Talk:The Dark Pictures Anthology: Directive 8020

Should this article be merged with the other current draft?

@1AmNobody24: @ZooBlazer: @Amakuru: Hello, all. Sorry to bother you. I created the draft for this article before I knew that another one had already been started. To be honest, that draft is far superior than the one I started here. I did intend to expand on it and add more about the game, but I think just merging the content in the draft with this article would work just fine. Or, alternatively, we could delete this stub here, and then leave the other draft, and wait to move it to main space when the game comes out.

My apologies if what I said makes no sense whatsoever. To put it far more simply, we could:

a) Delete this article here and save the draft at Draft:The Dark Pictures Anthology: Directive 8020, or

b) Merge the old (frankly better) draft with the main space article clear here.

Thoughts? Sincerely, Professor Penguino (talk) 11:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Professor Penguino - thanks for the note, and that's fine. The main issue with the current draft as it stands is that the material in the lead appears to be uncited. So if those bits can be cited now then we could directly move it over the top of your stub. Option 2,we could also move the draft and then chop out the uncited bits for the time being. Alternatively, option 3 if you just want to bring in the bits that are cited for the time being, then a merge would be in order. Up to you really. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 12:13, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Professor Penguino I've had a discussion with ZooBlazer about this here. My point was that the significant coverage part of WP:GNG is lacking, but acceptable for a Stub. His pont was that since not even the developers have confirmed anything it' Too soon for an article. (Which I can also agree with.) Nobody (talk) 12:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@1AmNobody24: I think the stub is fine as is, it's sourced to several articles on the subject (although I'm always a little unsure what the community accepts when it comes to gaming news sites, it's a grey area at WP:RSN). I think you were fine to accept it and it can go through AFD if people think it doesn't yet meet GNG. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 13:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

@Amakuru

The main issue with the current draft as it stands is that the material in the lead appears to be uncited.

That's becauae the lead is supposed to be a summary of the body of the article. Everything that can be cited is done so. The other info is the basic things from the other games in the series which will be cited when there is actually refs to use for those particular bits of info. Or they will be removed if changes are confirmed. -- ZooBlazer 20:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)