J2UDY7r00CRjH

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work on the Unreal Engine articles! Mika1h (talk) 12:37, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Your Reversion on Yasuke

Isn't it a little much to revert an entire edit because of an improper comma? You could have simply removed the comma rather than reverting. WP:PARTR, for instance, suggests If a contribution is ungrammatical, improve the grammar. If a citation is incorrectly formatted, fix the format. If you have some minor nitpick of policy, then fix it. Brocade River Poems 02:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You are right. That was my mistake. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Game infobox engine field

Hello there, first thanks for adding references to the Unreal Engine fields in the game infoboxes. However, you also appear to continuously removed the field if you cannot find a source. Similar to individual developer credits, check the credits screen or startup logos. Unless there is doubt that the engine was actually used, I would revert the removals on Stray Gods, Tribes 3: Rivals, etc. Regards IgelRM (talk) 23:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@IgelRM Thanks for bringing this up. To my knowledge, Epic no longer shows the version of the engine used in its games in the logo. The logo changed in the second half of Unreal Engine 4's life and has not changed since to my knowledge. See epic's branding page Could you please 1. demonstrate that Unreal Engine 5 is explicitly listed in the credits of any video game (as opposed to just the unreal engine logo without a number, and preferably not from a game owned by Epic) 2. that such logos are considered a valid source for Wikipeida (I don't disagree here, just would like to see some guideline/precedent that shows it can be used, so that it won't be reverted later) and 3. show the proper citation format so that I can use it.

I am not against reverting all these changes, but I will add "citation needed" to all of them, unless there is reason to object to that. In total, I think I removed about 13 games (started at UE5 category having 117 entries, now has 104) and added about 30 missing citations.

Also, to be clear, you agree that if a credits screen or startup logo cannot be found that it should be removed, right? J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 23:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

It would help me understand if the concern is about the field information being inaccurate or sourcing standards. Because e.g. on South Park: Snow Day!, Christopher Brian is not sourced. If it is possible to readily find this sort of information from playing the game/media, I suppose Wikipedians found it not necessary to add a citation like "see credits screen".

Regarding Unreal 4 or 5: if it is unclear, just Unreal Engine should be useful already. I think information should not be continuously removed in this way if there is no suspicion of it being inaccurate. IgelRM (talk) 00:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

>just Unreal Engine should be useful already

Right, I forgot about that possibility J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I will start reverting aforementioned and point to this discussion, where I do not see clear reason for the removal. You could start doing so as well, no rush of course. IgelRM (talk) 00:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

>where I do not see clear reason for the removal

this talk page vg discussion might be relevant: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Game_engine_sourcing_project_feedback:

>In a broad general manner: Yes. If you cannot source an engine and include it in prose, remove it from the infobox

This seems to imply that unless we directly cite the source (eg. via the credits) we should remove it. Might be worth it to open a new discussion on VG to get more input. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 00:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@IgelRM started a discussion here J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand that is good practice, but ferret also says to include it in prose. We would need to ask ferret what in-game information is readily visible enough for sourcing. But the articles you added a web reference in do not have the in prose part, so the practice in not met either. IgelRM (talk) 19:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@IgelRM I think the key word here is "ideally." Also from MOS:INFOBOXCITE:

If the material needs a reference (see WP:MINREF for guidelines) and the information does not also appear in the body of the article, the reference should be included in the infobox.

I am not necessarily against any of your suggestions. I just want to make sure the matter is clear to VG because sometimes my edits have been reverted in the past

>We would need to ask ferret what in-game information is readily visible enough for sourcing

I think I did this already in this discussion. If you think the wording or content of that discussion could be improved, feel free to clarify in that discussion. I'd rather at least open a discussion there for now. I'd also really like a way to distinguish between engine claims that are from the startup logo and ones that are just based on pure speculation. That is why I would like to know how to cite the game as a source directly. My guess is that all the unsourced UE5 claims are from speculation or unreliable sources rather than from the startup logo because as I said you cannot really tell that a game is UE5 from the startup logo. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 19:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you have already. I replied here again since we were talking on how to interpret ferret's comment and just replied on the VG thread too. IgelRM (talk) 19:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@IgelRM Oh, I just responded to that comment there thinking it was on this talk page. I would have worded it somewhat differently if I had noticed that. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 20:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)