Talk:Nintendo Switch emulation

Sourcing issues
So first, great job on this standalone article, BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4! I mean that.

I do have some concerns about sourcing, though. There are a lot of claims cited to unreliable, primary, and questionable sources: a WP:FORBESCON source is cited several times, as are primary developer sites/GitHub, and HotHardware. (As far as I can tell, HotHardware's "news" is just rewritten press releases.) This results in undue weight given to features and capabilities, and also to Ryujinx in general. It's important that we focus on what reliable sources say about Switch emulation/emulators. I'm hoping to have some time to work on it in a day or two, unless BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4 or someone else gets to it first. Woodroar (talk) 13:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * @Woodroar I have removed the dubious sources and some undue primary claims, sticking to simple and hopefully uncontroversial facts about Ryujinx in particular. Also thanks to ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ for helping reword the article to remove some of my unintentionally POV language; I've made further edits in this regard in an effort to further ensure its neutrality. Hopefully it's improved enough that we can now say there aren't any actively present major content issues. silvia ASH (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within)  04:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright, I removed WP:IBTIMES and WP:FORBESCON, both unreliable sources, along with a bunch of self-serving/promotional claims cited only to primary sources. I think what's rest is all cited to vetted reliable sources. Woodroar (talk) 19:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, I missed those. I was editing on mobile at the time, so I guess I didn't catch the other hothardware cite? Or maybe I thought I removed it, but got it wrong. Oh well. Thanks for taking care of those. silviaASH (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within)  20:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Mobile is the worst, haha. I try to fix a typo and delete three paragraphs by mistake. Woodroar (talk) 21:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * One thing I'd think there needs to be some consensus on established somewhere, not only about this article, but about similar articles to these in general, is what, in the context of an open source unofficial emulator, is an appropriate use of a primary source, and what would be deemed a promotional/self-serving claim. I've observed that this has been something repeatedly raised by people discussing their articles, most recently in the VisualBoyAdvance AfD where, some folks claimed it looked promotional due to its abundance of primary source usage, though some others disputed that given the software is not a for-profit product. I'm not certain what the best way to come to an agreement on that question might be, but just to give some small thoughts of my own:
 * It is often the case that media coverage of an emulator, which is natural to focus on including first given that it proves the notability of the software, often only focuses on saying "x game can now be played on it" and does not mention a lot of other information that would be of interest to us in encyclopedically describing the emulator, which is where primary sources can be useful. At the same time, I totally respect that we don't want to just list off all the achievements that emulator developers have made if they're not reliably cited to secondary sources since we don't want the article to in effect become a "congratulations on your emulator" or be able to be read as such. Even if one would disagree with me on that, it is definitely true that many emulator articles are based on primary sources in a natural effort by editors to cover blind spots in the secondary coverage (like, when did this start, how does it work) and so I think because of that, some subject specific guidelines on the appropriateness of their use (as well as how to prove an emulator's notability in general) could be in order. I may try to draft those up at another time and ask the community for feedback. In general, I don't think we should completely ignore primary sources, but there is definitely a fine line to be walked between filling in gaps in knowledge left by the secondary sources, and promoting the emulator, which a number of these articles do very arguably fall afoul of. That's only my opinion on the matter, anyway.
 * Getting back on topic to the matter at hand, I do think that removing most of that information about Ryujinx in the context of this article is fine given it's not the main topic of the article, and the admittedly excessive level of detail like the username of the developer, the mention of OpenGL, Puyo Puyo Tetris, and all that stuff, which I'd agree in hindsight is not all that necessary. But what's here now seems like an over-correction to me, given it now does not mention even when the emulator began development or what devices it runs on. Given this, I'd propose a single sentence in the "Ryujinx" section, cited to an absolute minimum of primary sources, which can say something like:
 * "Ryujinx, written in C# for Windows and Linux, began development in 2017 and was first released in February 2018."
 * And then the rest of the article can remain as is. silviaASH (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within)  21:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC) Actually, upon reconsidering, I've decided that this edit would not be good- it would make the section look incomplete, which may attract unhelpful edits from well-intentioned users trying to add back the undue primary information. So, never mind. Let's just leave the section like it is for now. silviaASH (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within)  22:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Title change
If this article sticks around it should probably be moved to Nintendo Switch emulation per WP:PLURAL and for consistency. I didn't open an RM because it may not need one if everyone agrees. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree. Current title is very clunky and I don't think it's even proper English. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thirded. Woodroar (talk) 21:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)