Talk:ResetEra

}}

Why is this a separate article again?
This is like the third time now. It's getting a little annoying... Just merge it back with NeoGaf and be done with it please. :( --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:4CCA:C406:D944:C216 (talk) 14:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry to annoy you IP. As I stated in my edit summary I felt the subject met the criteria of inclusion in the encyclopedia. "Since 2019 the site has grown and its impact on the industry has increased. I've reviewed the previous incarnation of the article and updated it where I could. While web rankings are suspect ,ResetEra is a magnitude larger than its predecessor, NeoGaf by multiple analytical tools. It has also been referred to by RS "one of the internet's largest video game forums"" If others disagree, let's discuss why. Ckoerner (talk) 17:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Honestly, this article speaks like it was written by someone from that very forum itself. It's leaving out the warts (only criticism is on David Jaffe's relationship, which......it isn't), while overselling the other aspects, like the user ratio and notable industry figures who registered for the site. Specifically: How many of those notable industry figures are active lol? More specifically: How many of those notable industry figures have been active in the past year? More more specifically: How many of those notable industry figures have been active in the past few years? ResetEra is an offshoot of NeoGAF - same people, same members, same drama, renamed in an effort to distance from a single person. That's all it is: A rebranding, and in terms of industry recognition, nowhere near the level of clout GAF used to have. As a community, it is just incredibly insignificant when it comes to gaming hubs when compared to reddit subs, individual company Discord servers, or hell, even Gamefaqs. They've accomplished nothing of any significance, set no benchmarks of any kind, since their inception aside from their general toxicity and social media drama. And, I'm gonna gingerly put my foot down on this, they don't deserve to be rewarded with a Wikipedia page for that. They're a footnote on NeoGAF's main page at best, and considering how many times this has happened already...it's inevitably that this page is gonna get deleted and/or merged. Again. It's becoming an annoyance. --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:7524:11CA:354:339B (talk) 21:19, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If you have any reliable sources for your claims I’d gladly include them in the article. Ckoerner (talk) 21:56, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, the idea is to....not have an article to begin with, but I can scare up two or three things to add. For starters, [there's the feud they're having with Warner Bros. Games over Hogwarts Legacy] - any talk of the game is outright banned, even though the lead problematic dev left. [They're feuding with Play-Asia over stupid inconsequential bullshit]. [They're feuding with a Skyrim dev] and have taken disproportionate action against him after he criticized the site. There's honestly just way, way too much crap on them that if you really went through it all, the Controversy and Criticism tab itself would dwarf anything and everything else on the page. And, again, I go back to my original argument: They've literally accomplished nothing to warrant a Wikipedia article. Acting out like a wanker does not meet general notability guidelines. --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:9491:92B4:C5A8:CFBE (talk) 06:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for you help. The only reliable source you suggest is already referenced in the article. So that's good. The rest are not RS and is what we'd call original research so I can't include them. Ckoerner (talk) 14:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Captured social media posts aren't a source? You might....wanna try telling that to the, I dunno, all of Wikipedia. --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:1CC:6A10:7180:2434 (talk) 17:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a false equivalency. One was the president of a nation, the other posts on an internet forum. You can read and understand the principles of Wikipedia and engage constructively or not. I'm disengaging from this thread. Ckoerner (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Notability
@TheJoebro64, could you please expand on what you mean by, "This article's sourcing is pretty weak"? I'd like to know what would be sufficient sourcing, or could be improved, in light of the article's 29 citations. Ckoerner (talk) 17:24, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hmm. The reply tool didn't ping you. Sorry @TheJoebro64. Trying again. Ckoerner (talk) 17:25, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , most of the sources are about tangentially related things, not ResetEra itself. They don't indicate why ResetEra is notable enough on its own. I'd say references 5, 10, and 11 are the only ones that seem to be specifically about ResetEra itself, and of them, reference 5 is the only one I find to be significant coverage. I feel like it'd be better to write a section about ResetEra at the NeoGAF article and then split it when it becomes unwieldy to be contained there. JOE BRO  64  18:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It used to be like that, but people from that forum keep wanting it to have its own Wikipedia page. Well, I'd love one too! I have a photogenic enough of a face to look REALLY nice on an infobox! But it doesn't work like that. ResetEra is like me: Inconsequential. Since their inception, their founding has had no impact on the industry whatsoever. The only news you hear of them these days is on their toxicity and social media drama. It doesn't warrant a page, and this is like the third time we've done this song and dance, and it always leads to the same outcome. I just really wish they would get the hint and stop trying to force a Wikipedia article, but then again, "not taking the hint" is basically their thing... --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:7524:11CA:354:339B (talk) 21:24, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for expanding your thinking @TheJoebro64. I’d love to hear input from other editors as well (assuming folks are watching). Ckoerner (talk) 21:58, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to echo a lot of sentiments here. NeoGAF had notability because a lot of game developers posted there. I think this should be merged into the NeoGAF article. On it's own merits, ResetERA doesn't really have much that distinguishes it from any other forum at all, it's actually pretty unnoteworthy by comparison. If this stays up I think it runs the risk of setting a bad precedent - it will open the flood gates for any online community to make their own wikipedia entry regardless of how well known or unnoteworthy it is.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.227.209.69 (talk) 23:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd like to confirm and repeat what 2603:9000:CC02:4E00:7524:11CA:354:339B has said, it's relevant to note that this is not the first time ResetEra has tried to push itself into Wikipedia despite a clear lack of notability, while that doesn't directly invalidate their merit to have an article per se it really shows their motivations to do so, regardless, as many have mentioned this article has clearly lots of faults, from using social media posts at face value as source (comparing to a former POTUS' tweets) to being excesively apologetic, I'd like for you to take a minute to think about who's interested into making this website seem more notable than it really is, and I'm honestly not shocked at all considering the oversocialised far-left types that frequent ResetEra. Just food for thought. --CrashLucasDancer (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)--CrashLucasDancer (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Welcome to Wikipedia, @CrashLucasDancer. Confirming and repeating a misunderstanding of how this project works - or the motivations of editors - doesn’t make it any more true. If fellow editors feel like this article doesn’t meet the requirements for inclusion, there are policies and procedures to handle those concerns. I have referred to many of them on this very talk page. Ckoerner (talk) 17:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Why does this article ignore pretty much all and any of the severe criticism against Resetera? This article makes it sound like a helpful, positive website. Very bizarre to read.
To go in on the details:

Resetera has been at the helm of many toxic harassment campaigns against developers, development studios, publishers or otherwise people that they deemed "bad". You will probably ask for sourcing, which is difficult because these toxic actions always gain traction within the environment, then are executed on other platforms like Twitter. That shouldn't keep it from being mentioned, though.

Examples of the top of my head: - Calling Vavra, head behind Kingdom Come: Deliverance, was and is called a nazi, despite utmost evidence having cleared all suspicions. - Alec Holowka, indie developer, was driven into suicide by a random call from Zoe Quinn. Resetera helped making her story big until a person died. - Similar, Etika was ridiculed until he killed himself - CD Projekt Red an Cyberpunk 2077 are being called transphobic only for depicting a fictional cyberpunk world where genitals can be changed and used for advertisement. - recently, Sakurai, Nintendo and Smash Bros were accused of racism for not having more black characters in Smash - and countless more that could be added to their organized harassment campaigns

Then there's also the way that discourse is conducted on their forum: Having a "wrong opinion" gets you dog piled and banned. This is defended by labeling the "wrong opinion" as "bigot" or similar, and therefore the punishment is justified. Many of the above mentioned cases saw some users argue against and explain, but these explanations always fall on deaf ears and are dismissed.

Resetera has strong fascists leanings, openly expressing about changing the judicial system in favor or a court of public opinion. Relentlessly and without empathy nor mercy ruining the lives of those they chose as "having a wrong opinion". This extremist attitude should absolutely be expressed in any article about this community. There should be enough people that can add much, much more severe criticism to what I already mentioned. They're also pro-censorship, demanding any changes to topics in games they find uncomfortable. And last but not least their extreme hypocrisy where sexualizing female characters gets you banned, but threads about sexualized male characters are tolerated.

If you really find this community worthy a Wikipedia-article, I beg you to update the critcism section by A LOT. As it is, it's warping reality, and Wikipedia should strive to present facts and information, not propaganda. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:D8:8F07:A300:101F:9780:F3EF:749A (talk) 12:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi IP. As I mentioned above, to include these claims in an encyclopedia article we'd need to have reliable sources writing about them. We could then include them in a neutral way. That's how this works. Not anyone coming to a talk page making claims about a thing or person without any way to verify. If we didn't have these rules, then Wikipedia would be untrustworthy and biased. Ckoerner (talk) 14:09, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yo I don't think anyone has ever expressed the desire to replace the judicial system with a court of public opinion. But the sentiment was very funny. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 10:32, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast reply. What constitutes as a reliable source? The problem is that most of it either happens in specific threads within the community or is reported by right-wing websites. One central issue with Resetera is that it stands at the center of a bunch of associate websites, all the biggest gaming websites like Kotaku, polygon, Eurogamer and such, that naturally do not report about Resetera's toxic behavior. But is that reason not to include it? It happened countless times for sure, but any link I could give you would probably dismissed as "not trustworthy". But it's not okay to present Resetera favorably just because it successfully managed to erase its misbehavior, right? A google search gave me these results, maybe you can take a look into these if theyre good enough sources to justify additional criticism: https://outrageousfacts.wordpress.com/2020/06/27/the-fascism-of-resetera-com/ https://outrageousfacts.wordpress.com/2020/11/23/fiction-is-not-reality-reseteras-attack-on-cyberpunk-2077/ https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1589587-alec-holowka-sexual-abuse-allegations — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:d8:8f07:a300:101f:9780:f3ef:749a (talk) 09:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I...I linked to what reliable sources are. You should read that. Spoiler alert : – A handful of cherry-picked blogs from search results are not reliable sources. Ckoerner (talk) 15:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

See, this is what I meant. It's hard to find "reliable sources". However, below you replied to someone else that YOU ARE a member of Resetera. You claim being neutral, but shouldn't you be well aware of all the toxic bs that happens there every day?! It's impossible to overlook this. I really hope you either reflect on you own bias and add A LOT of criticism to the article, or delete it altogether. As it is, it's promoting Resetera as a good place to be that is totally innocent and all. Hardly representative of reality :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:d8:8f07:a300:101f:9780:f3ef:749a (talk) 14:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Participation in the forum does not discredit my editing of the article. By the same logic anyone who ever purchased goods or services from a business, even once, would be suspect in editing large portions of the encyclopedia. :) When we talk about neutrality, we talk about the tone, language, verifiability, and proper weight to various viewpoints. Not in being entirely neutral as people who write the articles. We all have biases. I feel your frustration in a lack of reliable sources to back up your claims. I don't want to discredit your feelings either. At the same time we can't put into the article "Person from random blog Y said Z" and expect people reading to trust the content of Wikipedia. When you have a reliable source or constructive suggestion, I'd be happy to work with you to include it in the article. Ckoerner (talk) 20:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I will try to find better sources then. But just to your analogy: One doesnt need to be a registered member in an online forum to read it, the same is not true for a product that one should have used before evaluating it. Since you're the one writing this article and claim to have no bias, I'd still hope that even without me bringing something up, you'd want to give a complete impression of Resetera by your own volition. Even such issues where Resetera-administration threw their own trans-communitiy under the bus, making up arguments for why Cyberpunk2077 shouldn't be banned from the forum. despite, as they claimed, being transphobic - which the game isn't, but admins literally wanted to have their cake and eat it, too, simply because they knew banning CP2077 would lose them a lot of click revenue. How can one source that? The threads should still exist, but I doubt any bigger outside-source wrote about it. It's still important in the characterization of this community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:d8:8f07:a300:101f:9780:f3ef:749a (talk) 15:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The goals of Wikipedia are not to characterize a subject. They are to document and understanding of a topic based upon reliable sources. Please review the links I have provided to better understand what is happening and why. You can make unsubstantiated claims here on the talk page all you want (well, to a certain point) but that does not, nor will it, change how Wikipedia works. Since you lack the capacity to engage in a constructive manner I am removing myself from this conversation. Ckoerner (talk) 21:31, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, this entire article reads like....well, frankly speaking, like Ckoerner is a member and desperately wants to wax poetic. It's PR. Unfortunately, using Wikipedia to make your own site look good is a big, big no-no. Someone needs to recommend this to be deleted ASAP. I could, but...I'm just an IP. No one listens to IPs. :( --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:1CC:6A10:7180:2434 (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I do have an account on ResetEra and engage in the community there recreationally. I have no horse in the race and am not receiving any compensation for working on this article. Valid suggestions to improve the article are welcome. Ckoerner (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Like I said. "Not taking the hint" is very much a ResetEra thing. --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:1DA8:7897:33B:D821 (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not interested in "hints", but in reliable sources. Do you have any? --bonadea contributions talk 18:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter if you, or I, or Ckoerner thinks ResetEra is toxic or not, this has to come from reliable sources to be added to the article. You ranting and raving about your own beefs with ResetEra is a waste of your time and ours, as there's nothing we can do with that. --SubSeven (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Reliable, or reliable to me? World of difference. --ZigguratZone (talk) 20:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Reliable as outlined in the guidelines of Wikipedia. Ckoerner (talk) 20:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And the Video Games Project curates a list of reliable sources, in accordance with the Wikipedia policies, found here: WP:VG/RS --SubSeven (talk) 23:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Games that have been announced on ResetEra
If I can recall correctly, one or two indie games were actually announced on ResetEra's gaming side by the game's developers. I would like to see a list of those game(s) in the article if it helps bring up the site's notability. 2600:1700:BA30:49E0:95F9:19F2:51DD:AB04 (talk) 19:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Hmm. That might be good for the "In the media" section, if we could find reliable sources that mention that the game(s) were first announced on the forum. Ckoerner (talk) 20:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Recreated page
I wasn't actually aware of this website's cyclical deletion nature until after remaking it but I thought I could add more citations and that it was notable. Y'all can decide on it once again but in the meantime I'll try improving this article. It seems this forum is controversial so I'm wary of edit warring.--Carolina_Heart (talk) 11:00, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh god, what did I get myself into Carolina_Heart (talk) 11:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Rewriting History Section
I've noticed most of the "written like an advertisement" critique probably comes from the second paragraph of the history section where notable members are listed off. How would one rewrite this while still retaining the information, in a more neutral sounding way? I'm not sure Carolina Heart (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Listing them off with their job titles can appear to be promotional, but I actually think that's fine personally. What more so gave me red flags were the following statements:
 * ResetEra is one of the world's biggest gaming forums
 * Having 60 million page views is significant, but it's original research to state in Wikipedia's voice that means it's the "biggest" in the world - we want a reliable source to make that statement, not us.
 * Overtime game developers and journalists have visited the forums to stoke hype for a release or conduct interviews
 * While uses this phrasing, not everyone listed posted for the same purpose, and so it's better to more neutrally state what they did - which is visit the site.
 * I've refactored the 2 examples above to hopefully be more neutral. I've also made some other edits detailed in my summaries. Feel free to reach out if you disagree with anything. — Sirdog (talk) 06:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Those are good Carolina Heart (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

ResetEra is an oppressive, authoritarian website that embodies a tyranny of opinion with enforced political conformity. The staff aggressively censors and bans the views of persons with differing political perspectives. The website does not reflect American values of freedom of expression.

If you refer to the Merriam-Webster definition of the term forum, a forum is, "A public meeting place for open discussion." In a forum, people attempt to persuade others through the strength of their arguments and the evidence they present. By contrast, ResetEra staff attempts to "win" arguments by banning members who disagree with the political opinions of their moderators.

This week, a member was banned for wishing "RIP" to Prince Philip. A member was banned for pointing out that there have been fatalities from the Covid-19 vaccines. Another member was banned for posting that the Covid-19 virus may have originated at the Wuhan lab. A member was banned for suggesting that people were migrating to the UK in order to exploit the benefits system.

There was a recent thread accusing people who believe that Jesus was white of being racists. When a member replied that Levantine men are generally white, he was banned. There was a thread that accused a game called "Six Days in Fallujah" of being insensitive. Two members were banned for disagreeing with the controversy and a third member was banned for saying they would play the game. There was a thread about a recent controversy involving Lindsay Ellis. Multiple members were banned for saying that there was nothing wrong with her post on Twitter.

ResetEra cannot, in truth, be called a forum because there is no discussion. It is a one party state. They are cowards and bed-wetters, and they have betrayed the American people.

PlasmaStorm10003 (talk) 03:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)PlasmaStorm10003


 * You created an account to post that? --SubSeven (talk) 03:53, 18 April 2021 (UTC)