Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of video games by monthly active player count


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

List of video games by monthly active player count

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

See also: Articles for deletion/List of video games by daily active users. There is no way to make this verifiable and reliable. In practice, "monthly" is no better than "daily", as these statistics aren't reliably updated on a monthly basis. This list is inherently unverifiable, which is how you end up with entries on here with severely outdated information, to the point of not even being active games anymore. And as I mentioned in the other AFD, if we did find a reliable third party that was publishing monthly user data, we'd essentially be updating this monthly as some sort of news page, and Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. If this ever becomes something that could be covered properly, it will likely be at an industry database similar to the Nielsen Ratings, and not on Wikipedia itself. Jontesta (talk) 18:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:19, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree 100% that these types of lists are inherently unverifiable and inherently going to get outdated, as we can see in how some entries have not been updated since 2011.--AlexandraIDV 19:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * delete even if we put aside WP:OR, and WP:SYNTH; wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There is no encyclopaedic value behind "which game was played the most last month". There is no way to get true numbers, as the numbers are going to come from primary sources, even if they are later reported by secondary sources. Keeping the article is not even in question as the article is not encyclopaedic to begin with. We already have "YYYY in video gaming" (2019 in video games). A brief note can be added in such articles, based on third party observations. One more similar article is List of most-played video games by peak concurrent users. —usernamekiran (talk) 05:58, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: Obvious unverifiable and perpetually outdated WP:SYNTH and WP:NOR. If Wikidata had something this might work.  // Timothy ::  talk  15:22, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:DEL-REASON 6: Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and articles that are themselves hoaxes (but not articles describing notable hoaxes), unless it can be demonstrated that we actually can attribute this to WP:RELIABLE sources in a way that doesn't violate WP:SYNTH and which keeps this from being constantly out of date (in which case I am neutral as to the encyclopedic merits of this article). I'm not exactly holding my breath, however. TompaDompa (talk) 22:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nevermind the nigh-insurmountable sourcing challenges, it makes zero sense to make comparisons like this. What does it even mean that Crossfire had 13M more monthly players in Jan 2020 than PUBG did in June 2018? The month is different, the months since launch of their respective games is different, the genre is different. Nothing is controlled for so the comparison is nonsense! It's like saying cats are longer than potatoes. Yes, the unit of measure is the same but there has been no effort to explain why you're making the comparison in the first place. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.