Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 26

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

→

Revisiting Kotaku

Ferret mentioned that we may need to reassess Kotaku on Discord so I thought I'd go ahead and start a discussion. I am not an expert on the site, but I do feel we should discuss whether Kotaku should remain in the green or if it should be reclassified as situational. Much of Kotaku's most reputed staff left during the Deadspin controversy (including EiC Stephen Totilo, who's now at Axios), and from the looking I've done... Kotaku's quality appears to have taken a hit in the time since. In general, they've been publishing a ton of clickbaity articles with increasing ideological bias recently. We've gotten articles like this (which paints Notorious Studios, founded by ex-Activision-Blizzard staff, as misogynists for not starting with any women on their tiny team at the moment), and then... this piece of stimulating journalism.

Of course, there are plenty more examples of pretty unprofessional content coming from the site as of late, but these are just two that I found particularly unsettling. I'm not arguing that Kotaku should be full-on demoted to unreliable, nor am I arguing that they should be demoted for being biased. However, I think we may need to implement cautions for additional considerations/limitations when using it. Whether this means bumping it back down to yellow should be up to the rest of the project. Pinging @Salvidrim!, TarkusAB, and Haleth, since they were involved in our most recent Discord discussion. JOE BRO 64 00:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I'll come back with a lengthier response later as I have stuff on today, but in summary, I believe that Kotaku should be treated similarly to how the project as a whole treats websites/sources with a solid history of publication pedigree and editorial oversight, but are unapologetically biased/opinionated on either end of the political spectrum like Fox and HuffPost, see the main perennial sources list. There's already a substantive discussion about Kotaku's reliability back in July 2021 in the main vg noticeboard talk page, here, that should be instructive and informative for this discussion about revisiting Kotaku. PS: The chaos article is an embarrassing s***post, but clearly falls within the existing disclaimer about "blog/geeky posts that have little news or reporting significance". Also for further context, Totilo only left back in February 2021, well after the Deadspin controversy in late 2019, with Patricia Hernandez officially taking over in late June 2021. So Kotaku had an interim EiC (Riley Macleod) in between Totilo's departure and Hernandez's return, who also left just before she was announced as EiC. Haleth (talk) 01:26, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Yea, I'd move to situational with the note being something like: "Generally reliable, but exercise caution as site has reputation for low-effort geek culture commentary, opinionated writing, listicles, clickbait, and left-leaning political bias." I'd also like to add that other game journalism sources engage in similar behavior. Kotaku is one of the worst offenders, but editors should use the same keen eye when working with any source. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 03:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I'll repeat what I said at the last discussion: this is not unique to Kotaku, and clickbait is now a recurring problem in video game journalism. Between the good stuff, there will also be memes, top ten lists, and efforts to jump in on the zeitgeist. Negative reviews absolutely generate clicks. I don't think Kotaku should be singled out here, and I think we need a broader policy that distinguishes what level of editorialism is appropriate. Obviously, we write entire review sections based on video game criticism. But at what point do we decide to exclude a review? I still haven't seen exactly how Kotaku has been used to write a bad Wikipedia article, and I think that's because we have common sense not to write anything based on this. I am not convinced of bias, which is to say, I haven't seen it more than any game site that has their own take on what games/companies are doing good work. But examples are helpful to guide discussion. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:19, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Kotaku is fine—or at least, they're no better or worse than most other outlets we consider reliable. With respect to everyone here, this is the same debate about old vs. new journalism. Yes, Kotaku is biased. But you know what else is biased? Strictly focusing on factual coverage while ignoring analysis/interpretation or wider social impacts, pretending that crunch or other controversies don't exist, or relying on venture capital funding as a metric of which games/studios/publishers to cover. That's "professional" journalism. Just as biased. Woodroar (talk) 15:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I unfortunately don't think there's anything to besmirch Kotaku versus the output of lots of other games journalism. The same basic scrutiny and common sense needs to be applied when using it as a source as any other source—if it's a garbage article then don't use it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 22:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I think that's where I'm at. I'm disappointed by their recent output, but I'm not sure what to do about it. Not sure if it's enough to change anything. Sergecross73 msg me 22:36, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I think if they have a string of big articles they're forced to take down or significantly amend, that might be reason to deprecate coverage going forward, and so that's what I'd be looking for if we have another one of these discussions. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 21:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't have too much to add right now. I think it's good for us to periodically consider shifts in the quality of some of our flag ship sources. I do believe Kotaku is somewhat pushing the boundaries, but what we'll critically want to watch for is a shift to pure opinion or factual issues. I do think there's something to be said for considering the intersection between sources like Kotaku and WP:GNG though. Sources that are known to throw out daily mill stuff may be worth making a note on what coverage should be seen as applying towards GNG. It's problematic if we keep questionably notable topics on the back of Kotaku millgrind articles. -- ferret (talk) 21:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

I think this is the more relevant question, and also applies to other sites that are adding more "lifestyle" articles (the most generous way I can describe it), in between traditional news and reviews. A Wikipedia article will document facts. A Wikipedia article will even document opinions about games or studios in the review section. But is there a point where certain opinions should be excluded? If a journalist reports news, but heavily editorializes it with their own opinion, do we go so far as to exclude the news too? Are there opinions we might include, but that wouldn't count towards notability / supporting a topic under its own article? Conventional journalism is fracturing and changing due to hyper-competition, and these are questions we are eventually going to have to answer. Shooterwalker (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Deku Deals (limited use)

Find video game sources: "Deku Deals" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I would like to discuss adding Deku Deals as situational, for a very specific use case of verifying that a game has been released in a country. At least for Nintendo Switch games, if they are discontinued in a region, it's very difficult to verify that they were formerly released in that region, even if one has the eShop URL, as that URL will just return a 404 on Nintendo's servers and none of the eShop pages are archived by wayback machine. Deku Deals tracks games using the data from the actual eShop and displays a lot more historical data than the eShop itself. In particular, the fact that a game has had its price tracked by DD should be proof enough that it was formerly released in that region. DD also tracks PS and Xbox releases, although I'm not so familiar with those platforms and so not sure if this would be a help for those also. Kidburla (talk) 09:54, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Given DD has limited mention in VG RSes and all related to tracking eShop sales, I would agree that its use limited to supporting release dates on the eShop when that information cannot be sourced elsewhere is fine. --Masem (t) 14:57, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

I disagree. If the information can't be sourced elsewhere, that's a good sign it's inappropriate for Wikipedia. We shouldn't be looking to storefronts—whether they sell the product directly or earn a commission via affiliate links, like Deku Deals—to add more database cruft. Woodroar (talk) 15:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Collider

Find video game sources: "Collider" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

This site has been regarded as reliable in this discussion. As said there, the site seems to have an editoral team and a fact checking policy. They also have other policies in place, which could possibly enhance their trustworthiness. Jurta talk 16:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't know if we necessarily need to list it as its not a video game specific source, but it certainly would be a reliable source when it covers video games. --Masem (t) 18:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Onono

Find video game sources: "Onono" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Since this site looks decent at first glance. Per [1] "Can I write for Onono?" says "Yes. Everyone is welcome to write for Onono." Hence, unreliable. Filing here so we can add it to the list. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 10:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Unreliable - per WP:USERG. Sergecross73 msg me 00:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Unreliable also per WP:USERG. -- ferret (talk) 00:10, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

TheGamer (again)

I'd like to reopen Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources/Archive_25#TheGamer. At the tail end of this discussion, Haleth noted that the EiC had recently changed, though no further comments were made. This is the kind of articles the new EiC is publishing. I've got some concerns, to be honest. Should this really be listed as a situational source for the 1 year that McKeand ran things? The project continues to move further and further towards declaring parts of Valnet properties to be unusable in a variety of situations. -- ferret (talk) 23:52, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm struggling to see the problem with that article. It's a little bloggy, but it's a fairly standard opinion piece that wouldn't feel out of place on sites like Kotaku (or even IGN). It's fair enough to question the site, but I don't think that article is a good example of unreliability. – Rhain ☔ 00:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Metro Gaming

The Metro Gaming source was listed as unreliable, however, in the discussion about using this font for games, no consensus was reached, as we can see here. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 12:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Metro is considered unreliable on a project-wide scope. See WP:METRO. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 13:38, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Yup, no reason to think it's different with their gaming section. Sergecross73 msg me 20:04, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Overgame

Find video game sources: "Overgame.com" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I have run into this website a few times, but I have never seen it on Wikipedia. They say about themselves: "Overgame is historically the first French online magazine devoted to the world of video games, launched in 1996.". However, they do not seem to be very acknowleged among other sources and sites. What should we do? --Marcodpat (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Strana Igr/Gameland/Страна игр

Find video game sources: "Strana Igr" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

On the page for reliable sources, there seems to be only three Russian sources out of hundreds. Figured that I'd pitch in the magazine Strana Igr as a reliable source, which has had its own Wikipedia page since December 2013. Its name in Russian is Страна игр while the translation to English is Gameland. There's a decent amount of the magazine scanned on The Internet Archive and numerous websites have cited it upon a quick Google search. It was in circulation from January 1996 to November 2013; thus, 17 years worth of content in a language/country that is barely represented within the sources seems worthwhile to me. FYI, in regards to including it in the reception sections, they rated games by adding points in 0.5 increments, up to 10 total. Each review also had an author listed. Xanarki (talk) 02:47, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Looper

Find video game sources: "Looper" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Is Looper a reliable source for video games and internet culture? It's owned by the same media group that owns the already considered reliable source SVG, and also has an editorial policy with an established set of writers, some of whom have also written for SVG. Perhaps it's a Polygon/The Verge scenario here? PantheonRadiance (talk) 19:50, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Unreliable - Ive had a lot of the same problems I have with Dexerto and Inverse with Looper - clickbait headlines with 4 paragraphs of empty prose essentially saying "Hey guys, 6 months ago, (much awaited video game) was announced as as having a 2022 title and...as of today....that hasn't changed." It's got a real churnalism/clickbait combo problem. Sergecross73 msg me 19:56, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Really? Even with their editorial policy? Hmm... just out of curiosity, what do you think of SVG then? What makes them more reliable or better in comparison to Looper? PantheonRadiance (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with SVG, so I can't comment on that. But the stuff Looper churns out is low quality. They wrote an entire article about not knowing the title of the Breath of the Wild sequel. Here's a whole article about not knowing when Mario Kart 9 will be released - a game that hasn't even been announced yet. Here's an entire article explaining how Nintendo didn't want to announce hardware because it wanted to announce software. I know that basically the whole industry is guilty of clickbait headlines to varying degrees, but I really struggle with the low quality of the content behind the headlines, which is far worse than industry standard. Sergecross73 msg me 03:27, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Reliable. Looper is owned by ZergNet, and we consider its sister site SVG reliable. Their policy page lists strict adherence to fact-checking and accuracy and always providing sources for claims, and clicking on the links on their staff page shows numerous writers with good credentials. I recently used it for A Death in the Family (comics), which passed FAC with no issue. The article I cited in question was written by Chris Sims, a published author who's written for multiple reliable sources. From my personal experience Looper is a good source. As for clickbait/churnalism—I've found those articles are no worse than others published by other sites we consider reliable. JOE BRO 64 01:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Uh oh... it seems we have a dilemma here. Sergecross73 believes that Looper creates clickbait articles about rumors and non-news, but TheJoebro64 considers it reliable and has used it for a Featured Article. I originally also thought Looper was fully reliable to use as a source because of its editorial policy (and admittedly I still kind of do), and I figured that editors would unanimously agree that it's reliable... but after seeing Sergecross's post, I'm now a bit uncertain about it. Perhaps I'll just wait for more people to discuss the outlet. PantheonRadiance (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

I don’t really think this is a dilemma—this stuff happens all the time. I think Looper is reliable. Serge doesn’t. Different views are pretty common when it comes to source discussions here. JOE BRO 64 22:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Participation has been unusually low lately, but we generally get more input over time. If not, we can always eventually leave a comment at the main WT:VG to see if we can muster up any other participation as well. Sergecross73 msg me 22:26, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Unreliable. I almost forgot that Looper had a website. I'm used to seeing them on YouTube, where they pump out endless numbered listicles, recaps ("what you need to know about X before the sequel"), and clickbaity "news" that's a quote or two from an interview—conducted by another media outlet—padded with minutes of filler. The website looks the same. In fact, their videos are just someone reading their articles. What it comes down to is that Looper doesn't actually make anything original, it's repurposed content all the way down. To be fair, at least they link to their sources on articles and show the source onscreen on their videos. Which raises the question, why cite Looper when we should be citing the original source instead? Woodroar (talk) 23:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that's similar to how GoNintendo is too. We generally deem it as unreliable...and it really doesn't affect things much because it's 99% reworking of other website's content where editors can just cite the original instead. Sergecross73 msg me 23:54, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

In a stunning display of how Google works with your data, this discussion has landed Looper into my Google News feed. And every single hit is some meaningless article as described by Woodroar. Same kind of garbage as Screenrant/Gamerant/Cbr/etc. I could see very specific review pieces maybe being used but in general their content is a mess we should stay away from. -- ferret (talk) 00:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I would say they're a situational source that is better off replaced with unquestionably-reliable ones where possible. Not all their articles are clickbait or low-effort churnalism, and they do have authors with decent pedigrees, but it's too spotty to endorse. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 00:16, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

It's honestly really bizarre how Looper supposedly has a lot of clickbait articles, yet its sister site SVG somehow doesn't have the same problems, especially considering how both of their editorial policies are virtually identical. So what makes SVG reliable but Looper not? Did anyone identify the same issues with SVG that Looper has? Should that source be considered situationally reliable or unreliable as well? PantheonRadiance (talk) 22:02, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Just commenting that I finally told Google to stop including Looper in my suggested news feed because I saw literally 5 Looper articles back to back named "Actor/actress x tells us what we all already knew about how actor/actress y behaves on set." Literally the exact same headline five times about different actors. How do we denote what's good or not when there's so much bad? I'm not seeing how it's reliable at all and would lean to unreliable. It's unlikely Looper will ever have anything usable that another reliable source doesn't. -- ferret (talk) 02:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

GamingBolt

Find video game sources: "Gamingbolt.com" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk
Find video game sources: "GamingBolt" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

A few months ago this site was marked as reliable. Their About Us and Staff pages are lacklustre (I can't find any instances of their main staff writing elsewhere), but their articles seem quality enough. I'm not sure we analysed the site enough and I think we would benefit from a wider discussion (the last one only had three participants). Outside the most recent discussion, Gamingbolt was mentioned here, but it amounted to nothing. Anarchyte (talk) 14:22, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Advancing some sort of stance might help discussions. Sergecross73 msg me 23:59, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

My instinct is that the site is unreliable based solely on their terrible about us and staff pages, but I wouldn't be opposed to filing them under inconclusive. Anarchyte (talk) 06:15, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Gamingbolt has been around for a while though (how long exactly, I am not sure). The lack of meaningful content on their about us and staff pages does not necessarily indicate in any way that they could be dubiously reliable. The group of websites owned by Valnet (Screen Rant, Game Rant, The Gamer, CBR) all share the same editorial policies and similar "about us" pages, which I must say are all quite transparent and well written. That is not enough to sway many editors from considering them to be highly quality sources or be deemed fully reliable in discussions like these. I think some editors place less scrutiny on what a potentially reliable source say about themselves, and more towards what they have to say about video game content or real world aspects of the industry, and how they actually say it. I am not sure why no one else has participated in this discussion about Gamingbolt, but I'd say consensus from previous discussions is conclusive enough for it to be considered reliable without a doubt. Haleth (talk) 04:04, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Add Fandom

With Wikia now Fandom since October 2016, can I add Fandom on the "Unreliable sources" section on this page? (I would add that to other WikiProject sources pages as well.)

* Fandom ^{(see Wikia below on this list)}

Or how about rename from Wikia to Fandom on that section and organize that entry in alphabetical order? --Allen ^{(talk / ctrb)} 05:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I added FANDOM as an alias for Wikia. IceWelder [✉] 05:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Time to introduce some Japanese sources

Find video game sources: "Den Faminicogamer" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Game*Spark" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Inside" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "GameBusiness.jp" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Bugbug.news" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "TG Smart" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Find video game sources: "Moe-ge.net" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

We Chinese Wikipedia Wikiproject Video Game participants launched a one-year-long discussion of finding reliable sources in Japanese and Chinese in 2021. I would like to present some of our discussion results here.

The first one is called Den Faminicogamer (電ファミニコゲーマー). Its name looks like a hybrid of Dengeki and Famitsu, but in fact they are not related. From my observations, Den Faminicogamer produces a good number of insightful news reports. From their about page, the chief editor, TAITAI, was the vice-chief editor of 4Gamer, an already reliable Japanese source (See here for a list of articles by him). Other editors mostly have experience in other sites, which I will introduce below.

The next ones are from an IT company called IID, Inc. [ja]. They have launched three video game-related sites: Game*Spark, Inside and GameBusiness.jp. Their article quality is fine. One special note is that one of the editors of Den Famicogamer was the vice-chief editor of Inside.

The Japanese eroge market is still shrinking. However, there are still two magazines alive. The first one is BugBug [ja]. and the other one is Megastore [ja]. Before 2021, there was a third magazine called Tech Gian [ja]. Although it is hard to get a copy of Japanese eroge magazine from outside of Japan (well, at least it is possible to get a digital copy from DLsite, DMM, or E-h****i^{[just kidding]}), BugBug and Tech Gian both have launched websites: bugbug.news and TG Smart. The contents of their websites sometimes include a portion of their magazine so we can get a glimpse of them.

There is an industry-wide eroge award named Moe Game Award [ja].For each year's winners, they have commentary (from chief editor of BugBug and more) to them, which I believe constitutes valid introduction for an eroge. (For example, this is the page for the latest winner of the grand prize, Maitetsu: Last Run!!) It also worth noting that they also have launched a news website Moe-ge.net this year.

We hope these sources would be useful to achieve a world-wide view of video game articles. There are still more sources we are actively investigating, and we would like to introduce them once we have conclusion. Milky·Defer >Please use ping 16:23, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

I can see a valid argument present for Den Faminicogamer, but the rest of them seem a bit...incomplete...of a rationale to make a call on, based strictly on what is here right now. Sergecross73 msg me 17:44, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh...You made be remember the stress I went through during the FAC of Paper Mario: The Origami King last year where I extensively argued about the reliability of The Stand News. We will try to dig out more, but I am afraid that would be fruitless for the eroge sources because the Japanese strictly separates games for all-ages and for adults-only. Neverheless, we will try. Milky·Defer >Please use ping 17:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

One thing to add is that there are some culture differences between the east and the west. In Japan, major news websites are managed by various IT companies. They don't usually put emphasis on individual authors (in fact, they seldomly use their true names), you don't often see a page that lists all their authors' resumes. The same is also true for Chinese sources. Milky·Defer >Please use ping 18:19, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

I think the first four listed (Den Faminicogamer, Game Spark, Inside, GameBusiness.jp) are reliable. I have used them before and their quality is fine. They sometimes use nicknames for authorship, which I don't like, but I think that's a Japanese cultural thing. They regularly publish interviews with industry professionals ([2], [3], [4], [5]). I'm not familiar with the eroge stuff. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 19:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I feel like we need a bit more than just "I've used them before" as a marker of reliability—we can feasibly use anything on here. Could we have a discussion about the sources weighed towards subjects like editorial oversight, ethics policies, their coverage being picked by other outlets? Things which indicate wider reliability. I have no experience with these publications, so if we want them added, I feel a case has to be a bit more persuasively made. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 22:56, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I can second TarkusAB on this subject. I've also used DenFaminicoGamer, Game*Spark and Inside multiple times for various articles. I can say with confidence that they are reliable sources, since they do interviews with developers and host news for Japan-only titles. For example, I've used Inside on two articles for PC Engine shoot 'em ups when searching for their release dates on Virtual Console. Roberth Martinez (talk) 04:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I also want to express support for BugBug. BugBug is an eroge-focused publication that has been going since the 1990s. Roberth Martinez (talk) 04:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Well Den Faminico Gamer should be definitely be OK. Editor is from 4Gamer.net, hosts interviews with industry people, and has an about us page with editors listed. Now looking at the IID sites, they do not post formal editorial policies, however they appear professional in other aspects. The sites do indeed have editors, and the articles are staff-written. Here is an interview with the editor for Inside ([6]). They also regularly publish interviews with industry professionals (linked above), and have been given special preview access at company offices as a media outlet ([7]). It's unlikely, especially in Japan, that they would have this level of access unless they were considered professional by the industry. Siliconera, which is known for translating info on Japanese gaming sites for English readers, has translated IID sites often ([8]) TarkusAB^talk/contrib 05:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

List of BugBug staff from vol.319, list of Tech Gian staff from last volume(can find in some pirate website), list of Megastore staff from vol.342.Tech Gian has been cited by Anime News Network:[9][10]. Magazine and book are the main secondary sources medium for most of the eroge and online source is rare, so it is hard to find if they picked by other outlets.--So47009 (talk) 13:34, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding staff qualifications, current BugBug editor-in-chief is Masu Osawa (マス大澤), who also called Tadamoto Osawa (大澤忠基), has worked for BugBug since 1999 ([11],"マス大澤氏が編集長に就任したのは1999年。"). Most of the writer are using nicknames, but someone name can find in other places. For example, Dansuke Tatekawa (立川談之助), who has wroten bishojo game review for computer magazine POPCOM (ja:ポプコム)[12], now is the writer of BugBug. Tech Gian editor-in-chief was Masaaki Omura (大村正明), has worked as the chief of Enterbrain's character content department at the same time ([13]). He was involved in the production of a eroge which called The Beautiful World. BugBug, Tech Gian and Megastore all can date back to 1990s([14] " 「BugBug」（サン出版→富士美出版／1992年創刊）、「メガストア」（コアマガジン／93年創刊）、「TECH GIAN」（アスキー→エンターブレイン→KADOKAWA／96年創刊）")--So47009 (talk) 13:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

The use of nicknames for editorial staff is indeed a cultural difference - we see this even in internationally famous ones like Famitsu, whose articles are often either credited to the staff as a whole, or to staff with nicknames (as seen here, where the first staff review is by "Rolling Uchizawa"). As for these specific ones, I'm familiar with all but moe-ge, and they are outlets published by larger companies (Kadokawa Corporation, IID, Tatsumi Publishing, etc) with editorial staff, and get cited by other sites we consider RSs.--Alexandra^IDV 15:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
For the moe-ge part, its reliability lies within the fact that it is hosted by industry award Moe Game Award. As for the reliability of Moe Game Award, it is widely covered by eroge megazines including (but not limited to) the ones listed above. A complicated trust chain, I admit. Milky·Defer >Please use ping 15:56, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Ginx TV

Find video game sources: "Ginx TV" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Ginx TV. I've recently notice this site being added to various articles on my watchlist, which seems to indicate a potential spam campaign, as I've not seen it before. Mostly, I've seen it be added in places where suitable sourcing is already in an article, i.e. it's just being inserted in addition to other sources. See history of 82.163.127.182 for examples, which looks COI-y.

The site appears to be for a esports-driven web/streaming property. The About Us page explains all this, but does not mention much of their actual news coverage practices. Neither does the FAQ. I cannot locate a Staff page, or any information on an Editor in Chief, or editorial policies. They have a link in the footer to their "Presenters", which is presumably their web shows rather than their writers, but it just redirects to the main page. Clicking on various staff from articles themselves, most have no biography at all or the brief little "loves games and writing about them" type blurbs.

I'm seeing a lot of churnalism and "how to" type articles. So what's the thought on this site? -- ferret (talk) 15:26, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

I couldn't find any articles on their front page that looked more akin to journalism and less akin to "we just copy-pasted some changelogs" and how-to guides. Likewise couldn't find editorial info like you found. Would definitely lean unreliable. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 16:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I have seen a few decent articles from Ginx, although without a staff page or editorial policies, its hard to justify putting it under reliable. Their "Presenters" page did exist as late as January 18, 2022 [15], so perhaps its in the process of an overhaul, but from what I can tell, presenters don't include their writing staff. Would have to lean unreliable. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 16:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Coin945 sources

Ynet

Find video game sources: "Ynet" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Well-regarded Israeli news website containing information on local video games. (Like Master of Dimensions and Piposh. Website: https://www.ynet.co.il/--Coin945 (talk) 15:03, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

If what Coin and its own article say is true, it's probably reliable, but not the type of website we'd list at WP:VG/S, because it's more of a general news source. Like in the same way we wouldn't list The New York Times or something. Sergecross73 msg me 16:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

PC Home

Find video game sources: "PC Home" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

90s-00s video gaming magazine. Wayback link to magazines--Coin945 (talk) 15:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Zombie (magazine)

Find video game sources: "Zombie" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

A youth computer magazine published from 1994 to 1997. There was a companion TV series. Here's a lengthy piece on Zombie by reliable news source Haaretz. Hebrew Wikipedia page.--Coin945 (talk) 15:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

PC Joker

Find video game sources: "PC Joker" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

PC Joker was the first German-language computer games magazine for IBM PC-compatible computers, and had the same publsiher as Amiga Joker (which I believe should also be made a reliable source). German Wikipedia page: http://de.wiki.x.io/wiki/PC_Joker --Coin945 (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

PC Player

Find video game sources: "PC Player" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

There was previously one inconclusive discussion, which I wish to be finalised. The Wikipedia article states "The magazine reached its peak circulation of 140,000 copies in March 1994. İn 1996 it was the best-selling European PC magazine." German Wikipedia page: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/PC_Player_(German_magazine).--Coin945 (talk) 15:25, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Excalibur (magazine)

Find video game sources: "Excalibur" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Excalibur was one of the first magazines in what was then Czechoslovakia to focus on computer games. Czech Wikipedia page: http://cs.wiki.x.io/wiki/Excalibur_(%C4%8Dasopis)--Coin945 (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Micromanía

Find video game sources: "Micromanía" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Founded in 1985, Micromanía is one of the first magazines in Europe dedicated exclusively to discussing video games, along with MicroHobby (which should also be made reliable in my opinion). Spanish Wikipedia page: http://es.wiki.x.io/wiki/Microman%C3%ADa--Coin945 (talk) 15:32, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Do you mean to be asking if it's notable? Or are you meaning to ask if it's reliable? We usually just discuss the latter on this talk page so I wanted to check. Sergecross73 msg me 18:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- I meant reliable. Fixed in the comment above.--Coin945 (talk) 11:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

PC Jeux

Find video game sources: "PC Jeux" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

PC Jeux was aFrench monthly press magazine specializing in PC video games founded in 1997 by Edicorp, sister company of the British press group Future Publishing. It was the French version of the British magazine PC Gamer. French Wikipedia article: http://fr.wiki.x.io/wiki/PC_Jeux --Coin945 (talk) 15:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

PC Action

Find video game sources: "PC Action" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

PC Action was a German computer games magazine, published by Computec in Fürth. German Wikipedia article: http://de.wiki.x.io/wiki/PC_Action--Coin945 (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Mr. Bill's Adventureland

Find video game sources: "Mr. Bill's Adventureland" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I doubt this would be deemed reliable, but I've seen it used around the place so would like to have it officially declared one way ro the other. Archived home page --Coin945 (talk) 16:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiz (magazine)

Find video game sources: "Wiz" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Israeli game magazine from the 90s. Link to multiple issues: https://issuu.com/search?q=%D7%95%D7%95%D7%99%D7%96%20wiz--Coin945 (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Mega Score

Find video game sources: "Mega Score" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Mega Score was a Portuguese monthly magazine specializing in video games. Portuguese Wikipedia article: http://pt.wiki.x.io/wiki/Mega_Score.--Coin945 (talk) 16:23, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Riki (magazine)

Find video game sources: "Riki" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

A magazine that's been super helpful for my articles on Czech and Slovakian video games. For a time it was the only computer game magazine in Slovakia. Slovakian Wikipedia article: http://sk.wiki.x.io/wiki/Riki_(%C4%8Dasopis)--Coin945 (talk) 16:25, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

@Coin945: It's extremely unlikely you will get responses on most of these submitting them all at once. Please slow down, and if possible, note the 2-3 you are most in need of evaluation on. This is a huge list and participation at this page is not high enough to parse this volume. -- ferret (talk) 16:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it's often a struggle to get a discussion going on 1 or 2 sources at a time, let alone an amount like this... Sergecross73 msg me 17:03, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I consider all magazines that were in public circulation (i.e. you could buy it in a shop/newsstand) to be reliable sources of the time, so I guess you can add support under all of those unless there are specific objections on some grounds that I don't know of. They are as "video game journalism" as you can get in the era, contemporary oxymoron implications aside. Not sure how many of these (as scans) I have, but I have heard/seen of at least a bunch of the ones listed. I think a couple are in reference library too. — HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK 17:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Ferret and Sergecross73, and I would decline this proposal for now. It's possible that many of these are fine, but it's hard to have a discussion about this many proposals at once. Pick just a few that are important to improving an article right now, and let's discuss those. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:32, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Sirus Gaming

Find video game sources: "Sirus Gaming" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Added recently to the Kid A Mnesia Exhibition article, but I'm not sure it's useable. Any thoughts? Popcornfud (talk) 13:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Appears to be a by-gamers-for-gamers website. I didn't find anything on their "About Us" page about any of their staff having significant journalism experience. Along with no editorial policy, I'd have to say unreliable. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 18:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Upcomer

Upcomer.com is currently listed as the newest RS in our esports section. In an unfortunate development, since that's not a space with a ton of great outlets, they appear to have just cut most of their writing staff in the kind of pivot-to-video that we've seen all too often. It's probably worth keeping an eye on this one, because the editorial standards on videos are often lower after this happens. Courtesy ping to previous discussion participants Pbrks and IceWelder. Alyo (chat·edits) 18:30, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. The good news is that it still looks like the company has the same management, but there's quite a few editors in that Tweet that generally put out very quality content. We'll certainly have to keep an eye on it in the coming months. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 22:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Forbes' Matt Gardner

The first time I saw this source on Forza (series), I initially thought that it would be better to not cite his articles since Matt Gardener is a contributor to Forbes. I removed the source with this edit per WP:VG/RS and because I could not establish the author's reliability (his LinkedIn page did not help much), but now I see independent sources like USA Today, SVG.com and PPE.pl (which I assume is also reliable) citing his articles. I recall years ago from my editing experience that there is a precedent to use Forbes articles written by contributors, but only if those contributors' reliability can be established. I am not sure what to make of this one, though. Free Media Kid$ 22:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I'd generally say no. See WP:FORBESCON. It's bigger than just a WP:VG thing. Sergecross73 msg me 22:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I see. It now makes more sense as to why some articles by contributors to Forbes may be usable. Consensus is that they may be used if their authors are subject-matter experts, but not as sources of information about living people. In this case, I see no evidence that Matt Gardner is one of them. Free Media Kid$ 23:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

GamesHub

Find video game sources: "GamesHub" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I came across this article from a site named GamesHub while I was working on Assassin's Creed Odyssey. The article seems to be of good quality, and the site seems to be reliable, but I didn't use it in the article because I am unfamiliar with the site and it has never been discussed here. Edmond Tran is the managing director, and I remember he was a staff at GameSpot. OceanHok (talk) 11:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

WhatCulture again

Find video game sources: "WhatCulture" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

I know WhatCulture has been discussed on here and elsewhere on Wikipedia before, and consensus has always been that its unreliable, due to the fact that anyone can write articles there. However, the site also has staff writers, (see https://whatculture.com/team) and it seems no one here has ever addressed that part. Hence, I've wanted to bring this back up. Should we move it under situation sources, and treat it like other sites that accepts both user-generated content and staff-written content, like Destructoid and Giant Bomb? MoonJet (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

A quick look at the directors, operations, and editorial staff shows that most of them have very little experience outside of WhatCulture—the most would be Andrew Pollard (though not at anywhere reliable) and Joshua Brown (TouchArcade, GameRevolution, Fanbyte, Digital Trends). This doesn't make it automatically reliable or unreliable, of course, but I certainly understand the hesitancy to deem it situational. – Rhain ☔ 00:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

So, you're suggesting that we should take the About.com/Dotdash route and only cite certain authors, staff or not? In that case, Jess McDonnell also writes there, (https://whatculture.com/author/jess-mcdonell) whom doesn't appear on the staff page, but she previously worked for GameSpot. Maybe we could at least add a note to only cite authors that have credentials elsewhere? MoonJet (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting anything. With so few authors with reliable histories, it's probably safer to exclude the source overall. – Rhain ☔ 14:26, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Still, I would prefer to note that certain authors there can be cited, just so people don't automatically go around and remove any cites to WhatCulture. You get what I mean? MoonJet (talk) 20:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think we would need to change the comments on the source. Surely the author being reliable would be enough. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:41, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

If indeed the author is reliable. Author reliably is often tied to the fact they work for a reliable site with establish editorial review. This is the same reason we don't treat the 2-3 frequent video game contributors at Forbes as reliable, even though we all know they rarely if ever post wrong information. They have no editorial oversight. -- ferret (talk) 18:10, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

thegamer.com and gamerant.com are identical.

Currently using this very useful list as a basis for an article I'm writing. I just stumbled across [16] which I realized has the exact same proportions / font / styling as [17] which has me concerned, since one of them is an accepted source on the list, and the other is situational. Essentially unsure what to do so posting here! — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 18:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

They are published by the same company, Valnet, just like Screen Rant. All three use the same software for their website, so the layout is the same. The staff and content, however, are different. You can find the same with PC Gamer, GamesRadar+, and TechRadar. All are published by Future and use the same software/layout, but their staff and content diverge. IceWelder [✉] 18:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for the information! — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 18:46, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Not gonna fight it but I think thegamer should be treated the same as the other Valnet properties. -- ferret (talk) 19:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Is it not? All three share a table, with similar limitations. – Rhain ☔ 10:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Appears it is, the OP said it wasn't and I didn't check. :) -- ferret (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Since TheGamer is mentioned again, I thought I'd link this post as a reference point for future discussions about their reliability. At the very least, they seem introspective enough about their shoddy past. Haleth (talk) 09:33, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Ovicio.com

Find video game sources: "...Ovicio.com..." – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

This is a Portuguese site that covers video games, films and comics. I recently bumped into it when searching for resources for Sonic-related articles. Is anyone here able to determine the reliability of this site?

Here's the English-translated version: https://ovicio-com-br.translate.goog/ MoonJet (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Sister site https://overplay.com.br/ should also be evaluated alongside. I'm a proponent of us vetting more non-English sourcing, however, I've not been able to find any sort of About Us, Editorial Policy, Staff Page, etc, so far. Not even a directly visible copyright notice anywhere. Both pages link to Facebook profiles that are only created in the last two years. Ovicio.com's archives go back to 2010 though, while Overplay seems to have been spun up in 2020. Clicking on authors takes you to a list of articles they have written with no description or credentials provided about the author. This spree of listicles is not encouraging. -- ferret (talk) 12:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

It seems they try to suppress the display of it, but I hit one page that did show a watermark and link to a one man Wordpress developer (www.fabiolobo.com.br) who apparently provides the theme/coding for this site, which is indeed Wordpress based. That in and of itself isn't a problem, Wordpress is used everywhere, but it doesn't lend a sense that this is a big operation or established company. Miguel Oliveira appears to be the owner of Ovicio, and he has a testimonial on Fabio's site. The site's involvement is actually documented at https://www.fabiolobo.com.br/trabalho/o-vicio -- ferret (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that. No "About Us" page or anything. Weird. As for the listicle thing, they do pertain to one character each, to be fair. MoonJet (talk) 14:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

That's kinda the issue though. They are just taking a list of characters for a series/franchise and indiscriminately, one a day, putting out a list. It doesn't suggest any particular importance to any character since they're running through them all. And that's all that particular author does, once a day, a new listicle about a character from the franchise they are currently running through. -- ferret (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, they talk about their creation and everything too. I think you need to look beyond the fact that they are listicles. MoonJet (talk) 14:38, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey, @Ferret:, I just looked at an archived version of the site, and they have a privacy page and a terms and conditions page there. See: https://web.archive.org/web/20160831160038/http://ovicio.com.br/ MoonJet (talk) 05:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
ToS and Privacy page do not aid Reliability determinations, really. Though it does shed some more light on what company may own the site, or at least at that time did. It seems the site was owned by or at least hosted by R7 at the time, but perhaps that's no longer the case? All of the articles on that front page are by Miguel though, suggesting it may have been a one man operation at the time. -- ferret (talk) 13:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

NerdCubed

Hello, I would like to ask if NerdCubed, a popular and renowned gamer and game reviewer who is even in charge of his own company that has made 3 games, is a reliable source for video game articles/pages on this site, like his list of Top 100 greatest games of all time.

He doesn't violate any of wikipedia's source reliability rules from what I can tell, and he doesn't seem too different from the already-accepted Electric Playground Network.

Eseseso (talk) 02:23, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Eseseso

Unreliable - looking him up, it looks like he's primarily just a Youtuber who self-publishes his own stuff. That's not generally what we look for in reliable/usable sources on Wikipedia. We're generally looking for websites/magazines/publications that have professional credentials and editorial policies, standards, editorial oversight, etc. I'm sure he's a great guy...but he sounds less like any of that, and more like a popular guy who uploads lots of videos straight to the internet. Sergecross73 msg me 03:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Serge sums it up. Self-published individual, who happens to be popular. -- ferret (talk) 12:48, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Gameswelt

German game news and review site Gameswelt has surprisingly never been evaluated here, despite hundreds of citations on WP, including a decent amount even on the English WP. The site has been around since 1999, and demonstrably has editorial oversight, as well as a large, paid staff. I don't see any reason this wouldn't pass the RS criteria, considering it seems de facto accepted as a RS already, but I'll still present it here to get it on record. Any objections to me adding it to the approved list? Phediuk (talk) 06:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Nothing much to add, appears to be reliable. -- ferret (talk) 13:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, it seems reliable. BenSPVE (talk) 23:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Screenage Wasteland and DigitalDreamDoor

Hello,

Would the sites of Screenage Wasteland (which has done various lists and such that focus on games, including a top 500 games list that begins here) and DigitalDreamDoor (which among other gaming things has its own list of greatest games of all time) be considered "reliable sources"?

Screenage Wasteland definitely seems like a reliable source by this site's standards, and seems no different from other journal/magazine sites that have had their gaming lists accepted.

DigitalDreamDoor was a bit less certain to me, but looking at the lists it seems like they have multiple individuals look over things such as the games put in their ranking lists and use some criteria when listing them. It also seems to follow all of wikipedia's source reliability standards from what I can tell.

Eseseso (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Eseseso

Both unreliable. No reputation for fact checking, no editorial policies, no credentialed staff. The staff page of Screenage Wasteland includes such descriptions as "I'm that guy that writes about Star Wars and shit." and "I like horror and stuff, but I hate most things.". The site is also only 3 years old. Digitaldreamdoor is older but looks like it's just a blog of some sort. No hallmarks to suggest it's reliable, unless someone knows something I don't. -- ferret (talk) 19:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Unreliable per ferrets analysis. (And the pro arguments don't seem to amount to much of an argument beyond "looks reliable" without much expansion as to why. Sergecross73 msg me 16:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Event Hubs

Find video game sources: "Event Hubs" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

While two editors considered this unreliable in the last discussion back in 2016 with no rebuttals, this site may need another look. Looking at their "about us" page, some of the staff have previous credentials. Maybe it should be listed under situational sources where we can only cite certain authors? MoonJet (talk) 02:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Is there something in particular we should be re-considering? Sergecross73 msg me 02:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Unreliable Since 2016, the only thing to really change on this page is they removed the sentence about how important their community is to them. The staff page has considerably shrunk, but all but two of them are original staff members from 2016. The founder previously worked at E W Scripps (without clarifying under what role), and another "had stints" at Expressen, and another is a recentish college grad who's first job is Event Hubs. Most of them appear to have worked only at Event Hubs as far as reporting. No editorial policy. The top and bottom of the page have a prominent "Submit News" button. They've been cited only a handful of times by other reliable sources I can find, generally for providing translations. Those cases describe the site as a "blog" and "community site". -- ferret (talk) 13:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Esports Insider

Find video game sources: "Esports Insider" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · WP Library · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk · LinkSearch · LinkTo

Esports Insider (About, Team) is a business-focused esports news website, akin to The Esports Observer. Most pieces are on acquisitions, funding, and partnerships. Appears to also write some sponsored content, which is tagged with "Supported by:" at the end of the article (e.g. [18], [19]). Also runs a print and digital magazine, The Esports Journal, in partnership with Latam Media Group. Subsidiary of SBC. I lean reliable; it's a good source for the content it provides. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 13:13, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I would also lean reliable. Separating sponcon and non-sponcon, writing team all seem to have experience/training in journalism, etc. Doesn't look like they're doing anything groundbreaking, but no reason to believe their coverage of business moves isn't reliable. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:06, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Situational, with the specific exclusion of sponsored content. -- ferret (talk) 02:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm leaning reliable as well, per Pbrks reasoning. Obviously the sponsored stuff is out, but I think that goes without saying with any source really, alongside any time a website clearly just posts a literally press release, or allows for user-blogging. Sergecross73 msg me 16:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

ppe.pl

Came across a Polish gaming outlet called ppe.pl. It has a sizable amount of citations on pl.wiki.x.io, as well as a few on en.wikipedia. The website itself also attracts a pretty large amount of visitors in Poland, nearly matching the amount of visitors Twitch gets there, and getting more than wargaming.net. From what I can tell, it's a pretty notable gaming outlet in its home country and reputable enough to be cited on pl.wiki.x.io on numerous occasions, so I'll leave it here for evaluation.

--Anonymouseditor2k19 (talk) 02:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

As always, difficult to evaluate sites you can't read natively, however, I think is behooves us to try. Site appears to be 12 years old, founded in 2010. "PSX Extreme veterans" is quoted as being the set of people who founded the site. They do appear to use freelancing, but have a permanent editorial staff. The editorial staff has several decade long members, but none with apparent journalism credentials outside of their work on this site itself, which I think is a red flag but not necessarily a show stopper. I can't find anything that's clearly an editorial policy. However I do believe it's a serious fully registered company and not simply some blog, which is a plus. More opinions needed. -- ferret (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd lean towards fine. PPE.PL is not some independent hobbyist blog but it is part of the portfolio of a bigger corporation, Roger Żochowski is the editor-in-chief of both PPE.PL and print magazine pl:PSX Extreme (the website and the magazine used to both be owned by the same company). It's the biggest video game website in Poland. I'd consider it equivalent, say, to JeuxVideo.com. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 14:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, this context helps a lot in my mind. I wasn't sure what PSX Extreme was, whether it was some fan group or what. I'd lean to reliable then. -- ferret (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Same, I went through the exact same thing. PS Extreme sounds like a run of the mill fansite, but now that I think of it, I do recall that being a print magazine. It being founded/run by a print magazine staff gives it more credibility in my eyes. Leaning reliable. Sergecross73 msg me 16:57, 23 May 2022 (UTC)