User talk:Datumizer - Knowledge (XXG)

722:

worth mentioning that while the majority of scores are very close, the most interesting ones are the ones that aren't close. While those occurrences are rare (our estimates put it around 10-20% of games), we feel like they're worth highlighting. For a cross-platform title, Metacritic lists 3 or more different scores, one for each platform, and Knowledge (XXG) uses the platform that received the most reviews. However, OpenCritic averages across all platforms. What's interesting is when these different methods arrive at different conclusions, and we believe that highlighting that difference is beneficial to users when it occurs. But that also means that highlighting the lack of a difference is equally important, when two different processes and data sets arrived at a similar conclusion. Lastly, we just want to mention that even a few points difference has huge ramifications: going from 79 to 82 moves your ranking from the top 27.5% to the top 15.4%. So while 3 points might not look like much, it's a pretty massive score difference.

3254: 690:

etc.) when calculating the % recommended. We're the only aggregator that shows the overall distribution of review scores, and we highlight where each game lies (ex: "The Witcher 3 is in the top 0.9% of games on OpenCritic"). We're also the only aggregator that lets gamers pick-and-chose their own trusted publications, creating a personalized and individual score. The reason I mention all this is just to say that we don't think about review aggregation as "boiling down all the reviews to a single number" - we think about review aggregation as helping provide consumers with as much information as possible when considering a purchase decision.

2427: 2683: 2053:

transparent about our formulas. We're the only aggregator that provides stats like % recommended or % rank. We're the only aggregator that Metacritic has copied from. We're the only aggregator to publish embargo times. We're the only aggregator with public standards that anyone can verify. We have similar traffic to publications like Nintendo World Report, Hardcore Gamer, GamePlanet, etc. that are listed in that same "critical reception" box.

33: 4258: 3642: 4515: 4469: 4423: 4369: 4206: 4119: 4073: 3910: 3771: 3594: 3037: 2985: 2740: 4012: 3819: 3506: 3423: 3134: 2870: 2797: 2549: 2267: 2220: 1514: 1475: 1436: 1262: 1223: 1184: 1145: 1073: 304: 262: 220: 147: 181: 3739:) I removed dozens of games that people added to advertise their projects, games I updated that were cancelled or ended up being released, and removed redlinks and organized and condensed. I also removed duplicate games, and DLC for games that didn't need to be included as their own, or were already covered. There is no reason for your edit. Please read the style guidelines and 1942:," that word "critic" has to mean something. It means that you're not an ordinary person reviewing games - you're held in some sort of esteem by our society and culture. That's why we have our standards focus on audience size and trust. What separates critics from ordinary reviewers is the presence of an audience. Metacritic seems to no longer care about this distinction. 2128: 3218: 2941: 3088: 2381: 1393: 1348: 1303: 566: 718:, but still haven't received a firm answer: what exactly is the "authority" bar? How does one objectively decide what is an authority, and what isn't? Knowing this bar would help us tremendously. One of our pillars is to be "the source of the critical reception of video games," and thus Knowledge (XXG) is an important milestone to that end. 956:

Instead, we're just looking for feedback. We consider you, as a video game editor, to be an intellectual in the industry that we want to support and thrive in. So we want to know - what do you look for when evaluating OpenCritic as an "industry source"? What are the variables/factors? What are the things we can improve?

3726:

I made dozens of style and format changes to make the article meet Knowledge (XXG) guidlines (and look cleaner and you blanket reverted them literally with the edit summary of basically "I dunno," and didn't even ATTEMPT to help, you just left the article alone. You've been here for 14 years and know

2052:

We think we either match or beat Metacritic on each of these categories. We were the first to have non-scoring reviews. We're the only aggregator to retain the publication's original score format. We're the only aggregator to credit authors in addition to publications. We're the only aggregator to be

2048:

If we're going to be compared to Metacritic, then let's really compare to Metacritic on the metrics that count: how fair is their inclusion process? how accurately do they capture the critical reception of an industry? does their business have any conflicts-of-interest? how much data and transparency

1844:

I understand the benefits of using the templates, and I agree that in future I will try again to use them more conistent. My concern here is the light-hearted usage of reverts (which in my expeirence create often bad blood for little benefit) and the light-hearted destruction of content. I would like

3940:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of

840:

We're still trying to figure out ways to make strides when it comes to Knowledge (XXG) and wanted to update with some of our progress. Previous conversations seemed to mostly conclude "too soon" and that we weren't "enough of a source in the industry." We wanted to continue to challenge that and get

721:

Third, we're concerned about the bar of "significantly different data." OpenCritic shares about 50% of its publications with Metacritic. Most of our games are within a couple points of the Metacritic average. Major titles are usually extremely close (within 1 or 2 points). However, we feel like it's

676:

I'm Matthew Enthoven, CEO of OpenCritic.com. We've been following the review aggregator discussion you started, but I felt like it'd be inappropriate for us to weigh in there given the obvious conflict of interest. However, we did want to mention some of the points that we think about when it comes

955:

The reason I'm writing is: We really want to know what you guys are looking for. This isn't a "please put us on Knowledge (XXG)" type thing: we're young gamers and don't really consider Knowledge (XXG) readers to be our demographic, and as we have no advertising, they'd be revenue-negative anyway.

701:

Part of why we chose to maintain total transparency was to lower the bar for "being an authority." We feel that we have nothing to prove as all of our data, processes, decisions, and calculations are public. Even the "decision" of which publications are included on OpenCritic is based on a set of

689:

the publication that submitted the review. We also supply infographics for game reviews and are continuing to develop there. We're the only aggregator that shows calculated standard deviation, and the only aggregator in games that displays and uses non-scoring reviews (such as Kotaku, Eurogamer,

1783:

Hi SharkD recently we came across each other where you reverted/deleted some ref contributing edits. I have to say I'm a little bit irritated by that. First, in general I added refs to articles which are in critical need for such material. So, this should be highly welcome. Second, sub-optimal

729:. We're creating the ability for users to favorite and subscribe to their favorite critics and publications, and will shortly after be creating user reviews. We're also considering overhauling our scoring system to something similar to Rotten Tomatoes and % recommended, but that's further out. 3226:

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of

2949:

2279:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

1845:

to give you here gentle reminder that other, less drastic possibilities exist.. e.g. a hint on the user page or doing the format yourself. In the end it is wiki, we have to live together here and step up ourselves for things we deem import (e.g. formatting). cheers and have a good day

2882:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2809:

1595:

tell you to omit this step. Secondly, you didn't merge the articles, you redirected them. The articles should go to AfD if you just want to get rid of them. What you did seemed very random without notifying on the Talk page of each article that there was any discussion going on.

3344:

Why would I need to list the frequency of every note when the frequencies are not going to be labelled in the image and when you can easily calculate the frequencies based on the frequency ratios (intervals) once a value is assumed for 1/1 (if 1/1 is 440 Hz then 2/1 is 880 Hz)?

3286:". If you're requesting I would be willing to make images comparing tunings, or at least attempt to. I'd be open to any specific requests or ideas and any suggestions or suggested improvements/corrections of the images I've already made. Just in case you don't know, there's 1934:

I strongly encourage you to do some digging on Metacritic's editorial standards and ask why they're considered a trusted authority at all. In our opinion, much of it is because "they just always have been." Some of these recent decisions aren't the actions of an authority.

952:. We've invested heavily in our technology and our presentation, and believe strongly that, while we draw on the same data as Metacritic, we offer a more complete and informed picture fo a title. As we wrap up our next few features, we're hoping to improve and, well... 1619:

is a music-orientated franchise, but sadly couldn't find any reliable sources to back it up, with Discogs being disallowed and all. Sorry for the initial confusion, I would like to think that I can get the first soundtrack article to GA one day at the very least!

4393:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

4174:

2766:

1085:

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

4178:

Users may edit the articles during the discussion, including to improve the articles to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the articles until the discussion has finished.

684:

on the score. While Knowledge (XXG) may frequently reference scores alone, we feel like aggregators have so much more potential. Available data is one area - OpenCritic is the only review aggregator for video games that correctly cites the author

1979:

Right now, it feels like Metacritic is king because a) they aggregate movies, tv shows, music, and games, inflating their traffic, and b) they always have been. Not because they actually meet the "trusted source" standards of Knowledge (XXG).

2056:

The two publications they added in Q4/Q1 (PlayStation Country, OPnoobs) just really hit it for me. These publications aren't critics. They're probably getting less than 250 visitors to their site each day. Why did Metacritic chose to include

4396:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has

3363: 3276: 1806:

Citation templates are necessary for bots to recognize references. For instance, when a page has gone offline, a bot can detect this and automatically link to archive.org. Please use citation templates when adding content to an article.

1614:

Oops, sorry about that. I thought that there wouldn't be any content worth putting in their parent articles as I've been told in GA reviews that including a tracklist is WP:GAMECRUFT. I might have been able to get away with it seeing as

3937: 1907:

Perhaps the most frustrating part of all this now is that Metacritic is just accepted as a "legitimate source," to the point where they seem to be able to get away with anything. As an example, Metacritic started aggregating

1877:

I agree on that I can (and maybe should) do better here. But on the other hand, also my time is limited and I see greater value in having two sub-optimal formatted good refs in articles than only one well formatted. cheers

2471:

SharkD works on categories, lists, images and templates and helps clean up articles by fixing grammatical and formatting errors. What caught my attention was that he has been diligently crafting one certain article,

3862: 3549: 3177: 2910: 2837: 2307: 2038:

We believe they're still doing it, too, just not in a way that we can prove as definitively. We believe that they load opencritic.com into an iFrame, which is why we see root-level domain referrals from Metacritic:

1975:

Just would be nice to know what specifically Knowledge (XXG) is looking for. Comments like "we haven't even vetted OpenCritic as a trusted source" feel awful, because we don't get any actionable feedback from that.

1113: 2770:

1916:

was added in Q4 last year. I don't want to come across as mean towards a small guy, but they're Alexa ranked 1 million, with less than 5,000 total social media followers, and with no formal journalism background.

360:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 1825:

It is not necessary to use citation templates and information certainly shouldn't be removed because of the lack of citation templates. The use of citation templates is neither encouraged nor discouraged. Read

1650:

Hello and congrats for your work. I'm interested about improving the quality of my additions. Are you OK with me trying again with more refs to Metacritic, reviews and interviews, if that's your requirement?

939:, and we're the only aggregator that maintains the original score format. We also report on the percentage of critics that recommend the title, a statistic that allows us to include non-numeric publications. 841:

more feedback. Since the start of this year, we've added numerous features and seen our presence as an authority rising, so we thought it'd be a good time to ask again "what is it that you guys look for?"

2164:. Having a problem with a maintenance tag without fixing the problem is not appropriate and undermines the efforts who try to improve the encyclopedia. I request that you self-revert. Also, please see 3846:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 3533:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 3161:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2894:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2821:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2291:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 1097:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 1552: 848:, with over 350 critics that have signed up and customized their page. To this day, we are the only aggregator that correctly attributes reviews to their author in addition to their publication. 4222: 4171: 4089: 3832: 3519: 3147: 2763: 1273: 1234: 1195: 1156: 4529: 4023: 3787: 3610: 2231: 315: 3103: 2396: 2045:

It's just frustrating to us that no authority wants to seriously question Metacritic when they're arbitrarily choosing publications, stealing data, and creating anti-industry barriers.

1525: 1486: 1447: 1408: 1363: 1318: 852: 2151: 2131: 4483: 3434: 3053: 3001: 2560: 231: 4437: 3479: 196: 107: 2138:

from Knowledge (XXG). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the

3989: 3970: 476:

has Top 100 in #8, #9, but they are based on user votes. To quote, "The suspense is over. We can reveal what you, the Retro Gamer readers, have voted your favourite 50 games." —

703: 273: 105:, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at 1784:

formatting is NOT a valid reason for removal or revert of valid (even critical!) content. And third, it is a wiki... please help with formatting that stuff. :) all the best...

3685: 2020: 4389: 2146:

for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been

3047:, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the 2995:, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the 1030: 4474: 4460: 3922: 4378: 4124: 3944:

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit

3926: 2752: 2651: 1920:

How did Metacritic evaluate these publications for inclusion? It seems pretty arbitrary, knowing it's one guy behind the scenes who's making this decision.

1753: 1708: 992: 805: 410: 3381:

I like that it's a plot and not a chart, and that it shows the logarithmic curve. Also, I like that the X and Y axes aren't showing the exact same thing. ➧

919:

that highlight key features and themes of reviews. We continue to see more and more traction across the board. We're adding 3DS and Vita titles now, with

3666: 4329: 2079:

That's an editor for Destructoid, lead writer for PCWorld's gaming section, and a writer for USgamer all supporting using OpenCritic over Metacritic.

3253: 711: 3678: 875: 3684:

If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Knowledge (XXG)'s

4083:

has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the

3781:

has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the

2096: 1946: 4534: 4488: 4442: 4227: 4094: 3792: 3615: 3058: 3006: 112: 3720: 3646: 3287: 2647: 2581:

Hi SharkD , as you were involved some time ago in a discussion regarding infobox fields with VGs, there is an ongoing 3O discussing this for

2024: 1749: 1704: 988: 406: 4019: 3430: 3081: 2556: 2374: 2227: 1521: 1482: 1443: 1386: 1341: 1296: 1269: 1230: 1191: 1152: 311: 269: 227: 188: 154: 135: 3885: 3571: 3258: 3199: 2924: 2851: 2700: 2349: 2321: 1859:

It's inconsiderate, because not only do other editors have to clean up after you, but also perform the job of a bot when a link goes dead.

1127: 385: 4079: 4064: 4050: 883: 981:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to

399:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to

4333: 2135: 3464: 2161: 2143: 725:

Anyways, these are just some things to keep in mind. OpenCritic will hit 100 publications over our deploy tonight, and with it come

1928: 3095: 2028: 879: 4154: 3917: 3901: 786: 329: 287: 245: 2388: 2333: 3993: 3974: 3881: 3567: 3426: 3195: 2920: 2847: 2317: 1958: 1310: 1123: 381: 3855: 3674: 3650: 3542: 3170: 2903: 2830: 2464: 2442: 2300: 1106: 3261: 1746:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 1701:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 985:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 898: 403:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 71: 4321: 4269: 4247: 959:

We're always on the lookout for ideas, and as we wrap up our next few features, we want to get your thoughts and opinions.

707: 2488:

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

895: 638: 611:

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary

59: 54: 49: 4325: 3693: 942:

We strongly believe that we are the fastest and most reliable aggregator. We are consistently faster than Metacritic, as

4212: 4197: 3600: 3585: 3460: 3268: 2249: 1739: 508:

What about the existing entries in the list that aren't reliable? (P.S. Since you didn't sign, the ping didn't work.) —

4428: 4414: 4382: 4128: 3930: 3697: 2756: 2523:, thanks so much!! Not sure if it's worth noting that I spent several weeks working on Wikidata as well. Thanks again! 372:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

3945: 3867: 3554: 3182: 2915: 2842: 2689: 2682: 2312: 1265: 1118: 377: 4524: 4478: 4432: 4217: 4123:

A discussion is taking place as to whether these articles are suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

4084: 3782: 3662: 3605: 3048: 2996: 982: 400: 2991: 2976: 2552: 1968:

It does start to feel a little hopeless, but the silver lining is that we continue to make progress. We're still in

1555:, I was recommended to merge the soundtrack articles as there aren't enough reliable sources to expand them, sadly. 2473: 1738:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

1693:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge (XXG) appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

4520: 4506: 3282:

I'm not sure if you're offering to make images or asking for images to be made. If you're offering, they all say "

3043: 3028: 2484:. A committed veteran editor that uses the edit summary 90% of the time with half of his 41000 edits in mainspace. 1997:

Interesting. I will have to read that Escapist article if you say it talks about plagiarism on Metacritic's part.

702:

publicly verifiable metrics. Yet still, we struggle with getting over the "authority" hump. Small references from

150: 139: 4164: 4015: 4004: 3733:"rm rating category in first section. only used for 2-3 ios games. totally inappropriate per Knowledge (XXG):WWIN 2637: 223: 4216:

has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the

3604:

has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the

80: 4281:. The linked webpages are also dead, indicating no continued relevance. One alternative would be to merge with 3777: 3762: 4144: 3843: 3696:, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in 3530: 3158: 2891: 2818: 2288: 1439: 1094: 4139: 4134: 2747: 2731: 868: 307: 265: 4542: 4496: 4450: 4054: 2477: 1909: 1517: 1478: 699:

you can't become an authority without being referenced, but you only get referenced if you are an authority.

697:

Second, we do strongly agree with the "kingmaker" problem in this area. For us, it's the greatest Catch-22:

2641: 2237: 2223: 2154:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the

715: 4149: 1835: 1400: 1355: 1226: 101: 4337: 4159: 3670: 901: 775:. It's categorized as a WP:VG template, but I can't seem to figure out where it links to or what does. -- 714:, and others help tremendously, but the "authority" benchmark remains far away (and rightfully so). I've 373: 4527:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

4481:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

4435:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

4308: 4237: 4220:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

4087:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

3785:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

3608:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

3051:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

2999:

guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at

2715: 2360: 2204: 2182: 2173: 1187: 1148: 905: 619: 162: 2601: 1831: 158: 4431:

has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the

4406: 4187: 4102: 3751: 3708: 3444: 2624:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

2019:

They absolutely copied our data. They changed the links back after being caught. Some more articles:

1924: 1694: 1000: 780: 323: 281: 239: 4523:

has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the

4477:

has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the

3826: 3513: 3141: 2878: 2805: 2441:

Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as

2275: 2155: 1081: 1063: 349: 340: 4031: 3955: 2709: 2101: 2082: 2060: 1983: 1931:. Can we claim OpenCritic as a legitimate authority when Metacritic seems to recognize us as such? 1656: 963: 741: 517: 485: 3839: 3526: 3154: 2887: 2814: 2284: 1090: 836:

Disclosure in case you don't remember me: I'm Matthew Enthoven, one of the founders of OpenCritic.

369: 353: 4538: 4492: 4446: 4282: 3487: 3404: 3371: 3350: 3335: 3295: 2633: 2105: 2086: 2064: 1987: 1535: 1496: 1457: 1418: 1373: 1328: 1283: 1244: 1205: 1166: 967: 936: 745: 204: 124: 86: 1950: 1827: 4304: 4277:

The article about a video game lacks sources and seemingly lacks notability per the advice at

3239: 3113: 3068: 3016: 2965: 2667: 2609: 2590: 2504: 2426: 2406: 2139: 1883: 1850: 1789: 1769: 1724: 1053: 949: 456: 3851: 3740: 3538: 3283: 3166: 2899: 2826: 2296: 2074: 1102: 946: 365: 357: 4265: 4251: 4231: 3874: 3799: 3561: 3189: 2530: 2353: 2245: 2200: 2178: 2169: 2004: 1866: 1814: 1676: 1629: 1603: 1564: 856: 815: 654: 540: 418: 82: 32: 4291: 4278: 3854:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 3847: 3541:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 3534: 3169:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 3162: 2902:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2895: 2829:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2822: 2448: 2299:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2292: 2165: 1105:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1098: 368:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 361: 4400: 4348: 4183: 4098: 3744: 3701: 3665:

with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the

3452: 3438: 799: 776: 319: 277: 235: 2481: 909: 2644:, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. 1962: 1591:

to solicit discussion before merging an article. The instructions in the FAC discussion

943: 4027: 3950: 3654: 3621: 3383: 3314: 2780: 2565: 2147: 2032: 1969: 1954: 1666: 1652: 1585: 769: 528: 510: 497: 478: 184: 173: 4290:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, pages may be

3459:

Unless there is a specific concern or inaccuracy against it, I would say go for it! --

928: 4374: 4359: 3483: 3400: 3367: 3346: 3331: 3307: 3291: 2658:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

2629: 1760:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

1715:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

1529: 1490: 1451: 1412: 1367: 1322: 1277: 1238: 1199: 1160: 1044:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

447:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

439: 424: 200: 192: 116: 4344:

I am notifying you because you have contributed to this article in the past. Thanks!

920: 3230: 3109: 3064: 3012: 2956: 2663: 2659: 2605: 2602:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Template_talk:Infobox_video_game/Archive_15#missing_fields

2586: 2518: 2495: 2460: 2402: 2344: 1879: 1846: 1801: 1785: 1765: 1761: 1720: 1716: 1049: 1045: 452: 448: 3818: 3645:

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Knowledge (XXG), as you did at

3641: 3505: 3133: 2869: 2796: 2266: 1072: 890:

on many pages. In the community, we're an officially sanctioned aggregator by the

3938:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of unreleased role-playing video games

3719:

Your disruptive and bad-faith blanket reversion and neglect of editing duties at

887: 692:

To us, that means more than just the number - review aggregation is an experience

153:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

4047:

I like reading through old wikipedia edits and found this humerous, cheers mate

3796: 2625: 2525: 2445:

in recognition of your diligent editing. Thank you for the great contributions!

2241: 1999: 1861: 1809: 1698: 1671: 1622: 1598: 1578: 1557: 810: 649: 535: 472: 17: 1938:

Our view is different. Our view is that, to be included in an aggregator as a "

845: 3364:

File:Music intervals frequency ratio equal tempered pythagorean comparison.svg

932: 565: 924: 923:

already posted. We're the only aggregator that includes publications such as

694:, and we hope that we're judged, at least partially, on that experience too. 2773: 1927:

to create barriers between it and OpenCritic. Last summer, they were caught

1904:

Saw you left a message (via email) on my talk page, but saw it was deleted.

1036: 1021: 1006: 916: 433: 891: 4314:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

2073:

Sorry for posting yet again, but just want to stress this Twitter thread:

84: 3312:

If you can list me the frequency of each note I can make another image. ➧

851:

We also added support for embeddable scores, which are now being used by

573: 3858:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

3545:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

3173:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

3087: 2906:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2833:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2380: 2303:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2127: 1581:

You should contact the articles' authors first and tag the article with

1392: 1347: 1302: 1109:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

680:

First, one thing that's concerned us from the conversation is the focus

533:

I guess they can be removed/ignored, but I still find them interesting.

4546: 4500: 4454: 4408: 4352: 4241: 4191: 4106: 4058: 4041: 4035: 3997: 3978: 3959: 3889: 3836:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

3804: 3756: 3713: 3630: 3575: 3523:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

3491: 3468: 3446: 3408: 3394: 3375: 3354: 3339: 3325: 3299: 3217: 3203: 3151:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

3119: 3074: 3022: 2970: 2940: 2928: 2855: 2784: 2724: 2696: 2671: 2613: 2594: 2571: 2536: 2509: 2412: 2367: 2325: 2253: 2208: 2186: 2109: 2090: 2068: 2010: 1991: 1887: 1872: 1854: 1839: 1820: 1793: 1773: 1743: 1728: 1682: 1660: 1637: 1609: 1572: 1541: 1502: 1463: 1424: 1379: 1334: 1289: 1250: 1211: 1172: 1131: 1057: 1015: 971: 821: 791: 749: 660: 623: 612: 546: 521: 503: 489: 460: 389: 356:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)

334: 292: 250: 208: 166: 129: 904:, often times as the only aggregator listed now. Metacritic has even 605: 601: 1913: 596:

that back in 1885, Knowledge (XXG) editors wrote Good Articles with

3478:

Some of the barnstar template categories you've created are up for

3252: 2582: 2134:. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed 3399:

Cents and ratios are different ways of measuring the same thing.

1553:

Knowledge (XXG):Featured topic candidates/Wipeout series/archive1

726: 3871:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 3558:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 3186:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 3861:

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review

3727:

better. You can at the very least look at my edit summaries. ("

3548:

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review

3275:"is there any interest in me creating more of images like this 3176:

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review

2909:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

2836:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

2306:

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review

1112:

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review

732:

Thanks for sparking the discussion, and we'll be following it.

3830:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All

3729:

rm redlinks and advertisements, removed outdated and cancelled

3517:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All

597: 87: 26: 4172:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of CryEngine games

3737:

rm duplicates, already linked, add italics per section rules"

3257:

Nancarrow's tempo ratios compared to 12-tet frequency ratios

3094:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

2764:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/HSL and HSV (version 2)

2387:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

1399:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

1354:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

1309:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

4256: 3925:, is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to 3216: 3086: 2939: 2703:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

2681: 2379: 2049:

do they provide? how often are they referenced by consumers?

1391: 1346: 1301: 716:

raised this issue in Knowledge (XXG) discussions in the past

470:

Hey, are we interested in user-based top lists? For example

2348:, I thought maybe you would be interested that I started a 2040: 1256:

Nomination for deletion of Template:Video game release/sort

762:

I'm going through video game templates, and I noticed that

4377:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

3417:

Nomination for deletion of Template:LucasArts game engines

2751:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

2075:

https://twitter.com/AutomaticZen/status/877623080474075137

3673:

with them. Alternatively, you can read Knowledge (XXG)'s

3435: