Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard


Shortcut

This talk page is for discussing the reliability of sources for use in video game articles. If you are wondering if a video game source is reliable enough to use on Wikipedia, this is the place to ask.

When posting a new topic, please add a link to the topic on the Video Game Sources Checklist after the entry for the site. If an entry for the site does not exist, create one for it and include the link to the topic afterward. Also, begin each topic by adding {{subst:find video game sources|...site name...|linksearch=...site URL...}} in order to provide other users with some easily accessible links to check up on the source.

Click here to start a new discussion thread


GMR Magazine[edit]

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

GMR is a Ziff Davis US magazine that provided computer and console game reviews from 2003 to 2005. The magazine had an editorial board and the magazines were closely linked to online content on the 1Up Network website, a reliable source under WP:VG/S. Given the publisher, plenty of the contributors turn up in other reliable sources, such as Greg Orlando, Che Chou and Ryan Scott. The only thing that is unusual is that the magazines were sold in Electronics Boutique. But it's a Ziff Davis publication and the review scores suggest this had no more of an impact on editorial independence than compared to other magazine reviews. You can find all the issues on the Internet Archive.

sportacentrs.com (non-English source)[edit]

Find video game sources: "Sporta Centrs" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

SportaCentrs.com (LV Wikipedia) is a Latvian (non-English) media that publishes information about sports and also eSports.

The site was launched in 2002 and they have a professional team of journalists about sports and esports: https://parmums.sportacentrs.com/redakcija.html

GameMeca - a Korean gaming source?[edit]

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

I've been having a debate on the Ragnarok Online talk page. And without spewing too much, as I'm exhausted; I'd like if enough people (credible, mods & admins preferred ofc) can verify the validity of this as a source as it doesn't appear in the source list whatsoever, reliable nor unreliable. However, based off what this site has to offer, they have information on things dating back as far as the early 2000's. 90's even it seems. Articles written in 2002 and stuff. To me, clearly this has been an organization operating for a long time and has plentiful of credible news and sources-to that has been under our radar that can provide info on much more things other than just the game I'm attempting to add additions to the article too. Especially under the "Net Power" game magazine section. It's so much history & coverage on gaming and old school MMOs on that site.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4ReeZy (talk • contribs)

GameMeca was established in 2000 by Jeumedia, a publisher that had a hand in creating video game focused Korean magazines including Game Power (1992), PC Power Zine (1995) and NET Power Zine (1999). So the website's history dates all the way back to the 1990s. I'm yet to check their editorial team to see if they have had notable people, but it is true GameMeca has a longer history and a more plausible claim to fame than a lot of Korean websites out there. --Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 04:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reassessing Hardcore Gamer post-Valnet acquisition[edit]

Hardcore Gamer, a currently reliable source that has been considered such for nearly two decades, was purchased by Valnet around a year ago. Knowing the status on Valnet sources here, a new discussion on the status of Hardcore Gamer is needed. Even if they weren't purchased by Valnet, the source was last assessed in 2006.

From what I see, while they publish a lot of game guide content, they still seem to publish decent reviews and appear to publish higher quality content than sites like CBR on average. Maybe it could still generally be used to demonstrate notability even after being purchased by Valnet? Some opinions here would be appreciated. λ NegativeMP1 20:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They still seem okay for now. I agree that their content is higher quality than other Valnet sources. That may change in the future, but if they're still decent today I wouldn't preemptively downgrade them. As a personal anecdote, I really liked Marcus Estrada who covered a lot of niche Japanese/Visual Novel stuff that otherwise wouldn't get much English RS coverage. But it seems like he was a casualty of the Valnet acquisition, so RIP using him as a source. CurlyWi (talk) 18:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Let's not be too purist about it. Valnet might be a red flag for some people, but it's not an instant disqualification. Organizations don't instantly change the moment they are acquired by new owners, and Hardcore Gaming seems to be holding its level of quality for now. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I guess that would explain a few things. Some of their articles are terrible. I can't provide links because it's just a passing thought I've had while trying to source articles. If the ratio of good to terrible becomes worse, I guess we can revisit this. It'd be a pain in the ass for me, though, because I lean on this source more than I'd like to demonstrate notability for indie games. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't affect previously reliable coverage, but might affect things going forward. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:36, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Game File[edit]

Find video game sources: "Game File" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Game File is a newsletter written solely by Stephen Totilo, the former editor at Kotaku (at least, during its period where there was no question to its reliability). Some parts of it are for paid subs, but most of the rest, spot checking, are accessible as long as you register your email. — Masem (t) 01:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reading it for the last month or two. It's quality writing. No idea how newsletters like this fit into Wikipedia standards for reliability though. Sergecross73 msg me 02:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gamerant[edit]

Is gamerant considered a reliable source that can be used as a reference? Infrabel1 (talk) 14:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's already on the list with pretty detailed notes... Sergecross73 msg me 15:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To make life easier for anyone else checking, Game Rant is listed as a Situational Source with the following note.
> Consensus is that it is not a high quality source, to be treated with caution and excluded from BLP pages. Topics of low potential for controversy such as general pop culture topics or game information are allowable areas. Sometimes erroneously spelled "Gamerant".
...Though as an aside, the first line of the note makes it sound like its describing an unreliable source to me with no info on why it's even situational included but I can see there has been plenty of discussion on it DarkeruTomoe (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two more sources to add among the reliable ones[edit]

I ask to add the following sources, https://www.gonintendo.com/, and https://www.spaziogames.it among the lists of reliable sources, thank you. 151.34.66.194 (talk) 07:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've not looked into Spaziogames as it's in Italian, but Go Nintendo doesn't seem like a reliable one unless you've got evidence to the contrary?
No editorial policy that I can see.
Authors are all pseudonyms like Editor in Chief "rawmeatcowboy" so can't check the staff history
No qualifications mentioned giving them expertise that I can see
They don't even seem to be on OpenCritic DarkeruTomoe (talk) 19:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we've discussed GoNintendo in the past and landed on unreliable. Its usually a non-issue - they write very little original content. It's almost entirely "reposting" pre-releases or stories from other websites, in which, you can just use the source they're using if its reliable. I can only think of like one time that they reported on something that no one else had. Sergecross73 msg me 21:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cultured Vultures[edit]

I've seen this being used by multiple articles, so listing here so we can conclude if its reliable or not. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 02:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I remember coming across this source. IIRC, they get a bunch of random people with no prior experience to write for them. So, I'd say that they're unreliable. — 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 12:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'd not disqualify for that alone. Other sites deemed as reliable and situational pick up students and those with no/little experience. They just don't advertise it. With a strong enough editorial staff, it could be acceptable and they seem to be trying to train people in-house.
Whether their output and editorial process is strong enough for that might be another question. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 19:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning towards unreliable too, based on the fact that they proclaim the inexperience of their writers as a feature. If I saw stronger evidence of editorial overview, I might reconsider. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CBR[edit]

Just out of curiosity, is there any reason why CBR is listed as less reliable than other Valnet sources? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been wondering the same thing. I think it should be treated like the other Valent sources; reliable pre-buyout and situational post-buyout. You can argue that it should be generally unreliable since 2023, due to the AI content, but otherwise, I would have it marked situational post-buyout. MoonJet (talk) 06:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above, though I will mention the claims AI content seems to have been a false flag, as we haven't seen signs of it and Valnet themselves stated it wasn't something they were pursuing (yet). Until we actually see evidence, I don't see a reason to go full unreliable at this time.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 06:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quick quote that I posted elsewhere before, but if they're not using AI, then I'd question their editorial standards even more when adding in 'hallucinated' information like this example:
> I saw them recently mentioned for an inaccurate article where they've used ANN as a source but seemingly made up some extra details that can't be found on the ANN article or the original Japanese source such as English voice acting. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 08:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A few quotes from other times this has been discussed that may add context
> CBR was a great source that had many experienced writers and received numerous awards for their journalism throughout the 2000s and early 2010s. In 2016, they were acquired by Valnet and most of their writers left as they shifted to churnalism
>This is very much rumor mill right now, but this morning on Twitter, CBR founder Jonah Weiland shared a post, shared by another former CBR editor, of the CBR account, which was apparently removed, claiming that most of the news editors who had not already resigned had been fired as the site moved further into AI-driven content.
> I saw them recently mentioned for an inaccurate article where they've used ANN as a source but seemingly made up some extra details that can't be found on the ANN article or the original Japanese source such as English voice acting. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 08:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PC Invasion[edit]

Another untouched source for WP:VG/S. Is PC Invasion reliable? Supergrey1 (talk) 02:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final Weapon[edit]

Final Weapon is also not yet mentioned in WP:VG/S. Is it reliable? Supergrey1 (talk) 02:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick points to help evaluate:
The CEO Noah Roman isn't particularly qualified in terms of journalism/etc instead having qualifications on the ICT side, but the Managing Editor Raul Ochoa has experience as a News Writer at Games Rant (Valnet, Situational) and a degree in journalism which is somewhat promising at least.
There's no Editorial policy that I can see. They talk a little bit about their ethos and having standards that writers need to meet but that's it.
They note that a large portion of their writers started without any experience.
Their content seems good overall from what I've seen. They're on OpenCritic and have quite a bit of industry access which does indicate a certain minimum level of professionalism and notability, though shouldn't be taken as evidence alone. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 08:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unreliable - no editorial policy and largely uncredentialed writers... Sergecross73 msg me 20:48, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GameLuster as a source?[edit]

Currently working on Draft:Papa Louie (game series) and found a great review by GameLuster, but didn't see this listed under any sources or in this talk archive. They seem to have a dedicated writing/senior staff where they do both reviews and game news: https://gameluster.com/

Would love to get input on this source and how reliable it may be. Squiddyonwiki (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beebom[edit]

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

Is Beebom reliable or not? Supergrey1 (talk) 14:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Video Chums[edit]

Find video game sources: "Video Chums" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Is Video Chums a reliable source? The creator of the site, A.J. Maciejewski, is listed as a source in several articles. The.Kotora (talk) 06:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Blast (Brazilian Website)[edit]

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

Is Nintendo Blast a reliable non-English source? It's currently used as a source in 10 articles as of this post. The.Kotora (talk) 18:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They have staff. However, they apparently don't have any notable credentials. Some mention having graduated from some universities, but most of them just mention being "big fans of Nintendo" or something. Maybe it could be useful for Brazilian-related topics, but I think there's better options. Skyshiftertalk 19:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On some spot checks, I see Victor Vitório also writes for PSX Brasil (no reliability discussion that I can see but on MetaCritic) and the other high level staff only seem to work for Nintendo Blast and the presumably related GameBlast.com.br. At least one of their regular writers writes for an unreliable site (Ivanir Ignacchitti at NoisyPixel) but the rest of the 10 or so I checked didn't seem to write elsewhere and some only had a few reviews under their belt.
I can't see anything like an Editorial policy which isn't too promising either.
More promising is a few mentions of high education or experience with things like having had books published or some game development experience. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 19:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

80 Level[edit]

Find video game sources: "80 Level" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo
There is seemingly no prior discussion on this source. Is it reliable? — 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 19:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources&oldid=1224819568"