

There is a request for comment on the reliability of VG Chartz. If you are interested, please participate at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § RfC: VG Chartz. — Newslinger talk 02:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Hive4media.com

Hive4media.com(renamed later to home media retailing) Website formerly operated by Video Store Magazine. It's there online version. Covered primarily the home entertainment industry but also news related to games. Some examples [13], [14], [15] , [16] John Gaudios of Shacknews, The Holywood Reporter, CNN, Variety, Entertainment Weekly etc covered the news there. Among others. Can this be added&listed as Defunct websites that also covered games at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources ? Timur9008 (talk) 12:52, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

RacketBoy

Find video game sources: "...site name..." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · URL... LinkTo

Website established in 2004 that focuses on video game history, alongside reviews for arcade and console games. They've been referenced by a plethora of reliable sources, including 1UP.com (they've even listed Racketboy as part of the 101 Favorite Game Sites list), Ars Technica, Game Informer, GamePro, Joystiq, Kotaku and Wired. Doesn't appear that user-generated content is present either. Seems okay to me. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 14:37, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Did You Know Gaming?

Find video game sources: "Did You Know Gaming?" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Website and YouTube channel that focuses on development and facts related to video games. They claim to have been featured in multiple press outlets such as Huffington Post, MCV, Game Informer, MTV, Nerdist, IGN, Gamespot and the Houston Press. The issue I have is that their website and YouTube channel are entirely based on user-submitted content, which leads to a lot of their content having false or misinformed information in it (such as how Space Invaders caused a coin shortage or how the creator of Pac-Man left Namco in disgust over his paycheck). Really no editorial staff, either. I think this site is unreliable. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 13:35, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Depends - Obviously blog or user-submitted content is reliable, but some of their contributors like Liam Robertson are generally reliable. So I’d say a blanket unreliable on their user-submitted content, with the reliability of the remaining (mostly video) content being decided on a case-by-case basis, such as a reliable author (like Robertson). Toa Nidhiki05 12:26, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I mean, Liam has written for some reliable sources, but even then he just kind of freelances, and most are kind of in our “fringe” range, like ComicBook.com or NintendoLife. Sergecross73 msg me 13:02, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Liam is able to get interviews with developers for DYKG pretty easily though; I can name Sonic Extreme, The Flash: The Fastest Man Alive, and Batman: The Dark Knight right off the top of my head. JOEBRO64 15:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Very true, he definitely has connections in the industry, and I do enjoy some of his work personally. But in terms of Wikipedia, we’re still talking about a freelancer working for a website with...not much else going for it in the ways of RS. Hasn’t WP discussed this website before? I feel like we came to a rough agreement that it was usable when a different RS was covering it (which does seem to happen with some of his stories.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:42, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I remember we discussed Liam's contributions to Unseen64 maybe two years ago. He may be freelance but when everything he says is covered in established sources, you can't help but conclude he must be a reliable journalist (although SPS most of the time) Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 17:06, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that matters. The editorial apparatus is the more important part of what determines a reliable source versus the author. If that's missing, you're arguing at best for allowing the writer as a situational source along the lines of WP:SPS. The publication remains broadly unreliable. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 17:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

+1 This. czar 15:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Copying this over from a GA with a similar issue raised by the same person:

1. Robertson is noted for his work on Nintendo Life (a reliable source).
2. ComicBook.com says that he is "known for having scoops and reporting on them reliably in the past". ComicBook.com
3. RedBull Games, a reliable source, notes him as "extremely informative" and mentions his "independent reports on unreleased games" and his "tremendous access to insider info".
4. Eurogamer, a reliable source, favorably cited his video on the cancelled game Gnomageddon as an authoritative source on the subject.
5. Digital Trends, a reliable source, noted him as having a strong track record in being accurate.
6. IGN, a highly reliable source, also cites his work on this subject favorably and authoritatively.
7. On Sonic Extreme, a good article that passed just last year, his work is cited authoritatively by IGN and Digital Trends; these two reliable sources, at minimum, find multiple of his videos on the subject authoritative.
8. https://kotaku.com/the-superman-game-that-killed-a-beloved-game-studio-1766032573 Kotaku], a reliable source, credits his work as authoritative on both Superman and BIONICLE.
9. GameInformer, a reliable source, cites his work authoritatively. Toa Nidhiki05 15:35, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, these sorts of sources, especially that last source - that’s what I’m talking about. When Game Informer puts out a story on it. That’s the time where the content is usable. Otherwise, it’s a WP:SPS issue. DYG has no editorial team or policy, or anything that makes them professional publication. Sergecross73 msg me 15:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

His contributions to Unseen64 is fascinating, I love reading that website...but Unseen64 isn’t considered an RS either. I think that’s another one that’s largely just used when other RS’s cover/verify their work. Maybe that the source I was thinking of in my last comment? Anyways, I kind of think both should be handled that way. Sergecross73 msg me 17:29, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I'd argue Liam Robertson could be reliable (so anything that credits him as an author), but not this site. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:36, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

VGMO

Any reason why the composer biographies aren't considered reliable? I'm just curious. JOEBRO64 20:00, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Just looking through a few biographies, they're sourced to user-generated content like VGMdb and IMDb. Some even say "Authorised by..." which taints their independence. Woodroar (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Makes sense, thanks. JOEBRO64 20:46, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Inven Global

Find video game sources: "Inven Global" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I had brought this up back in 2017 but little discussion. As the site is now somewhat in the news (around the Hearthstone ban over Hong Kong protests), it reminds me we haven't decided on this. The site's major coverage are video games and esports in SE Asia. It has an editorial team [17] and frequently used by our other RSes for interviews for non-English speaking players in esports. --Masem (t) 22:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

• Support per nom. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:28, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Looks fine and dandy to me. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 19:25, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Gaming Trend 2

Find video game sources: "Gaming Trend" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Seems like a fan website. Has a review system [18] and staff list [19], but nothing indicates that this is a reliable source to use for. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:25, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

• Unreliable - Very much a fansite. There isn’t really anything on it that supports the staff having any sort of reliability. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 19:32, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Before Mario

Find video game sources: "Before Mario" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

This is a blog owned and written by Erik Voskuil, documenting toys, video games and other products made by Nintendo prior to the release of Donkey Kong, Super Mario Bros. and the Family Computer. While blogs are usually considered unreliable, this one I think has some merit as his work has been featured in publications such as GamestTM, Kotaku, Retro Gamer, N-Zone and Nintendo Dream magazine. Eric has also published the book Before Mario and has contributed to the books Nintendo Complete Guide - Toys, Gunpei Yokoi - Vie et philosophie du dieu des jouets Nintendo and The History of Nintendo Vol. 1. The blog itself is also pretty well-written and contains a treasure-trove of Nintendo-related information, much of which isn't documented anywhere else online as far as I can tell. This is a great resource if you ask me and I do think it has some reliability to it, but I'd like to hear what others think of this. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 17:11, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Support, i think if other reliable sources recognize Before Mario, it should be considered a reliable source.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^{Chat Contribs} 19:23, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

That usually helps, but sometimes reliable sources cite places like NeoGaf and other rumor mills and that doesn't make them any more reliable, so this isn't something that always guarantees reliability. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Very true, I agree, but in the case of Before Mario Voskuil and his work are covered by these websites/publications in rather great detail, as opposed to them just making a small, passing mention of him/his blog. I myself would say that can help establish some sort of reliability/notability, but again I'll wait what others have to say. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 16:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Indie Game Reviewer

Find video game sources: "Indie Game Reviewer" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo Currently used in a GA Ancient Trader, doesn't seem reliable at all. From what I can see, there is no staff page at all, just an "about" one [20]. Had an article deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indie Game Reviewer. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 21:28, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable, there seems to be no editorial oversight whatsoever and with the seemingly little effort that you'd need to put in to write reviews (see Contact) I highly doubt anyone is payed. Stefvanschie (talk) 19:38, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable by a long shot. They have almost no editorial oversight and it's ridiculously easy to write and post reviews on there. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 04:03, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Serebii

Find video game sources: "Serebii" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Website that seems to mostly focus on Pokémon related news. The website seems to have been featured in two reliable sources currently (as far as I can find), one from USgamer and one from Polygon, with the former being an interview with the site's owner and the latter a simple reference to it. The interview specifies the website as a "one-man operation" and from looking at the website I can't seem to find any kind of editorial oversight. I'd also say that one reference from a RS isn't really enough to make this a reliable source, so I'd want to say that this website is unreliable.

• Unreliable per nom. Looks to just be another fan site with nobody involved having any real experience. Plenty of other sources cover Pokemon stuff heavily anyway, so I don’t feel we’re at a real loss here. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 19:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
• Unreliable - it’s a fansite written by ”enthusiast” amateur writers. Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
• Unreliable as a fansite, but also unnecessary. Pokemon is a huge and massively popular franchise, so anything important always gets covered by plenty of sources anyway.--Alexandra^IDV 17:04, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Multiplayer.it

Find video game sources: "Multiplayer.it" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Potentially reliable, it has it's own article on it:Multiplayer.it, seems to be up since 1999. There is a staff page [21], but no editorial policy. It seems to also give coverage to mobile games, which is needed in a lack of such sources in the recent times (mostly relying on Pocket Gamer/Touch Arcade/Gamezebo). Jovanmilic97 (talk) 16:59, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

• Previous inconclusive discussion: archive 14. --Izno (talk) 17:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
• Reading the Italian WP page on it, it seems to carry some weight in the industry, being officially partnered with E3, Gamescom and Comicon. I do think that, like with IGN, we need to be careful with content from before the early 2000s - as itwp notes, it started as an amateur project in early 1999 before becoming a serious company with editorial staff.--Alexandra^IDV 17:29, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, seems it started having an editorial from 2002 apparently. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

• Support for content after 2002 (as per noted above). The website seems reliable, it has proper staff and after reading some articles, they seem to be accurate. Stefvanschie (talk) 09:48, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

HobbyConsolas

Find video game sources: "HobbyConsolas" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

This is a very old gaming magazine, thus, a reliable source for califications at Metacritic. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

We already have agreement this one is reliable, per the comment I left on the talk page of the reviews template. --Izno (talk) 15:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Nintenderos

Find video game sources: "Nintenderos" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I see Nintenderos as a reliable source, and I seen several califications from they at Metacritic. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Whether a source is listed by MetaCritic is irrelevant when it comes to determining reliability on Wikipedia. MC is much more lenient on publications, mainly focusing on import reviews and popularity instead of its fact checking and staff behind it. The source itself does not appear reliable as I was unable to find any kind of staff listing outside of a vague, mostly empty contact page, so I’m voting this as being unreliable. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 20:58, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable, the website seems to be mostly formed by hobbyists, with only one person on the staff team actually graduating in journalism. On their 'Criteria' page, they also state: "To prepare the news we use various sources: (...) from unofficial sources such as forums or social networks", which doesn't sound like a good thing in my opinion. (Note that this is translated by Google Translate.) Stefvanschie (talk) 10:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Nintendo Insider

Find video game sources: "Nintendo Insider" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Yet another Nintendo-specislized gaming website. I see this as a reliable source, as Metacritic considered them in their califications. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I don’t see how it being listed on MetaCritic gives it some reliability. MC has plenty of reviews for games by sources that have been confirmed unreliable per consensus. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 20:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable, looking at the team there is only one person who writes articles and everyone else writes game reviews, so this seems to be mostly a one-man operation. Stefvanschie (talk) 10:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Vandal

Find video game sources: "Vandal" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Another old gaming-specialized website, and a reliable source. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

• Probably reliable; it is part of El Español and has actual staff. Lordtobi (✉) 10:58, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
• Reliable per Lordtobi. I don't see any red flags here, and could be useful for expanding/adding to the articles. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Meristation and 4Players

Find video game sources: "Meristation" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "4Players" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Considering both sources' reliability is questioned in an AfD ongoing now, it's the best action to start a discussion for both.

4Players is a German online website that exists since 2000, now owned by Computec. Staff list is on [22], and currently included in Template: Video game reviews.

es:Meristation is a Spanish website that exists since 1997, and a part of a newspaper Diario AS. Staff list is on [23]. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 14:51, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

• Reliable for Meristation, in my opinion. I consider Meristation to be reliable. They covered the N-Gage a lot and they are still around today. Truth to be told, i'm surprised the website was founded in 1997. Roberth Martinez (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
• Reliable for 4Players. Their website seems to have proper editorial oversight and quickly looking at some of the open job listings, they require them to have proper degrees, so I'm assuming at least most of the current staff also have similar forms of knowledge on their jobs. A quick look through their articles and I can't find anything out of the ordinary either. Stefvanschie (talk) 15:21, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Perfectly Nintendo

Find video game sources: "Perfectly Nintendo" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · Nintendo LinkTo

Website that seems to focus on Nintendo related news. As far as I can find, the website has been mentioned in one reliable source so far, from Nintendo Life. Looking at the website, I am unable to find any mention about editorial oversight. There are several people working on the website, with one full-time writer who has been working in the video game industry as a writer for eleven years, as per the We need your support page. I am unable to find who those other people are or what they do or if they have any kind of experience in journalism. They also mentioned financial issues on that page, so I'm assuming the people working for that website aren't paid. Because of these reasons, I think this website is unreliable. Stefvanschie (talk) 16:28, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

• Unreliable - per above. Another Nintendo fansite run/written by people who’s only credential is “liking Nintendo”. Sergecross73 msg me 00:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
• Unreliable per above. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 07:42, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
• Unreliable per the above reasonings. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:38, 20 February 2020 (UTC)