Talk:Dr. Langeskov, The Tiger, and The Terribly Cursed Emerald: A Whirlwind Heist

Article title
, after its initial introduction, every source I've seen has referred to the game not by its official title but by "Dr. Langeskov". It should be moved back to that location as its common name. czar 07:31, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thats not how I would take common name here. There is the difference between sources choosing between two wildly different names to determine how to title something, and using an abbreviated name after introducing the full title once to save on space such when "CoD" is used for Call of Duty. This latter aspect doesn't affect determining the common name because the shortening of the name to save space after the title is introduced once still means they are calling it by the long title. If coverage frequently omitted any mention of the long title and just used the short one, that would be different and CN would definitely apply. --M ASEM  (t) 13:13, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I suppose time will tell but I see this being closer to The Idler Wheel...—publications might use the long name to identify the subject once but otherwise find Dr. Langeskov sufficient (esp. in titles and throughout the rest of the article). It also sufficiently meets all points of Article titles: conciseness, precision, naturalness, recognizability, etc. czar  13:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree the situation seems similar to the Idler Wheel, but there, taking a random sample of sources like or  which do not at all mention the long name, that's a good argument towards the short CN. Here, I'm having problem finding an article that does not include the long name at all at least once. I would also argue to some OR degree that the full title is important to the game (having just played it yesterday). It sets a very specific tone you enter it with that influenced my perception of it.  It's not just a long name for long name purposes, but has rather important meaning. But it could also be one of those things that in time it normalizes in the sourcing to the short form. --M ASEM  (t) 14:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the reasoning for using the full name, but I do have to wonder why we capitalized the “The”s. —96.8.24.95 (talk) 03:53, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Assets
By the way, already reached out to Pugh and free use assets are on the way czar  07:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

The Heist
Why is there no mention of the arguably "actual" game, the ARG, which consists of minor "hacks" to their web site? (c.f https://www.reddit.com/r/crowscrowscrows/comments/3oh4vl/master_progress_thread/ )

Because nobody can be bothered to add it to the article Gregolego (talk) 11:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Though apparently they tried to sneak in references for it, I guess? (See below section.) —96.8.24.95 (talk) 03:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Page Move
please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games for discussion. I am looking to move this article to Dr. Langeskov, The Tiger, and The Terribly Cursed Emerald. Lee Vilenski(talk) 09:54, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriately used refs
As far as I can guess without delving into the page history, either these refs were altered in place to link to different sources than they did originally, or the article was edited around them and the associated claims were removed. They describe the alternate reality game that preceded the launch of the game. There is absolutely nothing in them that verifies anything in the vicinity of where they were cited.

—96.8.24.95 (talk) 02:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC) added another at 03:36, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

In case it’s useful for anything, here’s a source (cited for the creation of a studio that it fails to mention) that the article no longer cites.

—96.8.24.95 (talk) 03:57, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I think you should consider looking at the archive and edit history when making your statement. It makes sense to remove it from the body but not from the page altogether. Philotimo (talk) 07:44, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I had replied on the userpage but neglected to reply here: One of the archived sources had a paragraph that was inexplicably missing from the live link, but none of them, current or archived, contained anything of relevance to the cited material, as I stated. And I am dubious as to the value of pre-release marketing as “further reading.” If anyone disagrees, feel free to restore; otherwise, they’ll still be above, in case anyone thinks it worthwhile to write up about the ARG. —96.8.24.95 (talk) 03:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Metacritic user ratings
I know we commonly give the critics’ scores, but do we usually cite user scores from Metacritic? It kind of seems absurd to do so here, with Metacritic having less than half a percent of the number of ratings as Steam. —96.8.24.95 (talk) 04:36, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No we don't, and we also don't source Steam user scores either. User scores, unless identified by other reliable sources, are useless for us as they can be gamed. --M asem (t) 04:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I was afraid of that, though 8500 ratings seems reliable enough to me (if not WP:Reliable). And of course you’re right re gaming the system, as history has proven. But thanks for confirming! —96.8.24.95 (talk) 04:49, 20 July 2020 (UTC)