Talk:GamersGate

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Review[edit]

I notice a few things outside the DYK scope while reviewing the article. I'll list a few here, but it would be worth listing the article for a GOCE copyedit at some point. There were a bunch of places that could use commas for flow, or had clunky grammar.

  • "trust in consumers is acts a source of comfort" typo?
  • "On November 20, 2006 it was" comma after 2006
  • punctuation goes outside quotations almost always (MOS:QUOTE)

Minor stuff. Interesting article czar ♔ 19:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The first item is a typo. I changed it to "...acts as a source...". I fixed the second item and rewrote this and another date in dmy format per MOS:DATEUNIFY since all the other dates in the ref section took this format. The punctuation issue has largely been cleared up, though the period is still placed within the quotation marks in three cases. I think this comports with MOS:LQ but if not then I can fix it. A GOCE review sounds very interesting indeed. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll make a request after the DYK closes. -Thibbs (talk) 00:40, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just put in a request at GOCE. Thanks again for the idea. -Thibbs (talk) 01:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gamersgate is not DRM free![edit]

How can the article call GamersGate DRM free, when you have, according to the FAQ of Gamersgate, be online to install a game? Even downloading a game on an office PC to use the game on a PC at home without internet connection is not possible. In my opinion this is heavy DRM because a downloaded installer is useless without access to the servers at Gamersgate. If the servers get closed down, there will be no more a way to install the games. In consequence, the articles statement "Gamersgate is DRM free" is wrong and should be edited. As of now gog.com and humble bundle are the only digital distribution platforms i know, that are really DRM free. --37.209.89.166 (talk) 07:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. That doesn't square with the claims of The Escapist's Shamus Young who in this 2012 article said: "You don't have to 'log in' to get access to your games, and you can install them wherever you like. You just download your game and install it, with no added DRM." Have GamersGate's policies changed in the last 2 years? The archived version of the FAQ indicates not (on this point anyway). So then is Young using a different definition of DRM? In the same artricle he describes GoG's as using "no DRM whatsoever". Does "no added DRM" mean some small DRM more than "no DRM whatsoever"? I'm not sure how best to tackle this without injecting original research. Perhaps we should simply add a line like "The GamersGate FAQ claims that 'Internet connection is required for performing the installation process. Installation cannot be made manually. It is done automatically and it requires internet connection to be performed properly.'" Ideal would be to find another reliable source comparing GamersGate to GoG and Humble Bundle. Are you aware of any such a source? -Thibbs (talk) 11:55, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-edit[edit]

Hello! As I work on a copy-edit of the article (as requested by @Thibbs:), I'll list suggestions and clarifying questions here. kara❈talk 07:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the sentence "Seeking to provide cheap distribution of games to countries that did not offer them in physical retail stores, GamersGate developed a digital distribution system called "Paradox on Demand", should GamersGate actually be Paradox? According to the article, GamersGate had not yet been developed.
  • The first sentence of the second paragraph of "features" calls GamersGate one of the earliest "sites", while the first sentence of "downloadable content" calls it one of the earliest "stores". I'm guessing they should both be "sites", but because it is a repeated clause I'd say that one of them should be simply be removed completely.
  • GameNerve should be explained; it is introduced but never defined.
  • The information in the "OS X Games" section is mostly already covered in the games section; is there a reason it has a separate section?
  • The name of the free games service is presented in all caps (VOID) as well as normally (Void). Is it an acronym? If not, I'll standardize it as Void.
    • "should GamersGate actually be Paradox?" - checkY I think you're right. I've made the change.
    • "I'm guessing they should both be "sites"" - The intent here was to separately note GamersGate as one of the earliest to offer digital distribution (transmission of a game to a player via internet) and as one of the earliest to offer DLC (transmission of content expansions to players via internet). The two concepts are different. The terms "site" and "store", though, are synonyms here since the site is the store.
    • "GameNerve should be explained" - checkY Done.
    • "is there a reason it has a separate section?" - checkY Good point. That was a historical vestige from the first incarnation of the article. I assume it was only listed because it was a newish (<1 year old) development for the company back in 2010. This was a good move.
    • "Is it an acronym?" - I'm not sure. The company seems to stylize it in all caps and most of the sources I've seen follow this style, but I have seen "Void" used a few times too and I don't think it's a problem to standardize it like that. This looks fine.
Thanks for the assistance, Satkara! -Thibbs (talk) 19:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ioana Manea[edit]

Several recent edits (e.g. 1 and 2) by a Swedish IP editor have been trying to change the "Key people" in the company infobox from Bergquist, Hjelmtorp, and Nisser to Ioana Manea and Nikolay Trusov. I've asked for reliable sources to back up this edit and this allabolag.se link has been offered. I'm not familiar with allabolag.se, although I notice that it's used as a source in some 40 en.wikipedia articles (>600 sv.wikipedia articles) and this entirely non-independently-sourced sv.wikipedia page suggests that they are the most widely consulted source of information on companies (NB: presumably Swedish companies). So the first question is whether allabolag.se is in fact a reliable source.

The second issue is that Ioana Manea is not in fact mentioned by the source offered. Trusov is mentioned, but so is Bergquist and others. As yet I don't think there is sufficient sourcing to call Manea a "key figure"... I searched WP:VG/RS's reliable and situational GCSEs as well as gamersgate.com to see if there was any mention of these new people and I see nothing whatsoever. To be fair, Hjelmtorp and Nisser have far fewer corroborative sources than Bergquist, but there are RSes on the GCSEs that support both of them whereas there seem to be none that support Trusov and Manea. I'm willing to believe that the English sources are lagging behind the Swedish ones if this is a recent change, but we need to have reliable sources that actually support our article's claims.

This leads me to the third issue: The number of staffers at the company. There is a reliable source currently used in the article that puts the number of GamersGate employees at 25. This figure has recently been changed to 4. The edit summary rationale was "inside knowledge" as well as the allabolag.se source (which doesn't makes no claims regarding the number of employees). "Inside knowledge" is an example of original research and cannot be used as a source. Even more problematic, the reliable source claiming 25 employees is now being used as a support for the 4-employees figure. That's clearly inappropriate. If we can locate a reliable source claiming only 4 employees then we must replace the current source which does not support the 4-employees figure.

If the IP editor or anyone else needs help locating and identifying reliable sources then please let me know and I'll do my best to assist them. In the meanwhile I've reverted back to the original claims pending the discovery of appropriate sources for the new claims. -Thibbs (talk) 12:22, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on GamersGate. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:14, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

#GamerGate related harassment.[edit]

Gamersgate was the victim (for lack of a better term) of harassment because it had a similar name to #GamerGate[1]. I think this article should include a paragraph on that. If not, could it go on the #GamerGate article? CatGrass 06:50, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

  • I think it might be OK to include in this article although we want to be careful to give it only the coverage that is due (in other words we want to make sure we're not making it into more of an issue than it really is in relation to GamersGate). And of course it will absolutely require reliable sources (like the Polygon article you linked) for proper references. -Thibbs (talk) 10:30, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, it seems noteworthy, but not huge. Cheers, CatGrass 05:44, 30 June 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CatGrass (talk • contribs)

References

  1. ^ http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/23/7045179/ceo-gamersgate-com-is-not-gamergate

Since Polygon is a "woke" social-justice–oriented propaganda site whose writers constantly lie through their teeth, it is not even remotely a reliable source.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.203.11.159 (talk)

That source is considered reliable at Wikipedia so it is considered reliable for expansion of this article. Complaints, concerns, or queries regarding reliability should be directed to WT:VG/RS or WP:RSN. -Thibbs (talk) 17:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GamersGate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:22, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hatnote discussion at Talk: Gamergate (harassment campaign)[edit]

There is a discussion occurring at Talk:Gamergate_(harassment_campaign)#Hatnote which may be of interest to editors of this page.— Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 01:05, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:GamersGate&oldid=1200481753"