Talk:Colin Moriarty

Removal of redirect
Since 2007, Moriarty's body of work is significant as a games industry journalist, personality, content creator and game developer. Much of this is separate from his former company Kinda Funny, where he spent only three full years of his career. I believe this is reason enough for removing the redirect to Kinda Funny.

As for notability, his current company Last Stand Media has the highest number of Patreon supporters in his industry, and is top 50 overall, and there are reputable industry news sources that support this level of success, including Kotaku, Polygon and GameIndustry.biz.

Anecdotally, many fans of Kinda Funny are unfamiliar with Moriarty as he left the company four years ago. Likewise, many fans of Moriarty are unfamiliar with Kinda Funny. In my opinion, the redirect is unnecessary and a unique page is appropriate. FusilliGarry (talk) 05:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia depends on significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (?) to justify dedicated articles. The sources used in the prior edit do not meet our video game reliable sources qualifications. If his post-Kinda Funny career has attracted this kind of press (in which his career is the subject of the coverage rather than a brief mention/aside), then let's see and discuss those sources. Basically, there should be enough independent, reliable, secondary source coverage such that we could write a detailed article that does the subject justice without resorting to original research and primary sources. czar  05:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


 * That's fair, although I feel various sources on the page do meet this criteria you've described. It is not just the post-Kinda Funny career that warrants this individual entry, but the sum of the parts including pre-Kinda Funny, Last Stand Media and game development with Lillymo Games. Are there issues using coverage on Kotaku, Polygon, Twinfinie, GameIndustry.biz, ScreenRant, Gamerant, Game Revolution? Almost all of these appear on your linked Sources list and the others appear to fit the definition of reliable and independent, as established sites with editors and large numbers of followers/readers.


 * Would it be a compromise to remove anything that can not be justified as one of these sources? I believe there are enough clearly legitimate sources to supplement the information sourced from AV media and interviews, as is done on other content creator pages such as James Rolfe and Greg Miller. I feel the notability is justified and perhaps I need to work on fine-tuning the sources, so I appreciate the guidance you're able to offer. FusilliGarry (talk) 06:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


 * If we removed the unreliable sources, there wouldn't be much of an article left, which is the original predicament. The Polygon, Kotaku, Gamesindustry.biz, GameRevolution articles are all re: his affiliation Kinda Funny and should be covered in that article regardless of whether it's also covered here. ScreenRant and GameRant are passing mentions. Twinfinite is not a reliable source. That leaves Kotaku AU, a tabloid-y piece upon which we cannot base a dedicated article. czar  06:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)