Talk:Digital Homicide Studios

Imminent Uprising studios
It's just a redirect back to Digital Homicide. 2601:19B:700:DA18:7993:CD2:594B:6F3D (talk) 22:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * "Imminent Uprising" is a pseudonym used by Digital Homicide Studios. On Wikipedia we elaborate on those alike former names of companies, hence it redirects to the DigiHom article. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 09:08, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Almost all of the content of this article is duplicated in Digital Homicide Studios, where the entire lawsuit part belongs. After stripping that from this article, there's so little left, it makes sense to merge this entire article into Digital Homicide Studios. --DanielPharos (talk) 21:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - the game itself meets WP:NVG and this article is missing basic essential content such as what it's actually about, how it was developed and its reception beyond Jim Sterling's not-quite-review. --McGeddon (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose per McGeddon above. Article should be expanded rather than merged. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 15:44, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, makes sense. I'll reduce the duplicate content (removing parts that are not relevant to this article), and withdraw the merger request. --DanielPharos (talk) 15:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I would like to reopen this merger proposal, as I do not think that Slaughtering Grounds is really notable beyond the company's controversy. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 00:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I've added the missing essential content sections (empty for now), to give a better picture of what needs to be done for this article in order to remain stand-alone. --DanielPharos (talk) 08:47, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

>>>Edit war?!
It is not an "edit war", Chaheel, it is an attempt to remove crappy pretentious pseudo-French rubbish from WP, and there is no reason why anybody should be forbidden to do that. The term "nom de plume" is not used by educated French speakers — and come to that, nor by educated English speakers, who recognize it for the pretentious guff that it is. The French word is le pseudonyme. Je devrais mentionner que mes connaissances de la langue française sont assez avancées ! And my knowledge of English is likewise so. All that the inclusion of "nom de plume" in that article that you own shows is that you do not speak French, and have a very tenuous grip on English usage. The term "nom de plume" was invented in England (that's right, not France or any other French-speaking place) in the 19th century and used by those who wished to appear cultured, and they did, too — to those who knew no better. It is a substandard usage in both English and French, and I treat it as I would any usage of "ain't". Now, please explain why you think that "nom de plume" should be retained in that article? This mystifies me even without regard to its pretentiousness, for the term applies to writers of literature, not software companies. How about it? Kelisi (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Well... It is an edit war, albeit the very beginnings of one.  You made a change, then reverted to force your preferred version twice more:
 * Original change
 * First reversion breaking BRD
 * Second reversion breaking BRD
 * You may not like it, but nom de plume is a perfectly valid English phrase, and your dislike is no reason for removal. Or at least not to other editors.  As pointed out by Ice Welder, nom de plume is used in the source.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:59, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not a question of whether I like it, but rather one of whether it's proper English for an encyclopaedia. Since it is substandard usage, I say it isn't, any more than using euphemisms (which is discouraged here on WP) would be, or forms like "he don't know nothin'". I can see that you are personalizing this. That is a mistake. I am simply trying to raise the article's level of English. I can also see that what I have told you simply has not sunk in. Whether you use "nom de plume" or "pen name" in the context in this article, it is wrong. A pen name is a pseudonym used by a literary writer. Well known examples include "Boz" (Charles Dickens), "George Orwell" (Eric Arthur Blair), "George Eliot" (Mary Ann Evans), "Lewis Carroll" (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson) and "Hergé" (Georges Prosper Remi) — and we can include that last one because he wrote the text of all the Tintin stories, as well as drawing all the pictures. For any other kind of creator, though, you would have to use the broader term "pseudonym". You could also say "false name". The only exception that I can think of just now is false names used by celebrities, which can be called "professional names" (e.g. "Elton John" for Reginald Dwight). Some of those are actually legalized. Kelisi (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Do you have a citation for its being substandard English? Srnec (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The earliest reference in the Oxford English Dictionary is 1841 and it includes sources like the Daily Telegraph (a conservative British newspaper) in 1991. Pen name is actually a more recent word dating to 1864 and a back formation.   Nom de plume is an English coining (a case of English mugging the French language, see James Nicoll).  The French language phrase for the same thing  is nom de guerre.  Pocket Fowler's has "A nom de plume (also in translated form pen-name) is a name assumed by an author to appear on the title-page of a book; a pseudonym is a name assumed more generally although this too is normally applied in authorial contexts." Nothing about it being substandard. --Erp (talk) 03:17, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, native French speaker here,
 * While it is true that the word was forged in England, saying that the word isn’t used in French is incorrect, the word is present in all reference French dictionaries today (Larousse, Le Robert, TLFi) including the one from the very purist Académie française since 1935: https://dictionnaire-academie.fr/article/A9N0540 Thibaut (talk) 05:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Kelisi, a quick look at your contributions suggests that it's not me taking it personally - your last 100+ edits, all made after this section was started are all removal of "nom de plume" from articles. When all the edits doing the same prior to this conversation are included it certainly looks like this is a personal quest for you. Chaheel Riens (talk) 06:39, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

(Mark Twain, "Rogers", emphasis added.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

(Arthur Conan Doyle, The Valley of Fear, emphasis added.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:55, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Of all the things that this article is about, I would have never imagined that French would cause the most drama. I reverted the initial edit because it changed the phrase with no explanation, even though the definition for a nom de plume appears apt:
 * The term seems to be more specific than just "pseudonym", just like you would use "stage name" or "ring name" instead of the broad category for certain artists. The source uses this phrase verbatim as well.
 * I have no strong feelings towards using "nom de plume" but, judging by the arguments brought up by the other users, the notion that the phrase is "substandard English" seems unjustified. Any case for not using it should be brought up on the talk page of the term's article first, not unilaterally applied to all articles that use it. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 13:26, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no strong feelings towards using "nom de plume" but, judging by the arguments brought up by the other users, the notion that the phrase is "substandard English" seems unjustified. Any case for not using it should be brought up on the talk page of the term's article first, not unilaterally applied to all articles that use it. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 13:26, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

'nom de plume' is perfectly good English for an pseudonym used by an artist. It's roughly based on french, but so what? A lot of our language is. There's no reason to search the encyclopedia for it and remove it everywhere you find it. It's unsurprising, and not a problem, if editors revert the unneeded change. ApLundell (talk) 19:01, 13 July 2022 (UTC)