Talk:My.Games

Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: This article in its current state is literally just an advertisement. This long article was written in its entirety by an editor with a very sparse editing history on the English Wikipedia (this was originally created by the same editor on the Russian Wikipedia and was also made in basically a single edit, indicating meticulous offline preparation) and is littered with textbook corporate speak such as "My.Games' diverse portfolio features games of various genres for all platforms", "Mobile games remain its key growth driver", extensive use of the word "portfolio", etc. Half of these citations are either press releases or from sources whose reliability is questionable at best (such as App2Top, a sketchy site which literally – on its homepage – advertises its service of buying illegitimate installs of mobile apps). Meanwhile, many of the reliable sources that do mention this company such as Nintendo Life and Eurogamer do so only in the most shallow of passing, and the PCGamesN article outright admits that its content is commissioned based on outgoing links, automatically rendering it not independent.

This subject could potentially meet notability guidelines, but given how polluted throughout with ostensible undisclosed paid editing this article is and given how much shorter it would be without all the complete disregard for WP:BALASP through inflation with press releases, deleting this article then leaving it up to an unpaid editor to recreate it should they choose to do so would be the best option, unless the article's creator is willing to promptly do this themself. Leaving it up to a volunteer editor to painstakingly weed out the offending content from this ostensibly WP:PAID, WP:REFBOMBed article – essentially having them borderline rewrite it entirely – would be a mockery of the project's integrity. This article – whether actually paid or not – is a press release masquerading as an encyclopedic entry.

For these reasons, I will not mark this article as reviewed and encourage fellow new page reviewers to follow suit..

 TheTechnician27  (Talk page)  04:28, 25 March 2021 (UTC)