Talk:Assassin's Creed III

PC release
Note: EU PC release date =/= UK PC release date! The PC release date listed in the article only refers to the UK release date. NOT the european release date as implied by the [EU]. The continental European release date is on November 22nd.

Emg611 (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Plot summary
The plot summary seems a bit too lengthy, I'm trying to trim it down to the extent I've played, to avoid spoiling the game. Anybody who's completed the campaign feel like trying to cut down some excess information? Bobfordsgun (talk) 15:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Not trying to hide his heritage
He is dubbed Conner not in an effort to hide his heritage but simply because Achilies can't pronounce Ratonhnhaké:ton. He spends the entire game with classic markings and adornments of the Diné people. This should be changed. Padillah (talk) 21:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * But does Achilles not make a point of mentioning that it's better Connor be perceived as a Spaniard or Italian rather than a Native American? Dubbing him "Connor" is not specifically cited as to hide his heritage but surely that was a factor? Bobfordsgun (talk) 22:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, good point. I do remember something about that. Now I need to replay that mission so I can see what exactly happens. Padillah (talk) 19:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Masonic signs
In subterrain patchs there are various G masonic logos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.79.86.163 (talk) 19:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * And? --Jasca Ducato (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

"Connor" is not trying to hide his native American heritage. He is actually hiding his name for two reasons. The first is that Achilles can't pronounce that since he does not have Native American heritage. The second is so that Connor can keep a low profile during the points in which he must not be found as a "savage" as the redcoats called him. His secondary name (Connor) is not kept and his original name is occasionally mentioned throughout the progress of the game. You will find that as he goes back to defend his tribe ( which he attempts many times throughout the game ) they still call him by his original name. Connor himself does not always call himself Connor. He would prefer his original name, but he thinks Connor would suffice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.106.126.47 (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Video Games set in 2012
I know there's already the 21st Century one, but should be added?
 * Well, if other articles have the two categories (i.e. "set in the 21st century" and "set in 20xx") then I don't see why not. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok; I added it. DarkToonLink (talk) 11:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Davenport Homestead Location
The article states that the Davenport Homestead in AC3 is Davenport, New York. This would make sense, if not for the fact that on the AC3 map, the homestead is north of Boston, in northern Massachusetts if not New Hampshire. It is unlikely the homestead is related to the town in New York. It's probably just a coincidence. Or I could be wrong and then AC3 map really isn't accurate, and the homestead was re-positioned for some reason. I'm just wondering whether it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phillies9513 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Isn't Achilles' last name Davenport? I thought that was why it was called that. It definitely isn't near NY... DarkToonLink (talk) 22:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The Homestead is in Massachusetts, not New York. With regards to the name, I will be honest and say I think it is highly unlikely an individual of Achilles descent could conceivably own, let alone have named after himself, a manor the size of the one depicted in-game without it being left to him in a will or some such arrangement. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 10:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * At that particular point in time he seemed to have a decent amount of autonomy, but it's equally possible as an assassin it was left to him by his mentor or that he named himself after the region, either way he also has wealth plus...ya know, a history where Rodrigo Borgia was trying to take control of your mind. Either way, it isn't in New York.

Pivot Points
Two users believe that the narration about pivot points is part of the story when its an optional quest for a trophy and to unlock cheats, the voice clearly isn't speaking to Connor and without citation there is nothing to say it is speaking to Desmond. It's like saying the Multiplayer Abstergo training is part of the story. The pivots are a side mission. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yea -if it was similar to, say, the Eden movie from AC2 after witnessing/solving all the glitches (an optional quest), where its importance is clear to the story, it would make sense to include it, but its not apparent here (perhaps in AC4 or whatever sequel, at which point we can revisit it). --M ASEM  (t) 17:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Except that the side missions are optionally embarked upon. The voiceover will speak to Desmond/Connor at the end of the game, regardless of whether or not the player intends to complete the missions. Even with that said, the side missions themselves are still canon. The information belongs in the plot section. Masem: You mentioned the Eden video we see after completing the glitches and say that it warrants mention on the AC2 article, despite the fact that it is never referenced again. So why is it "important" to the story? --Jasca Ducato (talk) 12:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I would also like to point out that the MP Abstergo training programme is a part of the story, and is entirely canon. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 12:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The MP isn't part of the main plot though. The voiceover clearly isn't speaking to Connor because he is dead, and speaking to Desmond is OR since until a sequel comes out he is apparently dead, and noone put him into an animus to go find cheats, and the person speaking is addressing someone already aware of whatever it is they are doing. It's as viable that its a riff on the earlier mention of saving memories for others to experience them and this is some Templar reliving them, it's all theory. There's no indication it is a main story mission because all of the main story missions are isolated to the Sequences 1-12. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The glitches we learn later were put there by Subject (whatevernumberhewas) that is a key character for Desmond's side of the story, and demonstrates the world at the time of Those That Came Before and their interactions with humans. As best we know we don't know what the importance of the pivot points are at this time ; AC4 or whatever followup may state that at which point we can re-add it in but we don't know enough yet. Elsewhere, but not part of the plot, we can mention that completing the pivots or MP parts give additional story details but those at this time aren't crucial to the larger plot to include in the "Plot" section. --M ASEM (t) 14:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The MP storyline may not be directly related to Desmond's story, but it is a canon plotline covered by the game, nontheless. None of what you have said changes the fact that the pivot point voiceover will, regardless of whether you intend to complete them or not, always trigger the first time the story is completed. Whether you believe the pivot points are relevant to the plot or not matters little, the point that matters is the eventual 'connection to the cloud' that occurs. It doesn't matter who exactly, the VO is talking to either. Darkwarriorblake: You are making assumptions that Desmond has to be in an Animus to view his ancestors' memories, which we know from ACII is not the case (i.e. the Acre scene). You will both notice that the current text makes mention of neither Desmond or Connor, only that a VO is speaking (so you're arguements re both Connor and Desmond being deceased are irrelevant to the point). --Jasca Ducato (talk) 12:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, slightly off topic, but the alphanumerical code given when you connect to the cloud (5523C23D2553) has been translated to mean (via base64 and Caesar cipher) "Ouroboros", which IMO and in this context, suggests the idea of continually reliving memories continually and without the need for outside intervention. I'm not suggesting this go on the article as it is OR, but it's food for thought. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 13:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * None of that explains why it isn't a side mission when it is not a sequence. There is a clear epilogue and tehn there is a section related to unlocking cheats. If you don't have to be in the Animus to relive memories, doesn't change the fact that the voice isn't speaking to Connor so Desmond can't be reliving those memories. External information about a decoded pivot related piece of information doesn't make the information related to the main plot about Desmond and Connor which was over the word limit as it was.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it's not a memory? It is an epilogue mission however (the achievement for completing which, will not unlock unless this is done). Connor didn't hear this mysterious, god-like voice suddenly come booming from the sky telling him to look for metaphysical icons which give him supernatural powers to change the weather and whatnot. The VO is speaking to whoever is viewing the memories (which could be anybody related to Connor, not just Desmond; indeed, it could be William). Just because it isn't a genetic memory doesn't negate it from the plot, otherwise we have to delete all trace of Desmond and the modern-day from the plot. I would also like to point out that in previous games, the prerequisite to unlocking cheats was successfully completing the Sequences with 100% synchronisation, are you saying we should exclude those from the plot sections because they also unlock cheats (named in-game as Animus hacks, further supporting their canonicity).


 * Whether that extra paragraph pushes the plot section over the word limit is a different matter entirely, and can be countered by trimming down the wording from elsewhere in the section. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 13:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The Plot section should be a simple summary of the plot enough to understand the fictional events in the game to comprehend the rest of the article as well as related topics. Clearly all events (both from Desmond's and Connor's POV) up through the main story post-game sequence are important to include. The player receiving the message "Ouroboros" after completing a side mission has no relevance to the rest of the article -- yet. Consider, this is comparable to the first game ending, where you're left in the lab, free to use the animus, but the credits don't actually start until you go to your room and turn on Eagle Vision to see all the end of the world messages left on the wall, which the various story and emails you've read tie into  - and now 4 games later we know to be a critical element of the game. So of course we include that. Now, here, we have no idea if "Ouroboros" has any meaning directly to the planned story arc (I can certainly postulate its meaning being important if all the long-term story events are just part of some cycle), but it's just a coy word right now. Similarly, the Abstergo story revealed by the MP side isn't necessary to understand the rest of the article. We can certainly meaning that by playing the MP game, the player learns more about Abstergo's history and motives, but we don't have to delinate them any more than being the modern-day face of the Templars. --M ASEM  (t) 16:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Opening sentence
User:Djonathan 16 believes he knows better than everyone else and is edit warring over the opening sentence even after I asked him to start a discussion and linked him to two separate discussions I myself started, one with a member of Project Videogame here and one AT Project Videogame here. There discussions were opened days ago which gives an example of how long he has been edit warring for his particular perspective. For brevity's sake (too late for that) I will post my side of the conversation here. Firstly, no game would be described as "genre"|"design"|"genre", secondly the opening should discuss the genre, Torchiest made a good point that it cannot be expected that people will automatically know what open world is and it is discussed AND linked elsewhere in the lede where it is discussed and given context. Djonathan's argument is that people might not read the lede. Well gee, they might not read all the plot either, best put that in the first sentence too. In fact, let's move everything to the first sentence, can't expect people to read the article. He cites Skyrim and Red Dead Redemption as examples that benefit his stance, neither are GA or above. You don't win the Bafta award for Best Open World Game, you win for Best Action Adventure. He also insists on readding the emphasis on stealth, when a quick read of reviews will show that they consider it to have moved into an "action adventure" game with minimized stealth. What was the game nominated for at the Spike VGA's again? Best Action Adventure. All the GTA games similarly are not GA or above and feature Open World in the open sentence. I ask then why we do not include "Gamename is a 2013 non-open world video game" or "gamename is a linear video game". Are all games the same unless stated open world? Or is it just unnecessary to have open world in the opening sentence? What is Doom, when I can roam around the levels much more freely than I can in Call of Duty? Do we need to differentiate the two's level of world size? At the moment Djonathan has no support for his change while I have taken the time to gather that of Masem and the input of Torchiest. Still he continues to edit war and give loose examples of why his way is better even when others say it is not, 3 to 1. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:27, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I will just say that I believe "open world" and "action-adventure" should be swapped around (so it's reads "an open world action-adventure video game") for the sake of flow. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 13:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

DLC Titles
Should the DLC titles be italicized or just in quotes? Currently the heading have them in italics and when used in the body, they are just in quotes. Other Assassin's Creed pages have them in italics everywhere, so I was not sure what would be correct. I have seen sources list them with no stylings or with single quotes as well. I don't know where it would fall under in MOS:TITLE. -Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I italicize them since the story ones at least are kind of like their own game. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:18, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Done -Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Location of ToKW information
What's typical when it comes to separate expansions to the story? The Tyranny of King Washington ("ToKW") has now been revealed to be canon (I can't post the direct source, as game sites are blocked at work, but here's a link to the ACWiki page with the reference at the bottom,) and so is, for all intent and purposes, a continuation to the story - I would even go so far as to call it an expansion pack. Do we place the information at the foot of the "Story" section, or elsewhere in the article, or even create a separate article entirely once the other two parts come out. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 09:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The plot section is for the base story without editing or additions, Expansions should be in their own section, see games like Fallout New Vegas or Fallout 3 or Batman: Arkham City (plug). Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Other Languages/Interwiki links
Wikipedia's linking to other languages has changed, so someone needs to remove the text from the end of the source, and add the links directly through the Wikidata thing, or a bot might eventually do it. Sorry I can't do it myself! DarkToonLink (talk) 07:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * A bot has been making the rounds, so I think just give it time, it will happen in the very near future. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

DLC Music
I saw that Ubisoft released a soundtrack for the music that was used in the King Washington DLC. (Tracks and times can be found here.) Should this be included in the music section, even though it pertains to the DLC? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:40, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see why we shouldn't add a line into the Music section to this effect. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 08:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see any harm in it, though if you add a table and/or content and it starts to get large, it might be worth breaking it off into itds own Music of Assassin's Creed III article or something.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 June 2013
PrivateMasterHD (talk) 01:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. -- Red rose64 (talk) 08:35, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Refer to protagonist as Connor
So as I'm going through the article whenever the protagonist is mentioned is Ranakanen or whatever it is. Whilst it is true he starts off with this name he adopts the name Connor to better communicate in the colonial setting he does his Assassin work in, because his given name is impossible to pronounce. He is always referred to by other characters as Connor. I have no idea why somebody decided it was better to use his other name rather than Connor Youngson (talk) 11:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Ratonhnhaké:ton's given name is not "impossible to pronounce", Ubisoft actually provided the pronunciations before the game was even released (and I just used said pronunciation in my head whilst typing). That said, the reason Raton's name is used over "Connor" is the fact that "Connor" isn't his name; it's a moniker, or nickname, or byname (whatever one you want to use) given to him for ease of reference, but that doesn't change the fact his name is Ratonhnhaké:ton. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 12:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * His common name is Connor, it's how he is known through the majority of the game and how anyone asked about the character would identify him. Unless you were saying to your friends "Dude is was awesome when Rotonhnake:ton did that thing", or you were able to spell that without looking it up first. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I bet there's a large portion of people who have played ACIII all the way through and will fail to pronounce Ratonhnhaké:ton every time - it's not a "western" language name, a lot of people will struggle with it. And if Ubisoft needed to to provide the pronunciations it's probably a good indicator that it's not an easy word to pronounce. WP:COMMONNAME, while actually for article names, should provide some good input here. Either way, the article does need to be consistent and Connor wins in my book - I suspect it's the name used most in the game.  Я ehevkor ✉  18:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was able to spell Ratonhnhaké:ton without looking it up (granted, they may be to do with the fact that I gave a presence on the AC wiki). Regardless of whether 'Connor' is more common or not, his birth name is Ratonhnhaké:ton and he does not surrender that name when he is nicknamed Connor. If Raton had given up his birth name, I would support referencing him as Connor throughout, but as he does not, it is not a move I can support. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 18:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * He's not a person, he's a video game character, his plot birthrights don't mean anything in regards to his real world common identity. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:25, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

While it should be taken with a pinch of salt, "Ratonhnhaké:ton"'s 193,000 results verses "Connor Kenway"'s 723,000 results.  Я ehevkor ✉  21:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not once was he called "Connor Kenway" in-game, so I'm afraid those 723,000 hits are redundant. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 08:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * By referring to him as "Connor Kenway", they are also calling him Connor. How about 19 million results for "Assassin's Creed III" "connor"?  Я ehevkor ✉  18:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this, there's dozens of articles out there in the net and on magazines that refer to him as "Connor". Even for the remainder of the game, he is refered to as Connor and hardly as Ratonhnhaké:ton. The story also implies that he left behind his real name and began to lead his life as 'Connor' to be an Assassin. Therefore as an Assasin, he cannot be refered to as Ratonhnhaké:ton. We really should be refering to him as Connor when it comes to mentioning details about ACIII. Not his real name.Masterpeace3 (talk) 08:47, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The fact that he spends the entire game trying to save his village and native way of life somewhat goes against your assertion that he "left behind" his birth name. As you yourself say, it's his real name (despite the fact he is a fictional character). --Jasca Ducato (talk) 08:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The main character clearly has two names after adopting Connor. The point is that in reliable sources that talk about the game in detail touch on his given name and then nearly exclusively use Connor for all other pointers to that character (even Ubi's own dev diaries seem to stick to Connor when talking about the character in broad terms). As such, yes, we need to start with referring to him as Ratonhnhaké:ton, but as soon as he is mentored by Achilles, he should be called Connor. --M ASEM  (t) 13:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That would be... acceptable. It's the method we follow on the AC Wiki. --Jasca Ducato (talk) 14:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Assassin's Creed III. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.interactive.org/images/awards/16th-Annual-D.I.C.E.-Finalists-For-Web.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/08/journey-takes-game-of-the-year-at-dice-awards/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://kotaku.com/5978790/here-are-the-2012-games-that-game-developers-want-to-give-awards-to
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150512181500/http://www.wga.org/wga-awards/previous-nominees-winners.aspx to http://www.wga.org/wga-awards/previous-nominees-winners.aspx
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/call-of-duty-black-ops-ii-dominates-uk-2012-charts/0108868
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.joystiq.com/2013/01/10/december-npd-2012-sales-hit-13-26-billion-black-ops-2-leads-t/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

No mention of Kanien'kehá:ka Mohawk involvement with game
There is no mention of Kanien'kehá:ka (Mohawk) involvement with this game, at all. For example, no mention of Thomas Deer, cultural liason with the Kanien’kehá:ka Onkwawén:na Raotitióhkwa Language and Cultural Center (some RS's mentioning him and/or interviewing him here, here, here and here) who was instrumental in making sure that the developers got the portrayal of Kanien'kehá:ka culture as accurate as possible. Also no mention that Kanien'kehá:ka native speakers were recorded for dialogue (primary and background) and to perform songs.

There is also no mention of the response by Kanien'kehá:ka peoples to the game, which apparently has been positive (see sources above). One of the quotes from the Indian Country Today article above says "The high marks for the game, both as a game and as a window onto history, make clear what many Native gamers and moviegoers have thought all along: That it's possible to make good entertainment without dragging out the same tired stereotypes."

Given the history of portrayals of Native Americans in popular culture, this all seems very relevant to me. I propose adding a new sub-section (under the "Reception" section called "Native American Response" or something to that effect) to the article, pointing out the above reception, and also any negative response that there might be as well (I haven't specifically looked for it, but I'm sure there is some).

I also propose adding a sub-section to the "Development" section (possibly called "Native American/Kanien'kehá:ka Involement") to go over the above (Thomas Deer, native speakers, etc). Given the importance of the Kanien'kehá:ka people to the game, the fact that Thomas Deer worked so closely with the developers (as did, to some extent, the greater Kanien'kehá:ka community in Montreal) to get it right is notable. Vyselink (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:Be bold. I wouldn't necessarily make it a subsection, but a paragraph or two for sure long as the sourcing exists. -- ferret (talk) 20:37, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Assassin's Creed III. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100822001845/http://www.gamerzines.com/ps3/news/assassins-creed-3-details.html to http://www.gamerzines.com/ps3/news/assassins-creed-3-details.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120330210429/http://asia.gamespot.com/news/assassins-creed-iii-female-hero-would-be-a-pain-says-developer-6368577 to http://asia.gamespot.com/news/assassins-creed-iii-female-hero-would-be-a-pain-says-developer-6368577
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121102181126/http://www.officialplaystationmagazine.co.uk/review/assassins-creed-3-ps3-review-struggling-to-break-the-shackles-of-the-old-world/2/ to http://www.officialplaystationmagazine.co.uk/review/assassins-creed-3-ps3-review-struggling-to-break-the-shackles-of-the-old-world/2/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120401234257/http://asia.gamespot.com/news/assassins-creed-iii-setting-ubisoft-preorder-records-6368828 to http://asia.gamespot.com/news/assassins-creed-iii-setting-ubisoft-preorder-records-6368828

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Critical response has changed over time
I've just finished the game, 100% sync on everything but collecting feathers and almanac pages. Contrary to the critical reception, to me the game wasn't that good in terms of main character, being buggy, clunky to control and often just not fun to play.

But that's just my opinion and goes against the critical response right? Why bother Wikipedia with it? Because it isn't just my opinion. I've read about ten recent articles on reputable websites, ranking AC games from best to worst. And AC3 is consistently ranked as one of the worst main line AC games in the franchise.

So there's a rather big discrepancy between the reception at launch and the opinion of game journalists looking back. Which makes me wonder if this article is painting the whole picture by just referencing the reviews and critic's opinion at the time of launch and not mentioning anything about how the game is valued currently compared to the rest of the franchise. In my personal opinion, the comparison to the rest of the franchise in hindsight says more about the quality of the game than comparing the critic scores at launch with other titles within and outside the franchise.

Since i don't remember seeing a WP entry putting critical response at launch in a more recent perspective, I'd first like some opinions here before just adding a bit about this.

Here's a random example, stating that the main character is not very relatable and the game is clunky and buggy and ranking only some spinoff games as even worse; calling the game ultimately disappointing. That's far off from a very positive 80-85% score and it's consistent across recent articles on the matter.  PizzaMan  ♨♨♨  21:19, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Best-to-worst lists are hardly what we'd consider a reliable source for critial feedback. If you can find a recent reliable source that gives the game a lower critical score, we can look at including it in the article. -- JascaDucato (talk &#124; contributions) 11:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Why are these lists not a reliable source if published by a reliable source?  PizzaMan  ♨♨♨  18:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Technically they are RS, but generally we prefer an in-depth analysis of why the game is bad rather than a listicle. I think there are some sources out there that can be used. OceanHok (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Cultural Memory
— Assignment last updated by ANaticchioni2004 (talk) 20:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)