Talk:Hollow Knight: Silksong

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Silksong-Screenshots- 0002 18.png

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hollw Knight Silksong resized artwork.jpg

Source for Xbox One being one of the platforms?
I can't find any source for the game coming to Xbox One. The official Xbox page, Team Cherry's press kit, etc all just mention Series X|S. Am I missing something? Mazish (talk) 20:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability of Unity Awards
Regarding this paragraph:


 * Hollow Knight: Silksong was awarded "Most Anticipated Game" by Unity in 2022.

There are a couple of issues here.

Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of facts. By convention on Wikipedia, awards are only included when they are either independently notable (meaning they have an article or are unambiguously deserving of an article), or when a reliable, independent source explains why a particular non-notable award is encyclopedically significant. This is the norm. Currently, the article doesn't indicate what this award is, and Unity Awards is a redlink. In other words, our goal is to explain things, but this doesn't explain very much to readers, since they do not know why this award is being mentioned, going to Unity's website themselves doesn't explain it either.

Further, a Unity blog post is not impartial. Unity's goal is to promote their engine, not to impartially cover games. We shouldn't use Unity's PR team to tell readers this game is anticipated. If the blog-post/award is only mentioned to emphasize how anticipated this game (and obviously it is hotly anticipated), then surely a better source could be found.

Grayfell (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Grayfell I wasn't objecting to your revert, nor asking you an explanation for why you were doing so. However, I'm surprised that you decided to revert when a google search easily found multiple RSes that mentioned this information   and several articles (I.e. Firewatch, Twelve Minutes, Kerbal Space Program) that report on this award. I also don't fully understand your interpretation of why an award is non-notable; Is there an essay or guideline that supports this interpretation? A quick skim using the WP:VGSE shows that RSes have been reporting on these awards as far back as 2012.   The Night Watch     (talk)   02:55, 25 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks for finding those sources.
 * As I said, in my experience editing articles about commercial products and services, all awards should be contextualized by reliable, independent sources. I don't know if this is specifically supported by any essays, but past experience tells me that this is the norm across many topics. The reason usually given is that this standard helps prevent undue weight or worse from slipping into articles. It's not enough to list awards as factoids. The purpose of Wikipedia is to provide context to readers. The question editors should ask with any award is: 'What does this actually tell readers?'
 * So the first step was to find a WP:IS. The second step is to summarize what that source says. Presumably, reliable sources will indicate why an otherwise non-notable award is worth mentioning. This context is also useful to limit WP:CIRCULAR issues. I don't have any reason to think that's the case here, but it's an ongoing problem with awards in general, so it's worth the added effort IMO.
 * If other articles mention this award, or any other award, based solely on primary sources, this problem should also be fixed there. Wikipedia is a work in progress, after all. Grayfell (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I've used those sources to contextualize the award. Those sources seem to mention it because it was a relatively rare sign of activity from Team Cherry. They also seemed to emphasize the quote from Team Cherry, so I also included that. Grayfell (talk) 04:10, 25 February 2023 (UTC)