Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 16

3234:

major LGBTQ characters in video game history. I'd argue that editors on that article would be even better off relying on secondary source material on "LGBT characters in video games"—i.e., write about the topic in prose as a set rather than as list items. This way editors won't be deciding for themselves which LGBTQ characters are most noteworthy for inclusion in a list. But I wasn't involved in that discussion so I don't know the details. To Diego, American universities love to establish all kinds of "centers" for kinds of study. Getting a $ 1000 grant (fellowship?) from your university is peanuts and doesn't necessarily connote any kind of editorial quality improvement. The articles in this archive are still reliant on the reputation/expertise of its writers, which is to say that they are self-published sources (as mentioned above). If the project is anything like normal university humanities projects, it will rely on mostly volunteered grad student labor and the editing/quality will not be fact-checked, so on par with a scholar-only wiki. Unless there is proof that this isn't the case—and I see no such proof—there is little reason to quibble about their editorial policy. And for the record, the

3056:

given the long history of queer readings being a key form of resistant reception for LGBTQ audiences, it felt proscriptive to limit ourselves to explicit content. Second, we felt it was important to see whether explicit or implicit representation was more common at different points in time in games as it was in other media. For each game, we began with the original source that listed the game as having LGBTQ content and followed any citations for that claim. When those links were exhausted we used search engines to track down any additional information about the LGBTQ content in the games. We also dug through game wikis and walkthroughs, watched videos of gameplay posted online, played games ourselves, and looked for academic and popular articles or books that addressed the games’ LGBTQ content. Throughout this process we created a coding system using a grounded theoretical approach (Glaser & Strauss, 1967/2006) to provide a conceptual map of LGBTQ game content. We classified this content into nine categories: characters, relationships/romance/sex, actions, locations, mentions, artifacts, traits, queer games/narratives, and homophobia/transphobia.

4519:

to verify its reliable. With a game such as this, where not much info is known, it's wise to try to get multiple sources to back up a claim. That's all that's needed here because of the fact that we have to be factual, and the opinion of one Kotaku person doesn't mean it's true. Case in point: my addition of Bloodborne to the category was reverted due to the fact that the only source I could provide to support this is one from Eurogamer. Ever since, I've been making sure each game I add has at least two sources behind it, so as not to have that situation happen again. But again, the issue is that only Kotaku calls it an open world, when none of the other limited sources do.

3400:), I haven't seen any page on their website that uses it (associate parts of the game with summative words called "codes" and then group examples similarly coded to find themes, then build a theory of how they're connected from the ground up). "Seeming" is not the same as editorial policy. The idea of calling this source "reliable" given the above means that it would be a fine source to use at AfD to prove notability, which goes to show how nutty it is to call this page a reliable source, given its deficiencies. You requested third opinions and there is mine. At risk of repeating myself, that's all I'll say on the matter. 4558:

if there is anything more concrete before making a final decision on the subject. That's why this discussion is here, to see if anyone else can provide any info. Like I said to him earlier, it's nothing against him, I'm just trying to prevent the category from becoming convoluted. I did the same with with two recent edits, Astroneer and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword. Someone added them or removed them from the category, and I went back to verify it was the correct call. Once I verified it, I left it as is. But again, the way you described it above with the differences between the situations, I can understand it.

3287:

expert" is puffery in this case, as far as I'm concerned. The result is a bit muddled: you say they cross-check the wikis against reliable sources—that would mean that they are checking against secondary sources with edit staff, and if that's the case, we should just use those secondary sources and not the archive. Primary sources are not reliable sources for what should be obvious reasons: an expert analyzes primary source material (the game) to create a secondary analysis, but what makes it reliable is the editing that checks the writer, not the fact that it's secondary to the primary source.

1596:"and generally just not being discussed in my circles" What the heck kind of argument is that? Is there seriously a call for re-evaluting The Escapist because of GamerGate? I'm sorry but just because they may be on deaths door due to the layoffs and the closing of one of their offices doesn't mean we should not find them reliable anymore. They're still writing game reviews, reporting on news (even though it doesn't seem to be original reporting anymore), and all that stuff other websites do. Heck, you mentioned an ethics policy that they have. That's pretty all right with me that they have it. 3049:

construction and content of the archive, however, we should be clear that it is not an archive in the traditional sense, but a heavily curated site of knowledge production about this kind of game content. As Kate Eichhorn (2013) described in her book on feminist archives, “Rather than a destination for knowledges already produced or a place to recover histories and ideas placed under erasure, the making of the archives is frequently where knowledge production begins” (p. 3). In addition to documenting content, this project maps the various ways LGBTQ representation exists in games.

3438: 3264:, but they can be used when someone else is doing the research: it does provide proof of a video game content, which we would consider reliable if a journalist used it for their reviews. So we can rely on them as being accurate when an independent third party uses them for their fact-checking, which is the case here. Why do you consider it not reliable when it is an specialized university professor the one who follows exactly the same process, rather than a specialized journalist? 3933:, likely using his credentials from Zelda Informer. (Remember that E3 is only open to the press unless you actually win tickets.) I feel Gamnesia, which I admittedly don't follow as much as Zelda Informer, should be re-evaluated simply because it was originally evaluated in connection with Zelda Informer. As I said above, it is now its own entity. Nintendo Prime should be evaluated because it is created and maintained by the creator and head of Zelda Informer. 4487:. User claims it's reliable, but I'd like more voice on the subject, as the website is in a different language and I alone cannot verify whether it's reliable based on Knowledge (XXG) Guide for Reliable Sources either, but there are sources not listed there that could be argued as reliable. Nothing against the above user, just want to make sure the games page has as much accurate info as possible so others will not have to debate this again. Thank you. 35: 3416:, have you actually read the academic paper that summarizes the results learned from the Archive project? That analytic process has been described there in some detail. I don't know if it adequately follows the grounded theory approach, but that grouping of the examples found in the Archive certainly exists (and the pages in the Archive do exhibit the codes for the groups, these are the tags found at the bottom of each character page). 4888:. Its clickbait content doesn't do much to inspire confidence, and did they get rid of bylines or is that an issue with my browser? If the authors have a pedigree and there is editorial precedent, then this is a closed case, but could someone link evidence of this? (By the way, I wouldn't consider quoted opinions evidence of source endorsement, especially in Brave New Blog World.) 3305:

this project. Sincerely, I don't understand why you consider the editorial process of news sites to be superior to that performed by academics for publication at journals, when articles for news sites have are subject to tight deadlines and academics are not; nor why would the fallibility of the first renders the source untrustworthy but not the fallibility of the second.

1577:

look and the editorial policy doesn't seem to exist, but I did find an ethics policy. The drama surrounding Star Citizen shows that oversight is weak and since then it doesn't seem to have gotten better. Alex's questionable statements also do not bode well for reliability (or a sort of neutral stance). For the sake of making this easy, let's ignore

3170:- As mentioned below by Maple, currently, the only inclusion criteria we've agreed upon for the list is basically sourcing each entry. Would you agree with Maple's stance it basically shouldn't be used as the only source to verify an entry? (And as such, shouldn't be used to satisfy inclusion criteria?) Just wanted to confirm your stance, since 5336:? Is there evidence that they follow the same editorial process? Not pooh-poohing this, but want to remind that many, many publishers have spun out video game-specific blogs/publications with very little editorial oversight in this brave new clickbait world (see the eSports discussion in the archive for many prominent examples). 5108:

Both unreliable. TVTropes is a wiki which anyone can edit, so clearly unreliable. WatchMojo does not have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and so is not reliable either. The site mostly publishes click-bait puff pieces which are of no encyclopedic value. Being listed on one of WatchMojo's

4518:

I've researched it and so far, the Kotaku source is the only source that even describes it as such. That's why it's an issue, because no other sources which talk about the game describe it as open world, at least from the sources listed. That's why he added that second source, and why I asked someone

3430:

Right, like you said, they use subcats for each individual character. If they synthesized those subcats to make larger points about LGBTQ characters in games, that source would be usable as an expert SPS. And if it's published in a peer review journal, the source could be used with little restriction

2888:

I'm not sure I'd say that either the talk page discussion or the RS noticeboard deemed it reliable. There's only one reply at the notice board thus far. That said, the about us ("Who we are") looks rather promising and is a lot more than we typically see in detailing the goal, credits and methodology

1712:

I interpreted his comment about ZP to mean that he didn't want to discuss it at all. Like he wasn't factoring it in to the discussion. I could be wrong though. Anyways, I was just curious anyway. I don't have much experience with TE or ZP. I don't recall really reading, using, or coming across either

1485:, France's leading telco, and Millenium eSport is described elsewhere as "France's first pro-gaming structure, attached to the Webedia group". I can't find anything even close to a staff page or editorial oversight so I would classify it as an esport org's website, not as a news site (say, similar to 977:

Ultimately, I think determining the quality of the translator's skill is not important. It's no different from me opening an old Famicom issue, and translating it as I write it into Knowledge (XXG). Many editors don't have English as their primary language too. That is why we source, so that if other

969:

Hey guys, I want to send an email to the site owner, but I'm having trouble figuring out exactly what I'm trying to ask. As you may or may not know, this guy translates interviews from old Japanese publications to English. My main issue with the site is he often doesn't say WHERE he got the interview

4557:

No, I do have an actual concern. I just don't want to see this added and then someone else comes along and removes it later because we find out that it's not enough, you know what I mean. It's like that scene in Twelve Angry Men, where 11 vote guilty, and one not guilty. Just want to discuss and see

4246:

FanSided editors are given full editorial control of their very own team sites. Theyre eligible for our competitive revenue sharing program and a myriad of other perks. Whether you are looking to make a little extra money covering your favorite teams or you want a career in sports, FanSided is where

3304:

The fact-checking of characters as being LGBTQ has been cross-referenced to other RSs, but the analysis and comment is exclusive to the site; you can't get it from other sources - in fact, one of the conclusions of the paper is that such analysis didn't exist previous to the compilation performed by

3256:

OK, so what is the difference between this and what, say, a news reporter would do on a magazine when they repeat information from primary sources, which we then happen to consider reliable? The grad students are being supervised by several professors, and the main professor publishes regularly as a

3228:

Grad students aren't experts—they haven't been established in a field or necessarily even vetted by their community. That's partly why we discourage dissertations and theses as references (not as good as an edited volume). To Serge's point, I see a number of issues with that article (is it a list or

3101:

are completely sourced to fanwikis, but the real issue I have with these is that they aren't really anything. What exactly would we be sourcing here? It's not a journal or an article or... what? There doesn't seem to be any specific editorial control on what should or shouldn't get its own 'article'

2872:

The specifics of particular details about the games should be taken with a grain of salt though, as the primary author has said that she hasn't played all the 350+ games directly and has been relying on other reliable sources for their descriptions of specific LGBT-related episodes within the games.

981:

So is it really the reliability of Shmuplations we are looking for here? Honestly, I think if he sources back to the original source (issue number and everything), than I say use his translations all you want, just footnote the ORIGINAL source he listed into wiki. I was going to send him an email to

3257:

journalist in specialized news websites. When the publisher (a renowned expert in the topic) explicitly says that they are cross-checking the wikis with what we consider reliable sources, in order to verify that the characters are indeed LGBTQ, why do you assume that they don't do it as the default?

3136:

at that article, but I didn't want the new version of the article to be too heavily based on an source that could be deemed unreliable in the future. I thought it was best to get a consensus on it on the front end, because I share some of the rest of your concerns - namely that its a Wordpress blog

3131:

list mentioned in the first comment. I believe you participated in the AFD for the article, which closed as essentially "Keep, but work on cleaning it up/reworking it". The source would hypothetically used in those clean up efforts. I asked Diego to get an consensus on the source before proceeding,

1576:

The site has been rather turbulent since that one event in 2014 took the gaming world by storm. Between replacing or firing most all of its staff, axing its office and generally just not being discussed in my circles, is it still considered a reliable source for news an opinions? I went for a quick

3928:

I feel like the websites mentioned above should be (re-)evaluated for several reasons. For one, Zelda Informer and Gamnesia are no longer "bundled together" by contract. They are now completely separate entities. (After this discussion is finished, they should also be listed separately.) Also,

2921:

I agree that this doesn't automatically confer full-featured reliability. In particular, their methodology of using descriptions of the games found at online wikis and cross-checking them with news sources prompted me to add the above caveat about relying on it for the game details; although those

996:

Of course, this website can serve greatly as a portal to reliable foreign-language content. I would recommend against citing him directly, but using his translations as an editor can be very helpful. If you're unsure if the translation is accurate, you can always try using Google Translate to read

673:

In addition to this, many site articles have been published in physical format in the "Hardcore Gaming 101" series of books, also run by Kalata. This website is a tremendous source of information for older more obscure games. Thoughts? I just can't believe that this site is yellow and that garbage

670:

All submitted articles are subject to fact checking and editing by staff. Contributors should nonetheless always strife to write as accurately and fairly as possible. We reserve the option to not publish any submitted articles for content, completion or quality concerns. We'll always write back to

3061:

The main researcher is an associate professor, Adrienne Shaw, who has published regularly at commercial magazines and newspapers; and the project has received editorial assistance from other PhDs. As I mentioned above, they say they've cross-checked the lists of characters found at fan sites with

1601:

I don't think this should be knocked down from being a reliable source. Situational, I can see the argument. But if the argument is changing it to unreliable then I am against that idea. We might as well remove every citation from The Escapist, removing ten plus years of journalism from Knowledge

4588:

There isn't a requirement for two. It's just better to provide more than one in most instances. This is probably one of the rare instances where since there isn't a lot of info available, just one suffices. I can agree with that after discussing it fully. So I'll add it back in. I just wanted an

4501:

Usually, this is just where we discuss source reliability, not solve disputes, so I don't know how much input you'll get, but I'll try to help mediate. So, first off, why is the one Kotaku source not enough to source this? Is there a particular reason why this claim is controversial and requires

3233:

is a gay character. If the character is notably gay, that fact will be covered in secondary, reliable sources. (If you needed to make a side point about the Mukki plot, the source could work if the author checks out, but the emphasis should be on what secondary sources have already identified as

3211:

Gotcha, I must have misunderstood your comment. I thought you had meant that there wasn't anything it could possibly be used to source, when my concern had been the opposite, that it could be very useful for verifying a lot of entries - since the only inclusion criteria for the list is basically

3192:

Edit conflict - I understood the purpose of it; I'm just saying that, if anything, no item in that list should be sourced only to this website, as there are no inclusion criteria on that website. If the content is written by PhD graduates, I am sure that it's reliable, but that doesn't make it a

3055:

To compile our archive, we began with existing lists of LGBTQ characters in games. The earliest games we have found are from 1986, but we continue to add games as we learn about them. The archive includes explicit LGBTQ content and implicitly coded or queerly read content for two reasons: First,

2995:

I'd view this as a personal site from an academic (unless there is some information on how editorship works). Many of the entries are written by Ph.D. students, and being as the humanities are, I wonder to what degree any of the information is checked/verified. I'd only cite it on a case-by-case

1189:

Yes, I forgot to follow up this, but I meant to say something to this effect as well. For something political, and talking about a hypothetical future thing, you'd probably either want multiple sources, or directly attribute the stance to the paper. (ie "According to John Smith of the Washington

882:

The editor-in-chief is a journalism graduate, but that seems to be all. He doesn't seem to have any experience. None of his staff seems to be any better. I suppose it's better than any given website without editorial content, and their stated goal fits well, but I would definitely advice against

3536:

Well that's a quote from forever ago... I think mostly my observations hold, although in 2013 it was knocked offline by a DDoS attack and shuttered as a result of data loss. Its longevity (est. 1995) and people working on it probably give it some reliability, but especially since the stuff most

3286:

is that we trust secondary sources to do the work of distinguishing what content is noteworthy for the public to consume. I'm afraid that that grad student supervision you mention may not be much supervision at all unless explicitly stated. Not the same as editorial process, at least. "Renowned

3048:

Communication scholars have analyzed LGBTQ representation in a variety of other media. In doing so, they offer a contextualized, historical accounting of representation. We hope that our archive can serve as a jumpingoff point for future LGBTQ game studies in this respect. Before describing the

560:

Yeah, I personally read it, and see it used a lot across Knowledge (XXG). I used to remove it, because I don't think it technically meets the RS criteria, but eventually stopped, as in my time reading it, I don't recall them ever reporting anything incorrectly or with inappropriate slant on the

4363:

page is concerning - listing only one member of the "staff", the founder, who founded it a couple of years ago with no real credentials other than "being a video game enthusiast". On a content side, its more of a subjective call I know, but some of their articles on stuff can sound more like

3300:

The site has been submitted to the International Journal of Communication, as it forms the base data for the peer-reviewed paper (in which the URL for the site has been provided for the review of the referees that approved the paper), so I wouldn't say it goes "without a dedicated editorial

2777:

As mentioned there, the CraveOnline affiliation has more to do with marketing or advertising than with any semblance of reliability. What kind of original reporting are they doing? Every article I click is a repost from another already reliable source. I see no compelling reason to change my

3377:

like it, but the website seems to have fine editorial control and is well-respected by other people and organizations in the field. As noted above, I would advice highly against using this source as the only source for an item in the LGBT video game characters list (it doesn't establish

2732:, which we also find reliable. My only hesitation is that the other writers don't have much in the way of credentials other than writing for the site, though that's not as bad as many websites considering they've been around since 2008, and many have been around for that long as well. 2889:

of a site. However, as noted by Serge at the article talk page, there's cases where they clearly source back to Knowledge (XXG)/Wikia. If we use it, it needs to be marked situational and include text along the lines that we can't use it where it indicates Wiki based sourcing. --

667:

I understand this website has been brought up before, but can we establish the site as a completely reputable source instead of conditional? The site's head editor Kurt Kalata, has already been proven to be a reliable source and fact checks all submissions. From the about page:

3632:, Gestrid. Czar and I share access to them at present. Sorry it's gotten out of date. My work schedule these days is wrecking havoc with my rate of editing, but I'll delve into it and make adjustments to the search engine this weekend. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. - 3487:

Some of its staff such as Bob Mandel, have been heavily involved with the games industry for years. It can possibly be used for reviews and features but I am uncertain on its usage for news (perhaps older archives from its heydays could be considered reliable for old

3238:

from the original discussion is sourced to user-submitted wikis and YouTube, making it much closer to repeating primary source information than any secondary source analysis (indeed it quotes the wiki at length). That's not how we determine notability or even process

703:

There was just a recent discussion on this I think, which I believe generally had support for it too. I agree, their retrospectives are very in-depth, and I've used it many times to save articles at AFD. There's been an exception here or there, but I believe it's

1640:

I wasn't suggesting unreliable. But I am deeply concerned after the Star Citizen kerfuffle that it hasn't seemed to get any better. As for "my circles", yeah, that's a bad argument, but it is what prompted me to ask "do people still go here for gaming news?"

4158:. I can't make an argument in their favor, and if "Nintendo Prime's" main credential is "being founded by ZeldaInformer staff" then I don't see much to work with there either. As 1337gamer mentions above though, at least with ZI, with a series as popular as 2452:, but there's just two people listed as dedicated staff, and neither seem to have any credentials other than "being video game enthusiasts" and writing for GameRant. One has a college degree, but its in Film, so not particularly helpful. Other contributors 4502:

further verification? It's reasonable to ask for more than one source to verify something, but you'd need a reason why one isn't enough of its own. I'm particularly concerned because your talk page shows you've had significant problems with this...

3515:

Was it once reliable? Or only in comparison to other early Internet sites? I only took a cursory look through the archives but I didn't see any basis for calling it reliable. Perhaps someone with more background can comment. Also is it related to

4788:

wasn't released anywhere near the Jaguar's end.) Checking on the about section, the fact that the editors' profiles cite only their gaming history, with no hint of journalistic experience or credentials, makes me suspect this source is indeed

3153:

In that case, I think we're best evaluating each page of the site on its own merits. I'd only use it as a last resort to mainstream press, and it would even then depend on the credentials of the author (as an "expert") and their sources used.

4384:

I don't think there's much more to say: I agree with Sergecross, both in that those two pages are a big step up and that the website in general just isn't quite on the right level yet because of a lack of experienced staff. I want to look up

5503:(anyone have more info?) and went in the air a few years later. What year/period would it become credible? And should reviews from 1995 be deemed reliable if there is no perceptible editorial policy? It's kind of like citing early Kotaku... 752:

I can't claim to have taken a serious look at their editing policies or standing in the community, but I've read several articles from the site and have yet to see anything to make me question their reliability. I'd support bumping them to

1741:

hasn't changed its policies, and staff turnover shouldn't matter as long as their policies remain in place. An individual piece here or there with errors in it is something that happens to pretty much everybody at one point or another.

4533:

Well, yes, but as far as I can tell, very few sources cover this game at all, which is different from Bloodborne, which has hundreds of sources covering it. 1 out of 10 is less of a fluke than 1 out of 200, you know? Do you have an

1089:

is a "fearmongering tabloid with no credibility whatsoever". However, I think that they are lying (simply because the newspaper is conservative), and I want to know whether this is a good source to use to cover video game subjects.

4837:. I believe they are a reliable source for video game news, reviews, and opinions and should be added to the list. Here are some reliable sources that have considered NowGamer's opinions, reviews, and news reliable and noteworthy: 2667:. I doubt the reliability of the website, but I would like to double-check, and I do not have time to review the website myself (and I do not always trust myself anyway when it comes to determining the reliability of a source). 2242:. He doesn't really sell himself on his Linkedin page, but it seems like he's got a university degree in relevant fields and has been a freelance writer for six years. Doesn't look bad. At least these people are professional. ~ 4744: 3960:- Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm remembering right, the issue was that they yet another new(ish) website that had no real credentials other than being fans and loving gaming. They take user-submissions, (creating a 1920:, and I don't see the site listed anywhere here, including the archives. If it turns out not to be VGRS and non-credible rumors keep coming out of it, we should have something to point to if we have to remove it from 1672:

for saying Battleborn was going free-to-play when that wasn't the case. I don't know how much of an impact the Star Citizen article made onto The Escapist but I do not see it being the deal breaker for its usage here.

4054:

As I said, I haven't followed Gamnesia as closely as Zelda Informer recently. I just thought they should be re-evaluated separately from Zelda Informer now that they actually are separate and have been for a while.

3137:

that routinely cites Wikis and Knowledge (XXG) itself, though it seems much of the time the citations are to cite tangential details, like release dates or platforms, rather than the actual content on LBGT content.

2627: 1951:

but got laid off a couple months ago. That said, it doesn't mean the site is automatically reliable. I don't see any policies stated on the site so that's a red flag right there. So I'm unsure about this source.

4408:, who has written for Dual Pixels and just generally has a lot of work experience. I have difficulty finding much about most of the staff, and they don't seem particularly special, but I don't know either way. ~ 2827: 2412: 1886: 1684:

I'm curious - what exactly did you have in mind? Its at "reliable", and you didn't intend to send it to "unreliable", right? Situational? But even then, you'd have to define the parameters of its conditions...

5547: 3537:

likely to be still around is probably from its latter volunteer "blog phase" it seems like it would under normal circumstances be better to use another source. No relation to Adrenaline Zone as far as I know.

2707:

I've used it in the past for obscure articles and for saving articles at AFD, without issue. I can't say I recall taking a close look though, so I should probably do that before giving a certain call on it...

3064:

These lists were primarily from pages on Knowledge (XXG), TV Tropes, GayGamer.Net, and the “Can I Play Gay?” Tumblr and were cross-referenced with articles from IGN, Huffington Post, The Daily Dot, and many

1051: 978:

editors doubt information, they can go to the source and check it themselves and verify. Given the amount of work and effort put into the website, I think we can safely say he doesn't have malicious intent.

5595:

self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party

637: 518: 3212:"that sources mention it" - but that could lead to future issues if, hypothetically, the source was deemed entirely unusable in a year, causing the need for yet another massive reworking of the article. 1793: 1396: 2298: 197: 799: 724:

OK so far we have three in favor (including me) and none opposed. Also, I just emailed Kurt Kalata requesting a more detailed explanation of his editing policy so hopefully that will aid the discussion.

4261:

This site is apparently owned by Time, but that doesn't mean that the editorial control descends downwards. There is no apparent editorial structure to this site, so it should be marked as unreliable.

3898: 3788: 1246: 253: 1546: 939: 4305: 5388:

of video games. Are we ready to add it to the list? Its starting to come up as a point of contention with new game reviews. (The contention being "What is Glixel", not any sort of actual concern.)

2542: 5621:

source: I see his own articles as reliable, self-published expert sources, while reblogged posts (unsure if there are any as I haven't looked through the archives) of course would be unreliable.--

5014: 4959: 2979:

Give it at least one more day, but doesn't seem like anyone wants to comment. Please ensure it is clearly labelled as being situational with the caveats/concerns me and Serge have highlighted. --

4212: 3843: 141: 4784:

was released near the end of the Jaguar's lifetime. (Wherever they got that idea from, they didn't need to do any hardcore research to check it; just glance at the copyright year and you'll see

4121: 3435:) or its summary as a reliable source but as an expert self-published source because it does not have secondary editorial vetting. My point about editorial process and reliability still stands. 2770: 2148: 2141: 2130: 2120: 2113: 101: 93: 88: 76: 71: 63: 5220: 4663:

If a reliable source quotes an unreliable source, then you can use the quoted text by citing the reliable source. In the prose, you can write something like "John Doe, who was later quoted by

5496: 4885: 4881: 3509: 3499: 1348: 3396:

Lots of confusion here about what constitutes reliability. Reliability = editorial process, fact-checking, etc. Trustworthiness. As a researcher actually familiar with Strauss & Glaser (

309: 3552:

Unless someone has more info on their editorial practices or an argument on why this site is reliable, I agree that we have no real case for calling it such (and much better alternatives)

3102:

here. If there is somekind of consensus that a character is LGBT, then they're listed. I'd feel very uncomfortable using this as a source, and would rather pick something more... usual. ~

4364:

sensationalized/angry message board type stuff than than an article from a site like your typical IGN/GameSpot/Eurogamer etc. I'll try to dig some examples up, but in short, I'm leaning

3682:) as entries are added/removed. (So someone should leave a comment on each VGRS conversation as they close if they're added. I don't watch most pages though, so the pings are helpful.) 3282:. Because they might know what they're talking about, but they're still fallible and the editing process catches errors that slip even experts. The point of WP's source reliability and 2609: 5250:

Glixel is Rolling Stone's video-game news site. It has been running on the rolling stone domain for the last several months but it is officially launched today as its own brand. (See

2809: 1868: 5529: 4738: 4162:, there really shouldn't be any shortage of sourcing available for it, and if ZI is the only place mentioning it, there's a good chance its minutia we'd usually declare fancruft. 1033: 619: 500: 2866: 1775: 1378: 2280: 466:

At the very least, I do think it'd be good to discuss Toms Hardware, as it seems people try to use it every time new hardware releases, and there's usually disputes about it.

179: 2645: 781: 3880: 3770: 1228: 1660:

for gaming news? To be honest I don't hear people talk about those websites at all and yet they're considered reliable sources. Websites have a tendency to mess things up.

235: 3571:

Can we get www.kotaku.com.au added to the custom google searches? I believe we're only searching kotaku.com. Is there any reason to think the AU site is less reliable? --

1528: 921: 4287: 3675: 2524: 4996: 4941: 21: 4194: 4090:, I imagine they'd accept articles from just about anyone. Regardless of how you label it, I don't quite see how they'd meet the requirements we typically look for at 3825: 2386: 2316: 655: 123: 1701:

Well he did say not use Zero Punctuation as a source. Which we kinda don't anyway besides his end of year best/worst list. His written pieces are still used, though.

5202: 4913:

is a carbon copy from Retro Gamer #42, so I would definitely consider specific articles as reliable and useful as it is web alternative that is easily accessible. --

2845: 1475: 997:

the original work yourself. Sending the translator a mail to say that you would appreciate it if he'd list his sources more often sounds like a very good idea :) ~

3260:

And how is including a Youtube video of the particular scenes in the game, not considered fact-checking? Youtube is not a valid source for Wikipedians because of

291: 5565: 1904: 1069: 982:

suggest to start putting that information in more often. What do you think? And I mean hey if we determine shmuplations itself is reliable, I won't complain :)

5092:. It seems like people had concerns with WatchMojo as well, but I don't recall what they were, and I don't usually use the site, so I'll have to look into it. 4347:. Seems to be a step up from last time it was checked, though I'm not sure what the site was back in 2014. Is the site still considered to be unreliable here? 3916: 3806: 536: 548:

Just another Nintendo-focused website that needs to be vetted. Saw it be used on different articles so it would be helpful to see other peoples take on it.

3349:

a coding system using a grounded theoretical approach (Glaser & Strauss, 1967/2006) to provide a conceptual map of LGBTQ game content

1264: 215: 2576:

is the staff that created the website. They also contacted some people though. The main reason I bring this up here is because I was planning to nominate

1811: 829:

I think that this is an unreliable source because I can not find policies concerning ethics and credentials, but I want to double-check just to be sure.

817: 2957: 3999:

issue. I haven't seen any USERG content recently on the site. Anyway, you apparently haven't seen the site since they updated it since they now have

2489: 1288:, they're on Metacritic. Of course that doesn't mean it'll be considered reliable here automatically. So what does everyone else thing of the website? 2961: 2486: 51: 17: 5377: 5286: 1414: 569:

and don't have much info on them other than "I like video games" and "I own these systems" for qualifications. I only spot-checked a few though...

271: 5274:

Seeing that the staff are veterans in journalism, I would think they're safe to use. Also, it is there enough to write an article on the site yet?

3861: 2659: 957: 4339:

and seeing it using a source from Niche Gamer. Previous consensus was that it was deemed unreliable. Looking at the site now they have their own

3013:

I'm in roughly the same boat as czar, for the same reasons, and had started typing up but was fairly certain he would get to it before me. :D --

3128: 5589:

Chris Hoffman is still writing reviews and opinion pieces, on his own site, and wondered what the wikiproject thinks about this. According to

3437: 3355:, as academic published sources subject to peer-review are typically considered more reliable than mass media given their theoretical basis. 2631: 2560: 2448:

This one has been discussed twice in the past, but without much input either time. Was hoping to get a solid word on it this time. They have

1958: 1942: 1564: 2831: 2664: 1890: 5032: 4469: 4323: 5551: 3674:✓ done. I haven't been actively pruning the engine because I wasn't sure how to keep its contents transparent on WP. I think we'll update 1833:, and I have stumbled upon this source, but I am thinking that it is just a fan website with no credentials (I cannot find its policies). 4759: 4977: 2862: 2492:

with even less experience... Too bad, because I have good experiences with the website. I wonder what's up with its editorial control. ~

1055: 159: 4726: 4589:

experienced editor to provide input is all. I'll be sure to take this into account in these situations for future reference. Thank you.

641: 522: 3000:

guideline. Don't think it needs to be listed here unless someone thinks it needs to be explicitly stated as a situational resource...

1964:

Of course. It's the same kind of situation as Easy Allies was. They used to be the staff of GameTrailers before that got shut down.

688:

There's a grey area on whether they are reliable or situational so hopefully we can finally decide if it is or not. I vote that it is

4846: 4646: 1797: 1400: 1081:

Recently, I have told Steam users in the forums that something bad was going to happen to the Internet, and I have used this source,

5352:

John Davison is acting as general manager and editor oversight, with Simon Cox as content director, so it's not right-out a blog. --

2302: 1619: 411: 201: 1320:

Negative: The rest of the Staff has no bios at all. They're listed as "coming soon"...but the website has been up since 2012, so...

803: 4807:, no editorial pedigree. They have a golden Knowledge (XXG) logo on their front page under "Trusted resource for gaming hardware" 3902: 3792: 2925:

Maybe we should label the source as "situational", so people who want to use it will check under which conditions it can be used?

2572:

When working in some Final Fantasy articles, I've found this website, Flaregamer, which has been writing articles for many years.

1991:'s case but again, this site doesn't have a policy or standards. I have no faith in a website that doesn't take itself seriously. 1250: 5625: 5350: 2615: 2605: 257: 4909:

and other magazines that were published under Imagine. A number of articles are taken directly from those magazines. E.g. their

2815: 2805: 1874: 1864: 1550: 943: 4781: 4309: 4230: 2437: 1749: 437: 355: 5535: 5525: 3094: 2546: 5018: 4963: 3339:

As a reply to Maple, it is not true that "there are no inclusion criteria" on the LGBTQ Archive. They set their criteria as "

2418: 327: 4720: 4216: 4124:. A series as popular as Zelda gets plenty of coverage from reliable sources anyway, so it should be necessary to use it. -- 3847: 2203:, which doesn't pop up much for me for some reason) I use a lot in esports articles. I wish we had some better knowledge of 1039: 1029: 145: 3341:

a list of all of the games we could find that were listed in popular, academic, and web spaces as having some LGBTQ content

2380: 1151: 625: 615: 506: 496: 5511: 5481: 5434: 5416: 5399: 5364: 5344: 5327: 5305: 5280: 5265: 5238: 5224: 5179: 5154: 5118: 5103: 5077: 4922: 4896: 4874: 4819: 4798: 4697: 4680: 4658: 4598: 4583: 4567: 4552: 4528: 4513: 4496: 4477: 4442: 4421: 4379: 4353: 4269: 4173: 4133: 4105: 4073: 4045: 4025: 3979: 3951: 3751: 3735: 3719: 3701: 3690: 3661: 3641: 3623: 3600: 3580: 3560: 3543: 3528: 3448: 3425: 3408: 3391: 3364: 3314: 3295: 3273: 3251: 3223: 3206: 3185: 3162: 3148: 3115: 3098: 3076: 3022: 3008: 2988: 2973: 2948: 2934: 2898: 2882: 2790: 2763: 2743: 2719: 2702: 2684: 2589: 2505: 2471: 2338: 2255: 2190: 2165: 2103: 1997: 1982: 1850: 1753: 1724: 1707: 1696: 1679: 1647: 1631: 1608: 1590: 1509: 1459: 1438: 1357: 1342: 1294: 1201: 1184: 1170: 1138: 1107: 1010: 990: 900: 877: 846: 762: 745: 732: 719: 698: 682: 598: 580: 554: 477: 453: 386: 371: 4842: 2356: 1781: 1771: 1384: 1374: 1314:

Neutral: He's also written for PCGameN and Strategy Informer, two sources WP:VG haven't been able to find a consensus on.

4838: 3727: 2286: 2276: 185: 175: 4716: 4572:

I don't understand the need for a second source here. One source is fine, there's no requirement for there to be two.

4426:

Agree with what has already been said. My sense is that those explicit policy elements were added to be GG-responsive (

787: 777: 692:. Their article are very much informative and useful for articles here. As well as its pedigree making it worth using. 313: 5380:

article really make it sound like they're putting a lot into this - it doesn't sound like they're just starting up an

3886: 3876: 3776: 3766: 1234: 1224: 1119:. I mean, look out for the occasional typo that mainstream press often makes when they're not focused on video games ( 1622:

still use The Escapist as a reliable source for factual information as of Sept 17, so I think it's still reliable. --

241: 231: 5290: 2362: 1534: 1524: 927: 917: 4293: 4283: 2858: 1085:(Yes, they do cover video game subjects as well.), but they say that it will not happen, and two of them said that 42: 4854: 4766: 4146:

ones certainly fail it. The staff list doesn't help much either - most of their massive 40 person staff list have

2530: 2520: 419: 5002: 4992: 4947: 4937: 4850: 4639: 3027:

No, that's not an accurate assessment. The site is not a simple case of self-publishing, it has been financed by

2677: 2595: 1843: 1163: 1100: 870: 839: 5500: 4200: 4190: 3831: 3821: 129: 119: 5404:

Note that I just put a section in the RS article about Glixel and fixed the redirect with the sources above. --

5332:

What part of that link suggests anything about editorial oversight? That their early coverage was published in

4473: 4461: 5208: 5198: 3031: 2651: 2368: 2328:

I've heard of this website before but don't think there's ever been consensus of use here. The site is run by

1351:

of the site, there wasn't even consensus of its use. Just one person agreeing with another that its reliable.

5497:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 4#The Electric Playground and Reviews on the Run

585:

Anyone know if the staff at least gets paid for their work? I don't really see anything worth having yet... ~

3695:

That reminds me. The Escapist and Hardcore Gaming 101 should be moved to the Reliable Source search engine.

3301:

process"; peer-reviewed academic research is the best possible review process according to our RS standards.

3278:

When an academic or journalist publishes on their own, without a dedicated editorial process, we call it an

2757:

as well. Don't really see much in terms of policies besides a Review policy but that's better than nothing.

1615: 4858: 2322: 1115:

Yes, like most large newspapers like this, it would generally meet Knowledge (XXG)'s standards for being a

661: 297: 287: 5394: 5322: 5174: 5098: 4918: 4578: 4547: 4508: 4374: 4168: 4129: 4100: 4040: 3974: 3747: 3656: 3218: 3180: 3143: 2738: 2714: 2466: 2185: 1719: 1691: 1454: 1337: 1196: 1133: 714: 575: 472: 382: 5293:. At worst, a subsection on the main Rolling Stone article, with redirects, would 100% be appropriate. -- 2915: 2352: 1331:. Currently unsure. Having a hard time committing to "reliable" or "unreliable" honestly... Anyone else? 407: 5571: 4794: 4732: 3922: 2851: 2693:

The site is owned by CraveOnline. Previous CraveOnline sites like RPGamer have been deemed reliable. --

1910: 1829: 1434: 1075: 758: 4914: 4431: 4125: 4034:

Okay, what about any of the Gamnesia staff would you say are relevant credentials beyond being "fans"?

3812: 3743: 3352: 2621: 2477:

I'm surprised with the disappointing results I get from searching more of the website's staff. I mean,

1987:

Meanwhile we don't consider Easy Allies to be reliable, at least not yet. Granted you can say its like

561:

subject, and I do believe other websites cite it a lot themselves too. On the plus side, the do have a

542: 393: 378: 3235: 3230: 2821: 1880: 1664:

previewed the Uncharted Collection thinking it was Uncharted 4. Just today I saw Randy Pitchford from

1444:

I don't know French, and you didn't really give anything to go off of, so its hard to help much here.

1270: 221: 5275: 4674: 4653: 4630: 4594: 4563: 4524: 4492: 4415: 4348: 3696: 3595: 3421: 3385: 3360: 3310: 3269: 3200: 3109: 3086: 3072: 2969: 2944: 2930: 2878: 2758: 2668: 2499: 2333: 2249: 1992: 1953: 1917: 1834: 1817: 1702: 1674: 1603: 1352: 1289: 1154: 1091: 1018: 1004: 894: 861: 830: 823: 693: 592: 549: 5541: 4862: 2398: 5492: 5475: 5428: 5152: 5075: 4752: 3867: 2392: 2101: 1503: 1420: 1281: 443: 361: 277: 4540:

making things difficult for this person because someone did something similar to you in the past?

4359:

The ethics and review stuff seems better than what I remember about them, though their bare-bones

3517: 3090: 2133:

discussion -- deemed reliable, but probably should be caveated regarding events that they run per

1175:

For something that political, you probably need more than one paper's opinion on the situation. --

1045: 963: 403: 5114: 4870: 4834: 3594:

about it. I think he's the one who controls the custom search. The search needs updating anyway.

2922:

same details are the kind that should be easy to verify from the game itself as a primary source.

2909: 1642: 1627: 1585: 1308: 1180: 974:

on there, but it only says it's an interview with Masato Maegawa from 2001, no source mentioned.

631: 512: 5128: 5053: 4539: 3996: 3961: 3707: 3629: 3478:(Avault) used to be one of the premier gaming sites but slowly died due to an internal conflict. 2566: 2176: 1570: 5038: 4329: 2869:, where it has been deemed reliable for the commentary and analysis of their academic authors. 1787: 1390: 5389: 5317: 5169: 5136: 5093: 4983: 4573: 4542: 4503: 4369: 4163: 4095: 4066: 4035: 4018: 3990: 3969: 3944: 3651: 3616: 3479: 3213: 3175: 3138: 2733: 2709: 2585: 2461: 2292: 2180: 1975: 1935: 1760: 1714: 1686: 1449: 1332: 1191: 1128: 709: 570: 467: 191: 165: 4484: 4394: 3679: 1347:

In the event this does get voted unreliable, how would it fare with Wargamer? Looking at the

793: 422:. But if you believe this is the wrong venue for these types of sites, should I take them to 5253:). It is implied that the same editorial aspects Rolling Stone has done still apply here. -- 4790: 4150:

written about them, and the few I checked that did, had zero credentials other than "loving

3892: 3782: 3731: 3637: 3576: 3538: 3494: 3171: 3035: 2984: 2894: 2698: 2580:

in the future and one of Flaregamer's articles has a lot about how he was designed. Regards.

1578: 1430: 1240: 1127:

series) but they're generally useable. What in the world are you using it to source though?

754: 5590: 3279: 3240: 2997: 2134: 423: 247: 5412: 5360: 5301: 5261: 4668: 4590: 4559: 4520: 4488: 4457: 4409: 4336: 3417: 3397: 3379: 3356: 3306: 3265: 3194: 3124: 3103: 3068: 2965: 2940: 2926: 2874: 2493: 2374: 2243: 1921: 1540: 1495: 1445: 1307:

Positive: The Editor-In-Chief, has been in the industry for 8+ years, and has written for

998: 933: 888: 586: 4299: 4091: 3261: 2172:

That all sounds about right, though I would think Yahoo Games would be usable unless its

1116: 887:

for now. I assume they're rarely ever linked to by more well-established news websites? ~

399: 333: 2536: 1328: 5505: 5469: 5422: 5338: 5251: 5144: 5067: 5008: 4953: 4890: 4813: 4691: 4436: 4393:

indeed had no prior experience when starting up the website, but has a college degree.

4263: 3715: 3684: 3554: 3522: 3442: 3402: 3289: 3245: 3156: 3018: 3002: 2784: 2729: 2161: 2093: 1744: 429: 347: 5168:

Looks like there is agreement that they're both unreliable then. Sounds good. Thanks.

4236: 4206: 4088:

the strongest credential listed on their established staff is "graduating high school"

3837: 3481:

It has recently been resurrected and is small scale. The current staff are volunteers,

3431:

in the article in question. By the same token, I wouldn't use an archive finding aid (

3283: 2996:

basis to provide extra details that aren't covered in a better source, as part of the

2443: 135: 5110: 4866: 4804: 4449: 4398: 2771:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 13#PlayStation LifeStyle

2482: 1623: 1467: 1176: 1152:

I was using it to source the news about the Obama Administration's Internet giveaway.

983: 738: 725: 675: 5599: 5244: 5214: 4427: 4083: 3432: 2404: 2239: 4060: 4012: 3938: 3610: 2581: 2573: 1969: 1929: 4120:

Zelda Informer is unreliable. It's a fansite. Already discussed earlier this year

3378:""notability"" of an item), but I suppose it is otherwise reliable and accurate. ~ 3369:

Looking through all the comments given here and above, I guess I would list it as

2234:

Looking through the website a bit more, I see that the main writer for article on

4910: 4397:

seems to have some writing experience, and is a paid writer. Maciej Miszczyk has

303: 4906: 4777: 4004: 3633: 3589: 3572: 3351:". IMHO this is much more than what we get when we use content from the typical 2980: 2890: 2725: 2694: 2332:, who has freelanced for multiple websites that have been deemed reliable here. 1948: 1482: 562: 50:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

5109:

Top 10 X is not worth mentioning in a video game article on an encyclopedia. --

5405: 5353: 5294: 5254: 2220: 2027: 1988: 1653: 566: 377:

This page is for video game sources, and they're not video game websites... --

341: 4390: 4142:

Yeah, I can't think of any fansites that have been considered an RS. All the

5285:

I'm not (yet) seeing much 3rd party coverage, though there is a significant

5140: 4405: 4087: 4000: 3711: 3647: 3413: 3229:

prose?) All in all, I wouldn't use the LGBTQ Archive as the sole proof that

3167: 3014: 2481:

is professional and has more staff than currently listed, but it's not like

2329: 2157: 1657: 5604:, a freelance video game writer for "various companies", senior editor for 4155: 3028: 2863:

Talk:LGBT characters in video games#Reliability of LGBTQ Video Game Archive

1448:, you know French, right? Any thoughts one way or another on this website? 671:

discuss whatever improvements may be necessary to bring it up to standards.

4774: 2022: 5622: 3929:

the head of Zelda Informer (Nathanial Rumphol-Janc) was able to get into

2663:, and I have noticed that one passage cites two sources, one of which is 1285: 1277: 4122:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources/Archive_13#Zelda_Informer

3085:

So I'm looking at it and, yes, it all seems reliable, but articles like

1947:

If I remember correctly the founders of this website used to be part of

4902: 4344: 4340: 4254: 3965: 3930: 2453: 2066: 2037: 1665: 1471: 971: 853: 5421:

I don't see any reason to hold off further on adding it to the list. —

4460:

are having a little debate conserning this guideline page; please see

2728:, have a dedicated staff, and and their founder/director also manages 2018:

are unreliable, but what do you people think of the following sites?

1669: 1478: 415: 2914:

I said "reliable for the opinions of the author" ;-) , i.e. akin to

5349:

They really need an "about us" page, but from the May announcement

5062:: I don't know, but it ain't violating WP:USERG like the one above. 4780:

article and was disturbed when I saw the referenced page says that

3482: 5577: 2577: 2173: 2078: 1661: 3471:

I'm not familiar with this site—does anyone know more about it?

737:

Still haven't heard anything back from Kurt. Any other thoughts?

5127:

gathers their Top 10 lists via forum surveys. Since surveys are

5085: 4003:. The link you gave led to a 404. Zelda Informer also now has 3034:

research projects. Their methodology is best described in their

2424: 2082: 4386: 4360: 3485: 3484:

and some of its news are sourced from other major news sources.

2032: 1317:

Neutral: Another writer teaches college courses in game design.

5381: 2449: 29: 5384:

user-blog section or something, they're referring it as "the

4483:

I'd like to get others opinions on whether this is reliable:

2215:

articles on fighting games sometimes have the same author as

2042: 3172:

that was the context that initially spurred this discussion.

2092:

So what's your thoughts on my six sources that are on here?

2086: 2070: 2011: 1426: 4434:), though I wasn't around to have visited them in advance. 2140:

Yahoo--questionable. They're known to republish work--c.f.

2058: 1486: 398:

They all cover video-game related content, a few examples:

4485:

http://www.iltasanomat.fi/digitoday/art-2000001939410.html

856:

page does not look so good, so I am going to have to vote

3650:

can do? He's still pretty active around here these days.

3174:

I apologize to Maple if I have misconstrued your stance.

5499:. How far back does their reliability go? It started as 5059: 3475: 2015: 5558: 5231: 5045: 5025: 4970: 4465: 4316: 4223: 3909: 3854: 3799: 3628:

They're talking about the custom searches mentioned at

2838: 2638: 2553: 2430: 2309: 2074: 2047: 1897: 1804: 1557: 1407: 1257: 1062: 950: 810: 648: 529: 320: 264: 208: 152: 4751: 4082:

My USERG concern was along the lines of the fact that

344:, but I'd like confirmation that they're reliable. -- 3710:. It may help know when something needs to change. -- 3676:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject_Video_games/Search_engine

3127:- The main purpose would be to source entries in the 1827:

a reliable source? I was searching for sources about

4765: 2454:

don't have any info listed at all other than a name

970:from. For example, there's a great interview about 1489:). Maybe useful as a primary source about itself. 5131:, I am going to change my opinion to it being an 5123:I found out from one of my Facebook friends that 4929:I would like to know your opinion on these sites. 3605:What custom Google search are you talking about? 4084:they actively encourage anyone to write for them 3345:the posts are categorized by the type of content 2939:P.S. Ok, we agree to label it situational then. 5066:What do you folks think about the two sources. 4901:Some of the content on Nowgamer is shared from 3706:I'm going to add a section for 'processing' on 1327:They've also got a reviews policy, though its' 565:. On the minus side, the writers seem to go by 3132:because it could probably actually be sourced 3038:at the International Journal of Communication: 1916:This site recently came up in a discussion at 1584:Are we sure we want to keep this as reliable? 5501:what appears to be an amateur website in 1994 4241: 3473: 2724:I'm still leaning reliable. They're owned by 2126:ESPN - Doesn't even bear mentioning--reliable 8: 18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Video games 2485:has much experience, and most editors are 4404:once. The best I've found is contributor 3062:articles published at reliable sources (" 3758:Zelda Informer/ Gamnesia/ Nintendo Prime 1474:network. Millenium itself is owned by a 340:I'm using theses sites as references on 2857:This academic source is specialized in 5594: 3129:List of LGBT characters in video games 2006:Regarding the following eSports sites. 1429:, French gaming and eSports website.-- 48:Do not edit the contents of this page. 5461:s writers contribute to the site and 2142:last discussion regarding Yahoo Games 7: 4667:, noted that the game was 'swag'." ~ 3280:expert-written self-published source 5468:s staffers are industry veterans. — 4776:. I found this one in a ref on the 4255:http://fansided.com/about-fansided/ 3586:Think you're gonna have to talk to 2956:Ok, I've listed this discussion at 2657:I just started editing the article 4007:since they've updated their look. 3630:WP:VG/RS#Locating reliable sources 3036:academic peer-reviewed publication 2456:as far as I can tell. I'm leaning 1280:page. Seems they're both owned by 1276:Noticed this at the bottom of the 28: 5048:: This one I personally think is 4617:What if Gameranx is cited by the 4250:Apply to become a FanSider today. 3968:or editorial policy or anything. 2057:, I would like to point out that 1924:. Is this site reliable or not? 5316:with those sort of credentials. 5135:source. Hopefully this can help 4625:Would using the website for the 3436: 3097:just don't seem useful. I mean, 2964:to try and get some more input. 2151:discussion -- leaning unreliable 2123:discussion -- leaning unreliable 1855: 33: 5608:, writer and senior editor for 4782:Alien vs Predator (Jaguar game) 4468:. If possible, please comment. 2231:as well. Credentials look fine. 2199:The listed sources (except for 5617:. I'm thinking that it'd be a 5488:Electric Playground in the 90s 4863:BGR (Penske Media Corporation) 4156:being a teenager in art school 2223:. He's apparently written for 1754:17:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC) 1680:00:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC) 1648:20:06, 29 September 2016 (UTC) 1632:02:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC) 1609:23:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC) 1591:21:04, 27 September 2016 (UTC) 1439:04:44, 26 September 2016 (UTC) 1358:23:09, 30 September 2016 (UTC) 1343:19:22, 30 September 2016 (UTC) 1295:23:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC) 1202:12:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC) 1185:08:13, 27 September 2016 (UTC) 1171:02:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC) 1139:02:53, 16 September 2016 (UTC) 1108:02:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC) 1: 5626:15:18, 29 December 2016 (UTC) 5512:22:18, 28 December 2016 (UTC) 5482:20:58, 23 December 2016 (UTC) 5435:20:58, 23 December 2016 (UTC) 5417:15:44, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 5400:15:27, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 5365:15:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 5345:15:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 5328:14:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 5306:03:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 5281:02:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 5266:01:04, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 5180:16:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC) 5155:16:35, 23 December 2016 (UTC) 5119:15:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC) 5104:20:37, 14 December 2016 (UTC) 5078:20:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC) 4923:18:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC) 4897:17:16, 19 December 2016 (UTC) 4875:16:50, 17 December 2016 (UTC) 4820:17:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC) 4799:17:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4698:17:17, 19 December 2016 (UTC) 4681:11:41, 18 December 2016 (UTC) 4659:04:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC) 4647:04:07, 18 December 2016 (UTC) 4599:00:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4584:00:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4568:00:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4553:00:37, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4529:00:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4514:00:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC) 4497:22:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC) 4478:21:36, 10 December 2016 (UTC) 4443:17:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC) 4270:17:12, 10 December 2016 (UTC) 4134:22:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC) 4106:13:54, 28 November 2016 (UTC) 4074:00:37, 28 November 2016 (UTC) 4046:00:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC) 4026:22:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC) 3980:22:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC) 3952:22:02, 27 November 2016 (UTC) 3752:18:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3736:20:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3720:18:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3702:16:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3691:16:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3662:13:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3642:02:02, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3624:01:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3601:00:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3581:22:05, 29 November 2016 (UTC) 3561:16:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC) 3544:10:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3529:17:50, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 3449:18:56, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3426:18:15, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3409:17:37, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3392:11:30, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3365:09:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3315:18:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3296:17:37, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3274:09:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3252:05:05, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3224:21:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3207:20:43, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3186:21:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3163:20:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3149:20:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3116:20:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3077:22:04, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3023:15:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3009:15:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 2989:14:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 2974:16:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2949:14:41, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 2935:14:41, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 2899:14:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 2883:14:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 2791:17:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2764:19:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2744:19:08, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2720:19:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2703:18:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2685:18:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2590:17:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2506:15:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2472:22:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2116:discussion -- deemed reliable 1011:13:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC) 991:23:52, 3 September 2016 (UTC) 901:12:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC) 878:02:50, 4 September 2016 (UTC) 847:02:45, 4 September 2016 (UTC) 763:12:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC) 746:23:20, 3 September 2016 (UTC) 4911:The Making of Tetris feature 4833:is by UK magazine publisher 4422:21:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC) 4380:20:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC) 4354:20:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC) 4174:16:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC) 3742:Is kotaku.co.uk on there? -- 2339:18:56, 4 November 2016 (UTC) 2256:09:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC) 1998:20:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC) 1983:18:06, 30 October 2016 (UTC) 1959:17:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC) 1943:05:56, 28 October 2016 (UTC) 1851:18:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC) 1190:Times, the internet is...") 563:Reviews/Ethics policy listed 4389:, though, as I am curious: 4335:In the middle of reviewing 2867:reliable source noticeboard 2769:Previously discussed here: 2606:"PlayStation LifeStyle.net" 2191:14:38, 7 October 2016 (UTC) 2166:14:03, 7 October 2016 (UTC) 2104:13:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC) 1725:16:34, 5 October 2016 (UTC) 1708:16:21, 5 October 2016 (UTC) 1697:15:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC) 1510:17:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC) 1460:17:39, 3 October 2016 (UTC) 733:13:28, 27 August 2016 (UTC) 720:03:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC) 699:02:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC) 683:02:29, 23 August 2016 (UTC) 599:20:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC) 581:18:58, 31 August 2016 (UTC) 555:18:50, 31 August 2016 (UTC) 478:12:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC) 454:12:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC) 387:12:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC) 372:11:52, 28 August 2016 (UTC) 5641: 5612:, and managing editor for 5088:, making it automatically 4708:Video Game Console Library 2859:LGBT themes in video games 2806:"LGBTQ Video Game Archive" 4538:concern, or are you just 3540:Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 2596:PlayStation LifeStyle.net 1516:Reevaluating The Escapist 1481:. Millenium is backed by 1427:http://www.millenium.org/ 883:using the website. Looks 674:website Kotaku is green. 5522:Find video game sources: 5195:Find video game sources: 4989:Find video game sources: 4934:Find video game sources: 4616: 4387:some of the listed staff 4280:Find video game sources: 4187:Find video game sources: 3873:Find video game sources: 3818:Find video game sources: 3763:Find video game sources: 3193:high-quality source... ~ 2958:WikiProject LGBT studies 2802:Find video game sources: 2797:LGBTQ Video Game Archive 2602:Find video game sources: 2517:Find video game sources: 2350:Find video game sources: 2273:Find video game sources: 1865:"Let's Play Video Games" 1861:Find video game sources: 1768:Find video game sources: 1521:Find video game sources: 1487:http://www.sk-gaming.com 1371:Find video game sources: 1284:and, according to their 1221:Find video game sources: 1123:is the 8th entry in the 1026:Find video game sources: 914:Find video game sources: 774:Find video game sources: 612:Find video game sources: 493:Find video game sources: 284:Find video game sources: 228:Find video game sources: 172:Find video game sources: 116:Find video game sources: 5598:, and Hoffman has been 5289:article, and this from 4652:Complex owns GameRanx. 4629:magazine be all right? 3995:I'm not sure about the 2962:WikiProject Video games 2144:(is not Yahoo esports). 2089:also share this trait. 5526:"Chris Hoffman's blog" 5129:user generated content 4880:Previously discussed: 4259: 3505: 2998:self-published sources 2861:. It was discussed at 1856:Let's Play Video Games 1652:Do people still go on 1470:, it is hosted by the 1300:Its a bit hard to say. 1030:"The Washington Times" 5495:was added as a RS in 4466:the article's history 4243:Writing for FanSided 3467:Adrenaline Vault/Zone 2660:Star Wars Battlefront 2069:to function. Notably 1830:Star Wars: Jedi Arena 1329:not all that detailed 616:"Hardcore Gaming 101" 497:"Nintendo Everything" 46:of past discussions. 5582:Just found out that 5517:Chris Hoffman's blog 5516: 5084:Yes, TV Tropes is a 4826:Add NowGamer to List 4452:and reliable sources 3520:'s Adrenaline Zone? 3476:The Adrenaline Vault 1918:Talk:Nintendo Switch 1087:The Washington Times 1083:The Washington Times 1019:The Washington Times 5493:Electric Playground 5378:This New York Times 4809:{{citation needed}} 4621:magazine's website? 4401:Hardcore Gaming 101 3958:Gamnesia unreliable 1772:"Classic Game Room" 1375:"Millenium Portail" 1282:Slitherine Software 607:Hardcore Gaming 101 488:Nintendo Everything 5452:The New York Times 4835:Imagine Publishing 4805:Run by enthusiasts 3966:have no staff list 2277:"Quarter To Three" 2055:unreliable sources 1713:all that often... 1309:Rock Paper Shotgun 4786:Alien vs Predator 3567:www.kotaku.com.au 2913: 2393:free news sources 2236:League of Legends 2063:unreliable source 1825:Classic Game Room 1761:Classic Game Room 1646: 1589: 778:"Power Up Gaming" 449: 367: 107: 106: 58: 57: 52:current talk page 5632: 5602:Gamers' Republic 5588: 5574: 5561: 5510: 5508: 5478: 5472: 5467: 5460: 5431: 5425: 5409: 5397: 5392: 5357: 5343: 5341: 5325: 5320: 5298: 5278: 5258: 5247: 5234: 5177: 5172: 5149: 5101: 5096: 5072: 5041: 5028: 4986: 4973: 4895: 4893: 4818: 4816: 4810: 4770: 4769: 4755: 4696: 4694: 4677: 4671: 4656: 4637: 4635: 4581: 4576: 4550: 4545: 4511: 4506: 4441: 4439: 4418: 4412: 4377: 4372: 4351: 4332: 4319: 4268: 4266: 4257: 4247:you want to be. 4239: 4226: 4171: 4166: 4103: 4098: 4069: 4063: 4059: 4043: 4038: 4021: 4015: 4011: 3994: 3977: 3972: 3964:issue) and have 3947: 3941: 3937: 3925: 3912: 3877:"Nintendo Prime" 3870: 3857: 3815: 3802: 3767:"Zelda Informer" 3699: 3689: 3687: 3659: 3654: 3646:Is it something 3619: 3613: 3609: 3598: 3593: 3559: 3557: 3541: 3527: 3525: 3503: 3497: 3447: 3445: 3440: 3407: 3405: 3388: 3382: 3294: 3292: 3250: 3248: 3221: 3216: 3203: 3197: 3183: 3178: 3161: 3159: 3146: 3141: 3112: 3106: 3007: 3005: 2907: 2854: 2841: 2789: 2787: 2761: 2741: 2736: 2717: 2712: 2675: 2673: 2654: 2641: 2569: 2556: 2502: 2496: 2469: 2464: 2433: 2336: 2325: 2312: 2268:Quarter To Three 2252: 2246: 2188: 2183: 2179:content, right? 2098: 1995: 1978: 1972: 1968: 1956: 1938: 1932: 1928: 1913: 1900: 1841: 1839: 1820: 1807: 1722: 1717: 1705: 1694: 1689: 1677: 1645: 1606: 1588: 1579:Zero Punctuation 1573: 1560: 1508: 1506: 1500: 1499: 1479:Gameo-Consulting 1457: 1452: 1423: 1410: 1355: 1340: 1335: 1292: 1273: 1260: 1225:"Pocket Tactics" 1199: 1194: 1161: 1159: 1136: 1131: 1098: 1096: 1078: 1065: 1007: 1001: 988: 966: 953: 897: 891: 868: 866: 837: 835: 826: 813: 743: 730: 717: 712: 696: 680: 664: 651: 595: 589: 578: 573: 552: 545: 532: 475: 470: 451: 450: 446: 440: 435: 432: 397: 369: 368: 364: 358: 353: 350: 336: 323: 280: 267: 224: 211: 176:"Tom's Hardware" 168: 155: 85: 60: 59: 37: 36: 30: 5640: 5639: 5635: 5634: 5633: 5631: 5630: 5629: 5586: 5557: 5524: 5519: 5506: 5504: 5490: 5476: 5470: 5465: 5458: 5429: 5423: 5407: 5395: 5390: 5355: 5339: 5337: 5323: 5318: 5296: 5276: 5256: 5230: 5197: 5192: 5175: 5170: 5145: 5099: 5094: 5068: 5052:as it violates 5024: 4991: 4969: 4936: 4931: 4891: 4889: 4828: 4814: 4812: 4808: 4712: 4710: 4692: 4690: 4675: 4669: 4654: 4633: 4631: 4623: 4579: 4574: 4548: 4543: 4509: 4504: 4458:User:Dohvahkiin 4454: 4437: 4435: 4416: 4410: 4391:Brandon Orselli 4375: 4370: 4349: 4337:Mortal Kombat X 4315: 4282: 4277: 4264: 4262: 4252: 4222: 4189: 4184: 4169: 4164: 4101: 4096: 4067: 4061: 4057: 4041: 4036: 4019: 4013: 4009: 4005:a staff listing 4001:a staff listing 3988: 3975: 3970: 3945: 3939: 3935: 3908: 3875: 3853: 3820: 3798: 3765: 3760: 3726:Thanks, Czar. - 3697: 3685: 3683: 3657: 3652: 3617: 3611: 3607: 3596: 3587: 3569: 3555: 3553: 3539: 3523: 3521: 3492: 3490: 3469: 3443: 3441: 3403: 3401: 3398:grounded theory 3386: 3380: 3373:... It doesn't 3290: 3288: 3246: 3244: 3219: 3214: 3201: 3195: 3181: 3176: 3157: 3155: 3144: 3139: 3110: 3104: 3003: 3001: 2837: 2804: 2799: 2785: 2783: 2759: 2753:I lean towards 2739: 2734: 2715: 2710: 2671: 2669: 2637: 2604: 2599: 2552: 2519: 2514: 2500: 2494: 2467: 2462: 2348: 2346: 2334: 2308: 2275: 2270: 2250: 2244: 2186: 2181: 2094: 2071:Test Your Might 2008: 1993: 1976: 1970: 1966: 1954: 1936: 1930: 1926: 1922:Nintendo Switch 1896: 1863: 1858: 1837: 1835: 1803: 1770: 1765: 1752: 1720: 1715: 1703: 1692: 1687: 1675: 1604: 1556: 1523: 1518: 1504: 1497: 1496: 1493: 1490: 1455: 1450: 1406: 1373: 1368: 1353: 1349:only discussion 1338: 1333: 1290: 1256: 1223: 1218: 1197: 1192: 1157: 1155: 1134: 1129: 1117:reliable source 1094: 1092: 1061: 1028: 1023: 1005: 999: 984: 949: 916: 911: 895: 889: 864: 862: 833: 831: 809: 776: 771: 769:Power Up Gaming 739: 726: 715: 710: 694: 676: 647: 614: 609: 593: 587: 576: 571: 550: 528: 495: 490: 473: 468: 444: 438: 434: 430: 428: 391: 362: 356: 352: 348: 346: 319: 286: 263: 230: 207: 174: 151: 118: 112: 81: 34: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 5638: 5636: 5610:Nintendo Power 5584:Nintendo Power 5518: 5515: 5489: 5486: 5485: 5484: 5444: 5443: 5442: 5441: 5440: 5439: 5438: 5437: 5419: 5370: 5369: 5368: 5367: 5330: 5310: 5309: 5308: 5191: 5188: 5187: 5186: 5185: 5184: 5183: 5182: 5161: 5160: 5159: 5158: 5147:ULTRA-DARKNESS 5106: 5070:ULTRA-DARKNESS 5064: 5063: 5057: 4987: 4930: 4927: 4926: 4925: 4899: 4827: 4824: 4823: 4822: 4709: 4706: 4705: 4704: 4703: 4702: 4701: 4700: 4622: 4615: 4614: 4613: 4612: 4611: 4610: 4609: 4608: 4607: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4603: 4602: 4601: 4470:88.113.105.231 4453: 4447: 4446: 4445: 4424: 4406:Nieves Roberto 4395:Chris Gregoria 4382: 4276: 4273: 4251: 4183: 4180: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4176: 4137: 4136: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4109: 4108: 4077: 4076: 4049: 4048: 4029: 4028: 3983: 3982: 3871: 3816: 3759: 3756: 3755: 3754: 3740: 3739: 3738: 3724: 3723: 3722: 3671: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3667: 3666: 3665: 3664: 3568: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3549: 3548: 3547: 3546: 3513: 3512: 3489: 3468: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3455: 3454: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3324: 3323: 3322: 3321: 3320: 3319: 3318: 3317: 3302: 3258: 3190: 3189: 3188: 3119: 3118: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3059: 3051: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3011: 2992: 2991: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2937: 2923: 2919: 2902: 2901: 2798: 2795: 2794: 2793: 2778:assessment as 2774: 2773: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2730:GameRevolution 2598: 2593: 2513: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2353:"Gamerant.com" 2345: 2342: 2269: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2232: 2221:Martin Michael 2213:Yahoo! Esports 2194: 2193: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2145: 2138: 2127: 2124: 2117: 2096:ULTRA-DARKNESS 2051: 2050: 2045: 2043:Yahoo! eSports 2040: 2035: 2030: 2025: 2007: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1857: 1854: 1764: 1757: 1748: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1682: 1635: 1634: 1612: 1611: 1598: 1597: 1525:"The Escapist" 1517: 1514: 1513: 1512: 1491: 1463: 1462: 1367: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1318: 1315: 1312: 1302: 1301: 1217: 1216:Pocket Tactics 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1121:Super Mario 64 1022: 1015: 1014: 1013: 918:"Shmuplations" 910: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 770: 767: 766: 765: 750: 749: 748: 735: 701: 608: 605: 604: 603: 602: 601: 489: 486: 485: 484: 483: 482: 481: 480: 459: 458: 457: 456: 420:Tom's Hardware 338: 337: 281: 225: 169: 111: 108: 105: 104: 99: 96: 91: 86: 79: 74: 69: 66: 56: 55: 38: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5637: 5628: 5627: 5624: 5620: 5616: 5615: 5611: 5607: 5603: 5597: 5592: 5585: 5580: 5579: 5575: 5573: 5570: 5567: 5564: 5560: 5556: 5553: 5549: 5546: 5543: 5540: 5537: 5534: 5531: 5527: 5523: 5514: 5513: 5509: 5502: 5498: 5494: 5487: 5483: 5479: 5473: 5464: 5457: 5456:Rolling Stone 5453: 5449: 5446: 5445: 5436: 5432: 5426: 5420: 5418: 5414: 5410: 5403: 5402: 5401: 5398: 5393: 5387: 5386:Rolling Stone 5383: 5379: 5376: 5375: 5374: 5373: 5372: 5371: 5366: 5362: 5358: 5351: 5348: 5347: 5346: 5342: 5335: 5334:Rolling Stone 5331: 5329: 5326: 5321: 5315: 5311: 5307: 5303: 5299: 5292: 5288: 5284: 5283: 5282: 5279: 5273: 5270: 5269: 5268: 5267: 5263: 5259: 5252: 5248: 5246: 5243: 5240: 5237: 5233: 5229: 5226: 5222: 5219: 5216: 5213: 5210: 5207: 5204: 5200: 5196: 5189: 5181: 5178: 5173: 5167: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5162: 5157: 5156: 5153: 5150: 5148: 5142: 5138: 5134: 5130: 5126: 5122: 5121: 5120: 5116: 5112: 5107: 5105: 5102: 5097: 5091: 5087: 5083: 5082: 5081: 5080: 5079: 5076: 5073: 5071: 5061: 5058: 5055: 5051: 5047: 5044: 5043: 5042: 5040: 5037: 5034: 5031: 5027: 5023: 5020: 5016: 5013: 5010: 5007: 5004: 5001: 4998: 4994: 4990: 4985: 4982: 4979: 4976: 4972: 4968: 4965: 4961: 4958: 4955: 4952: 4949: 4946: 4943: 4939: 4935: 4928: 4924: 4920: 4916: 4912: 4908: 4904: 4900: 4898: 4894: 4887: 4883: 4879: 4878: 4877: 4876: 4872: 4868: 4864: 4860: 4856: 4852: 4848: 4844: 4840: 4836: 4832: 4825: 4821: 4817: 4806: 4803: 4802: 4801: 4800: 4796: 4792: 4789:unreliable.-- 4787: 4783: 4779: 4775: 4771: 4768: 4764: 4761: 4758: 4754: 4750: 4746: 4743: 4740: 4737: 4734: 4731: 4728: 4725: 4722: 4718: 4715: 4714:Find sources: 4707: 4699: 4695: 4688: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4678: 4672: 4666: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4657: 4651: 4650: 4649: 4648: 4645: 4643: 4638: 4636: 4628: 4620: 4600: 4596: 4592: 4587: 4586: 4585: 4582: 4577: 4571: 4570: 4569: 4565: 4561: 4556: 4555: 4554: 4551: 4546: 4541: 4537: 4532: 4531: 4530: 4526: 4522: 4517: 4516: 4515: 4512: 4507: 4500: 4499: 4498: 4494: 4490: 4486: 4482: 4481: 4480: 4479: 4475: 4471: 4467: 4463: 4459: 4451: 4450:My Summer Car 4448: 4444: 4440: 4433: 4429: 4425: 4423: 4419: 4413: 4407: 4403: 4402: 4396: 4392: 4388: 4383: 4381: 4378: 4373: 4367: 4362: 4358: 4357: 4356: 4355: 4352: 4346: 4345:review policy 4342: 4341:ethics policy 4338: 4333: 4331: 4328: 4325: 4322: 4318: 4314: 4311: 4307: 4304: 4301: 4298: 4295: 4292: 4289: 4285: 4284:"Niche Gamer" 4281: 4274: 4272: 4271: 4267: 4258: 4256: 4248: 4244: 4240: 4238: 4235: 4232: 4229: 4225: 4221: 4218: 4214: 4211: 4208: 4205: 4202: 4199: 4196: 4192: 4188: 4181: 4175: 4172: 4167: 4161: 4157: 4153: 4149: 4145: 4141: 4140: 4139: 4138: 4135: 4131: 4127: 4123: 4119: 4118: 4107: 4104: 4099: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4081: 4080: 4079: 4078: 4075: 4072: 4070: 4064: 4053: 4052: 4051: 4050: 4047: 4044: 4039: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4030: 4027: 4024: 4022: 4016: 4006: 4002: 3998: 3992: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3984: 3981: 3978: 3973: 3967: 3963: 3959: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3950: 3948: 3942: 3932: 3926: 3924: 3921: 3918: 3915: 3911: 3907: 3904: 3900: 3897: 3894: 3891: 3888: 3885: 3882: 3878: 3874: 3869: 3866: 3863: 3860: 3856: 3852: 3849: 3845: 3842: 3839: 3836: 3833: 3830: 3827: 3823: 3819: 3814: 3811: 3808: 3805: 3801: 3797: 3794: 3790: 3787: 3784: 3781: 3778: 3775: 3772: 3768: 3764: 3757: 3753: 3749: 3745: 3741: 3737: 3733: 3729: 3725: 3721: 3717: 3713: 3709: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3700: 3694: 3693: 3692: 3688: 3681: 3677: 3673: 3672: 3663: 3660: 3655: 3649: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3639: 3635: 3631: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3622: 3620: 3614: 3604: 3603: 3602: 3599: 3591: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3566: 3562: 3558: 3551: 3550: 3545: 3542: 3535: 3534: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3526: 3519: 3511: 3507: 3506: 3504: 3501: 3496: 3486: 3483: 3480: 3477: 3472: 3466: 3450: 3446: 3439: 3434: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3423: 3419: 3415: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3406: 3399: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3389: 3383: 3376: 3372: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3346: 3342: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3316: 3312: 3308: 3303: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3293: 3285: 3284:verifiability 3281: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3259: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3249: 3242: 3237: 3232: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3222: 3217: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3204: 3198: 3191: 3187: 3184: 3179: 3173: 3169: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3160: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3147: 3142: 3135: 3130: 3126: 3123: 3122: 3121: 3120: 3117: 3113: 3107: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3088: 3084: 3083: 3078: 3074: 3070: 3066: 3060: 3057: 3052: 3050: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3043: 3037: 3033: 3030: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3020: 3016: 3012: 3010: 3006: 2999: 2994: 2993: 2990: 2986: 2982: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2975: 2971: 2967: 2963: 2959: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2938: 2936: 2932: 2928: 2924: 2920: 2917: 2911: 2910:edit conflict 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2900: 2896: 2892: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2880: 2876: 2870: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2855: 2853: 2850: 2847: 2844: 2840: 2836: 2833: 2829: 2826: 2823: 2820: 2817: 2814: 2811: 2807: 2803: 2796: 2792: 2788: 2781: 2776: 2775: 2772: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2765: 2762: 2756: 2745: 2742: 2737: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2718: 2713: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2700: 2696: 2692: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2686: 2683: 2681: 2676: 2674: 2666: 2662: 2661: 2655: 2653: 2650: 2647: 2644: 2640: 2636: 2633: 2629: 2626: 2623: 2620: 2617: 2614: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2597: 2594: 2592: 2591: 2587: 2583: 2579: 2575: 2570: 2568: 2565: 2562: 2559: 2555: 2551: 2548: 2544: 2541: 2538: 2535: 2532: 2529: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2497: 2491: 2488: 2484: 2483:Jasmine Henry 2480: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2470: 2465: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2450:an about page 2446: 2445: 2442: 2439: 2436: 2432: 2429: 2426: 2423: 2420: 2417: 2414: 2411: 2408: 2407: 2403: 2400: 2397: 2394: 2391: 2388: 2385: 2382: 2379: 2376: 2373: 2370: 2367: 2364: 2361: 2358: 2354: 2351: 2343: 2341: 2340: 2337: 2331: 2326: 2324: 2321: 2318: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2304: 2300: 2297: 2294: 2291: 2288: 2285: 2282: 2278: 2274: 2267: 2257: 2253: 2247: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2230: 2226: 2222: 2218: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2202: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2192: 2189: 2184: 2178: 2175: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2150: 2146: 2143: 2139: 2136: 2132: 2128: 2125: 2122: 2118: 2115: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2102: 2099: 2097: 2090: 2088: 2084: 2083:FreeStepDodge 2080: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2049: 2046: 2044: 2041: 2039: 2036: 2034: 2031: 2029: 2026: 2024: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2017: 2013: 2005: 1999: 1996: 1990: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1981: 1979: 1973: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1957: 1950: 1945: 1944: 1941: 1939: 1933: 1923: 1919: 1914: 1912: 1909: 1906: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1892: 1888: 1885: 1882: 1879: 1876: 1873: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1853: 1852: 1849: 1847: 1842: 1840: 1832: 1831: 1826: 1821: 1819: 1816: 1813: 1810: 1806: 1802: 1799: 1795: 1792: 1789: 1786: 1783: 1780: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1763: 1762: 1758: 1756: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1746: 1740: 1726: 1723: 1718: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1706: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1695: 1690: 1683: 1681: 1678: 1671: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1644: 1643:Zero Serenity 1639: 1638: 1637: 1636: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1620:iDigitalTimes 1617: 1614: 1613: 1610: 1607: 1600: 1599: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1587: 1586:Zero Serenity 1582: 1580: 1574: 1572: 1569: 1566: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1552: 1548: 1545: 1542: 1539: 1536: 1533: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1501: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1468:Jeuxvideo.com 1465: 1464: 1461: 1458: 1453: 1447: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1422: 1419: 1416: 1413: 1409: 1405: 1402: 1398: 1395: 1392: 1389: 1386: 1383: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1365: 1359: 1356: 1350: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1341: 1336: 1330: 1326: 1325: 1319: 1316: 1313: 1310: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1293: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1274: 1272: 1269: 1266: 1263: 1259: 1255: 1252: 1248: 1245: 1242: 1239: 1236: 1233: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1215: 1203: 1200: 1195: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1182: 1178: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1169: 1167: 1162: 1160: 1153: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1140: 1137: 1132: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1106: 1104: 1099: 1097: 1088: 1084: 1079: 1077: 1074: 1071: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1057: 1053: 1050: 1047: 1044: 1041: 1038: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1021: 1020: 1016: 1012: 1008: 1002: 995: 994: 993: 992: 989: 987: 979: 975: 973: 967: 965: 962: 959: 956: 952: 948: 945: 941: 938: 935: 932: 929: 926: 923: 919: 915: 908: 902: 898: 892: 886: 881: 880: 879: 876: 874: 869: 867: 859: 855: 851: 850: 849: 848: 845: 843: 838: 836: 827: 825: 822: 819: 816: 812: 808: 805: 801: 798: 795: 792: 789: 786: 783: 779: 775: 768: 764: 760: 756: 751: 747: 744: 742: 736: 734: 731: 729: 723: 722: 721: 718: 713: 707: 702: 700: 697: 691: 687: 686: 685: 684: 681: 679: 672: 665: 663: 660: 657: 654: 650: 646: 643: 639: 636: 633: 630: 627: 624: 621: 617: 613: 606: 600: 596: 590: 584: 583: 582: 579: 574: 568: 564: 559: 558: 557: 556: 553: 546: 544: 541: 538: 535: 531: 527: 524: 520: 517: 514: 511: 508: 505: 502: 498: 494: 487: 479: 476: 471: 465: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 455: 452: 447: 441: 433: 425: 421: 417: 413: 409: 405: 401: 395: 390: 389: 388: 384: 380: 376: 375: 374: 373: 370: 365: 359: 351: 343: 335: 332: 329: 326: 322: 318: 315: 311: 308: 305: 302: 299: 296: 293: 289: 285: 282: 279: 276: 273: 270: 266: 262: 259: 255: 252: 249: 246: 243: 240: 237: 233: 232:"Tom's Guide" 229: 226: 223: 220: 217: 214: 210: 206: 203: 199: 196: 193: 190: 187: 184: 181: 177: 173: 170: 167: 164: 161: 158: 154: 150: 147: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 128: 125: 121: 117: 114: 113: 109: 103: 100: 97: 95: 92: 90: 87: 84: 80: 78: 75: 73: 70: 67: 65: 62: 61: 53: 49: 45: 44: 39: 32: 31: 23: 19: 5618: 5613: 5609: 5605: 5601: 5596:publications 5583: 5581: 5576: 5568: 5562: 5554: 5544: 5538: 5532: 5521: 5520: 5491: 5462: 5455: 5451: 5447: 5391:Sergecross73 5385: 5333: 5319:Sergecross73 5313: 5271: 5249: 5241: 5235: 5227: 5217: 5211: 5205: 5194: 5193: 5171:Sergecross73 5151: 5146: 5137:Sergecross73 5132: 5124: 5095:Sergecross73 5089: 5074: 5069: 5065: 5049: 5035: 5029: 5021: 5011: 5005: 4999: 4988: 4980: 4974: 4966: 4956: 4950: 4944: 4933: 4932: 4915:The1337gamer 4831:NowGamer.com 4830: 4829: 4785: 4772: 4762: 4756: 4748: 4741: 4735: 4729: 4723: 4713: 4711: 4686: 4665:Reliable Mag 4664: 4641: 4634:Gamingforfun 4632: 4626: 4624: 4618: 4575:Sergecross73 4544:Sergecross73 4535: 4505:Sergecross73 4462:my talk page 4455: 4400: 4399:written for 4371:Sergecross73 4365: 4334: 4326: 4320: 4312: 4302: 4296: 4290: 4279: 4278: 4260: 4249: 4245: 4242: 4233: 4227: 4219: 4209: 4203: 4197: 4186: 4185: 4165:Sergecross73 4159: 4151: 4147: 4143: 4126:The1337gamer 4097:Sergecross73 4056: 4037:Sergecross73 4008: 3991:Sergecross73 3971:Sergecross73 3957: 3934: 3927: 3919: 3913: 3905: 3895: 3889: 3883: 3872: 3864: 3858: 3850: 3840: 3834: 3828: 3817: 3809: 3803: 3795: 3785: 3779: 3773: 3762: 3761: 3744:The1337gamer 3653:Sergecross73 3606: 3570: 3514: 3474: 3470: 3374: 3370: 3348: 3344: 3340: 3215:Sergecross73 3177:Sergecross73 3140:Sergecross73 3133: 3099:many of them 3063: 3054: 3047: 2955: 2918:reliability. 2916:WP:RSOPINION 2871: 2856: 2848: 2842: 2834: 2824: 2818: 2812: 2801: 2800: 2779: 2754: 2752: 2735:Sergecross73 2711:Sergecross73 2690: 2679: 2672:Gamingforfun 2670: 2658: 2656: 2648: 2642: 2634: 2624: 2618: 2612: 2601: 2600: 2571: 2563: 2557: 2549: 2539: 2533: 2527: 2521:"Flaregamer" 2516: 2515: 2478: 2463:Sergecross73 2460:. Thoughts? 2457: 2447: 2440: 2434: 2427: 2421: 2415: 2413:WP reference 2409: 2405: 2401: 2395: 2389: 2383: 2377: 2371: 2365: 2359: 2349: 2347: 2327: 2319: 2313: 2305: 2295: 2289: 2283: 2272: 2271: 2240:Taylor Cocke 2235: 2228: 2224: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2182:Sergecross73 2100: 2095: 2091: 2062: 2061:which is an 2054: 2052: 2010:I know that 2009: 1965: 1946: 1925: 1915: 1907: 1901: 1893: 1883: 1877: 1871: 1860: 1859: 1845: 1838:Gamingforfun 1836: 1828: 1824: 1822: 1814: 1808: 1800: 1790: 1784: 1778: 1767: 1766: 1759: 1743: 1739:The Escapist 1738: 1737: 1716:Sergecross73 1688:Sergecross73 1583: 1575: 1567: 1561: 1553: 1543: 1537: 1531: 1520: 1519: 1451:Sergecross73 1425: 1417: 1411: 1403: 1393: 1387: 1381: 1370: 1369: 1334:Sergecross73 1275: 1267: 1261: 1253: 1243: 1237: 1231: 1220: 1219: 1193:Sergecross73 1165: 1158:Gamingforfun 1156: 1130:Sergecross73 1124: 1120: 1102: 1095:Gamingforfun 1093: 1086: 1082: 1080: 1072: 1066: 1058: 1048: 1042: 1036: 1025: 1024: 1017: 985: 980: 976: 968: 960: 954: 946: 936: 930: 924: 913: 912: 909:Shmuplations 884: 872: 865:Gamingforfun 863: 857: 841: 834:Gamingforfun 832: 828: 820: 814: 806: 796: 790: 784: 773: 772: 740: 727: 711:Sergecross73 705: 689: 677: 669: 666: 658: 652: 644: 634: 628: 622: 611: 610: 572:Sergecross73 547: 539: 533: 525: 515: 509: 503: 492: 491: 469:Sergecross73 427: 394:The1337gamer 379:The1337gamer 345: 339: 330: 324: 316: 306: 300: 294: 283: 274: 268: 260: 250: 244: 238: 227: 218: 212: 204: 194: 188: 182: 171: 162: 156: 148: 138: 132: 126: 115: 82: 47: 41: 5619:situational 5600:editor for 5312:Definitely 4993:"WatchMojo" 4938:"TV Tropes" 4907:Retro Gamer 4791:Martin IIIa 4778:Nintendo 64 4773:Website at 4739:free images 4275:Niche Gamer 4086:, and when 3495:David Fuchs 3353:WP:NEWSBLOG 3032:independent 2726:CraveOnline 2387:free images 2059:SmashBoards 1949:Destructoid 1483:Orange S.A. 1431:Prisencolin 1125:Super Mario 755:Martin IIIa 753:reliable.-- 416:Tom's Guide 110:A few sites 40:This is an 5566:LinkSearch 5277:GamerPro64 5239:LinkSearch 5133:unreliable 5090:unreliable 5050:unreliable 5033:LinkSearch 4978:LinkSearch 4839:PushSquare 4689:would say 4685:Something 4655:GamerPro64 4591:Dohvahkiin 4560:Dohvahkiin 4521:Dohvahkiin 4489:Dohvahkiin 4366:unreliable 4361:"About Us" 4350:GamerPro64 4324:LinkSearch 4231:LinkSearch 4191:"FanSided" 3917:LinkSearch 3862:LinkSearch 3822:"Gamnesia" 3807:LinkSearch 3698:GamerPro64 3597:GamerPro64 3241:due weight 3236:Mukki page 3125:Maplestrip 2846:LinkSearch 2780:unreliable 2760:GamerPro64 2646:LinkSearch 2561:LinkSearch 2512:Flaregamer 2458:unreliable 2438:LinkSearch 2363:newspapers 2335:GamerPro64 2317:LinkSearch 2079:Skullheart 1994:GamerPro64 1989:Giant Bomb 1955:GamerPro64 1905:LinkSearch 1812:LinkSearch 1704:GamerPro64 1676:GamerPro64 1654:Gameplanet 1605:GamerPro64 1565:LinkSearch 1498:Salvidrim! 1446:Salvidrim! 1415:LinkSearch 1354:GamerPro64 1291:GamerPro64 1286:about page 1265:LinkSearch 1070:LinkSearch 958:LinkSearch 885:unreliable 858:unreliable 818:LinkSearch 695:GamerPro64 656:LinkSearch 567:pseudonyms 551:GamerPro64 537:LinkSearch 342:Razer Naga 328:LinkSearch 272:LinkSearch 216:LinkSearch 160:LinkSearch 120:"BetaNews" 102:Archive 20 94:Archive 18 89:Archive 17 83:Archive 16 77:Archive 15 72:Archive 14 64:Archive 10 5559:WPVG Talk 5471:zziccardi 5424:zziccardi 5232:WPVG Talk 5125:WatchMojo 5060:WatchMojo 5026:WPVG Talk 4971:WPVG Talk 4886:Archive 4 4882:Archive 8 4317:WPVG Talk 4224:WPVG Talk 3910:WPVG Talk 3855:WPVG Talk 3800:WPVG Talk 3518:PCM&E 3510:Archive 3 3500:Archive 1 3347:" using " 2839:WPVG Talk 2639:WPVG Talk 2554:WPVG Talk 2487:freelance 2431:WPVG/Talk 2330:Tom Chick 2310:WPVG Talk 2211:. I know 2201:The Score 2114:Daily Dot 2028:Daily Dot 2012:EventHubs 1898:WPVG Talk 1805:WPVG Talk 1745:Torchiest 1668:call out 1658:Shacknews 1558:WPVG Talk 1408:WPVG Talk 1366:Millenium 1258:WPVG Talk 1063:WPVG Talk 951:WPVG Talk 811:WPVG Talk 649:WPVG Talk 530:WPVG Talk 431:Anarchyte 349:Anarchyte 321:WPVG Talk 265:WPVG Talk 209:WPVG Talk 153:WPVG Talk 5448:Reliable 5314:Reliable 5272:Reliable 5199:"Glixel" 5111:Odie5533 5054:WP:USERG 5046:TVTropes 4867:Odie5533 4851:GameSpot 4847:Engadget 4843:Geek.com 4182:FanSided 3997:WP:USERG 3962:WP:USERG 3708:WP:VG/SE 3488:games?). 3371:reliable 3343:", and " 2865:and the 2755:Reliable 2479:Gamerant 2344:GameRant 2217:Red Bull 2209:PVP Live 2177:WP:USERG 2149:PVP Live 2121:TheScore 2048:PVP Live 2038:Red Bull 2023:TheScore 1624:Odie5533 1278:Wargamer 1177:Odie5533 986:TarkusAB 854:About Us 741:TarkusAB 728:TarkusAB 706:reliable 690:reliable 678:TarkusAB 412:BetaNews 20:‎ | 5614:MacLife 5542:scholar 5287:NYTimes 5215:scholar 5143:, etc. 5009:scholar 4954:scholar 4903:GamesTM 4855:IBTimes 4745:WP refs 4733:scholar 4687:Complex 4627:Complex 4619:Complex 4300:scholar 4207:scholar 4148:nothing 4062:Gestrid 4014:Gestrid 3940:Gestrid 3931:E3 2016 3893:scholar 3838:scholar 3783:scholar 3680:WP:VGSE 3612:Gestrid 3433:example 2822:scholar 2691:Comment 2622:scholar 2582:Tintor2 2537:scholar 2490:writers 2375:scholar 2293:scholar 2229:Playboy 2131:Redbull 2075:8WayRun 2067:XenForo 2065:, uses 2053:As for 1971:Gestrid 1931:Gestrid 1881:scholar 1788:scholar 1666:Gearbox 1602:(XXG). 1541:scholar 1472:Webedia 1391:scholar 1241:scholar 1046:scholar 972:Ikaruga 934:scholar 794:scholar 632:scholar 513:scholar 304:scholar 248:scholar 192:scholar 136:scholar 43:archive 22:Sources 5591:WP:SPS 5572:LinkTo 5548:images 5463:Glixel 5450:: Per 5396:msg me 5324:msg me 5291:AdWeek 5245:LinkTo 5221:images 5190:Glixel 5176:msg me 5100:msg me 5039:LinkTo 5015:images 4984:LinkTo 4960:images 4717:Google 4580:msg me 4549:msg me 4536:actual 4510:msg me 4456:I and 4376:msg me 4330:LinkTo 4306:images 4237:LinkTo 4213:images 4170:msg me 4154:" and 4102:msg me 4042:msg me 3976:msg me 3923:LinkTo 3899:images 3868:LinkTo 3844:images 3813:LinkTo 3789:images 3728:Thibbs 3658:msg me 3634:Thibbs 3590:Thibbs 3573:ferret 3502:(2008) 3220:msg me 3182:msg me 3145:msg me 3065:others 2981:ferret 2891:ferret 2852:LinkTo 2828:images 2740:msg me 2716:msg me 2695:ferret 2652:LinkTo 2628:images 2567:LinkTo 2543:images 2468:msg me 2444:LinkTo 2323:LinkTo 2299:images 2205:Yahoo! 2187:msg me 2135:WP:SPS 1911:LinkTo 1887:images 1818:LinkTo 1794:images 1721:msg me 1693:msg me 1670:Kotaku 1571:LinkTo 1547:images 1456:msg me 1421:LinkTo 1397:images 1339:msg me 1271:LinkTo 1247:images 1198:msg me 1135:msg me 1076:LinkTo 1052:images 964:LinkTo 940:images 852:Their 824:LinkTo 800:images 716:msg me 662:LinkTo 638:images 577:msg me 543:LinkTo 519:images 474:msg me 424:WP:RSN 334:LinkTo 310:images 278:LinkTo 254:images 222:LinkTo 198:images 166:LinkTo 142:images 5536:books 5209:books 5003:books 4948:books 4859:VG247 4760:JSTOR 4721:books 4670:Mable 4411:Mable 4294:books 4201:books 4160:Zelda 4152:Zelda 4144:Sonic 4092:WP:RS 3887:books 3832:books 3777:books 3508:Also 3418:Diego 3381:Mable 3357:Diego 3307:Diego 3266:Diego 3262:WP:OR 3231:Mukki 3196:Mable 3134:a lot 3105:Mable 3069:Diego 2966:Diego 2941:Diego 2927:Diego 2875:Diego 2816:books 2616:books 2578:Tidus 2531:books 2495:Mable 2425:VG/RL 2419:VG/RS 2381:JSTOR 2369:books 2287:books 2245:Mable 2174:rando 2147:Last 2129:Last 2119:Last 2112:Last 1875:books 1782:books 1750:edits 1662:VG247 1616:VG247 1535:books 1466:Like 1385:books 1235:books 1040:books 1000:Mable 928:books 890:Mable 788:books 626:books 588:Mable 507:books 298:books 288:"BGR" 242:books 186:books 130:books 16:< 5606:Play 5578:Link 5552:VGRS 5530:news 5507:czar 5477:talk 5430:talk 5408:ASEM 5356:ASEM 5340:czar 5297:ASEM 5257:ASEM 5225:VGRS 5203:news 5141:Czar 5115:talk 5086:wiki 5019:VGRS 4997:news 4964:VGRS 4942:news 4919:talk 4892:czar 4871:talk 4865:. -- 4815:czar 4811:... 4795:talk 4753:FENS 4727:news 4693:czar 4676:chat 4642:talk 4595:talk 4564:talk 4525:talk 4493:talk 4474:talk 4464:and 4438:czar 4417:chat 4343:and 4310:VGRS 4288:news 4265:czar 4217:VGRS 4195:news 4130:talk 4094:... 4068:talk 4020:talk 3946:talk 3903:VGRS 3881:news 3848:VGRS 3826:news 3793:VGRS 3771:news 3748:talk 3732:talk 3716:talk 3712:Izno 3686:czar 3648:Czar 3638:talk 3618:talk 3577:talk 3556:czar 3524:czar 3444:czar 3422:talk 3414:Czar 3404:czar 3387:chat 3375:look 3361:talk 3311:talk 3291:czar 3270:talk 3247:czar 3202:chat 3168:Czar 3158:czar 3111:chat 3095:this 3091:this 3087:this 3073:talk 3067:"). 3019:talk 3015:Izno 3004:czar 2985:talk 2970:talk 2960:and 2945:talk 2931:talk 2895:talk 2879:talk 2832:VGRS 2810:news 2786:czar 2699:talk 2680:talk 2665:this 2632:VGRS 2610:news 2586:talk 2574:Here 2547:VGRS 2525:news 2501:chat 2357:news 2303:VGRS 2281:news 2251:chat 2227:and 2207:and 2162:talk 2158:Izno 2087:VFDC 2085:and 2033:ESPN 2014:and 1977:talk 1937:talk 1891:VGRS 1869:news 1846:talk 1798:VGRS 1776:news 1628:talk 1618:and 1551:VGRS 1529:news 1476:SARL 1435:talk 1401:VGRS 1379:news 1251:VGRS 1229:news 1181:talk 1166:talk 1103:talk 1056:VGRS 1034:news 1006:chat 944:VGRS 922:news 896:chat 873:talk 842:talk 804:VGRS 782:news 759:talk 642:VGRS 620:news 594:chat 523:VGRS 501:news 445:talk 439:work 383:talk 363:talk 357:work 314:VGRS 292:news 258:VGRS 236:news 202:VGRS 180:news 146:VGRS 124:news 5623:IDV 5382:IGN 4767:TWL 3093:or 3089:or 3029:two 2406:NYT 2399:TWL 2238:is 2225:IGN 2016:SRK 1823:Is 1656:or 1581:. 408:BGR 404:BGR 400:BGR 5593:, 5587:'s 5550:– 5528:– 5480:) 5454:, 5433:) 5415:) 5363:) 5304:) 5264:) 5223:– 5201:– 5139:, 5117:) 5017:– 4995:– 4962:– 4940:– 4921:) 4905:, 4884:, 4873:) 4861:, 4857:, 4853:, 4849:, 4845:, 4841:, 4797:) 4747:) 4679:) 4597:) 4566:) 4527:) 4495:) 4476:) 4430:, 4420:) 4368:. 4308:– 4286:– 4253:— 4215:– 4193:– 4132:) 3901:– 3879:– 3846:– 3824:– 3791:– 3769:– 3750:) 3734:) 3718:) 3640:) 3579:) 3498:, 3491:— 3424:) 3390:) 3363:) 3313:) 3272:) 3243:. 3205:) 3114:) 3075:) 3021:) 2987:) 2972:) 2947:) 2933:) 2897:) 2881:) 2830:– 2808:– 2782:. 2701:) 2630:– 2608:– 2588:) 2545:– 2523:– 2504:) 2355:– 2301:– 2279:– 2254:) 2219:: 2164:) 2156:-- 2081:, 2077:, 2073:, 1889:– 1867:– 1796:– 1774:– 1630:) 1549:– 1527:– 1502:· 1494:· 1437:) 1399:– 1377:– 1249:– 1227:– 1183:) 1054:– 1032:– 1009:) 942:– 920:– 899:) 860:. 802:– 780:– 761:) 708:. 640:– 618:– 597:) 521:– 499:– 442:| 426:? 418:, 414:, 410:, 406:, 402:, 385:) 360:| 312:– 290:– 256:– 234:– 200:– 178:– 144:– 122:– 98:→ 68:← 5569:· 5563:· 5555:· 5545:· 5539:· 5533:· 5474:( 5466:' 5459:' 5427:( 5413:t 5411:( 5406:M 5361:t 5359:( 5354:M 5302:t 5300:( 5295:M 5262:t 5260:( 5255:M 5242:· 5236:· 5228:· 5218:· 5212:· 5206:· 5113:( 5056:. 5036:· 5030:· 5022:· 5012:· 5006:· 5000:· 4981:· 4975:· 4967:· 4957:· 4951:· 4945:· 4917:( 4869:( 4793:( 4763:· 4757:· 4749:· 4742:· 4736:· 4730:· 4724:· 4719:( 4673:( 4644:) 4640:( 4593:( 4562:( 4523:( 4491:( 4472:( 4432:2 4428:1 4414:( 4327:· 4321:· 4313:· 4303:· 4297:· 4291:· 4234:· 4228:· 4220:· 4210:· 4204:· 4198:· 4128:( 4071:) 4065:( 4058:— 4023:) 4017:( 4010:— 3993:: 3989:@ 3949:) 3943:( 3936:— 3920:· 3914:· 3906:· 3896:· 3890:· 3884:· 3865:· 3859:· 3851:· 3841:· 3835:· 3829:· 3810:· 3804:· 3796:· 3786:· 3780:· 3774:· 3746:( 3730:( 3714:( 3678:( 3636:( 3621:) 3615:( 3608:— 3592:: 3588:@ 3575:( 3493:@ 3420:( 3384:( 3359:( 3309:( 3268:( 3199:( 3108:( 3071:( 3058:" 3053:" 3017:( 2983:( 2968:( 2943:( 2929:( 2912:) 2908:( 2893:( 2877:( 2849:· 2843:· 2835:· 2825:· 2819:· 2813:· 2697:( 2682:) 2678:( 2649:· 2643:· 2635:· 2625:· 2619:· 2613:· 2584:( 2564:· 2558:· 2550:· 2540:· 2534:· 2528:· 2498:( 2441:· 2435:· 2428:· 2422:· 2416:· 2410:· 2402:· 2396:· 2390:· 2384:· 2378:· 2372:· 2366:· 2360:· 2320:· 2314:· 2306:· 2296:· 2290:· 2284:· 2248:( 2160:( 2137:. 1980:) 1974:( 1967:— 1940:) 1934:( 1927:— 1908:· 1902:· 1894:· 1884:· 1878:· 1872:· 1848:) 1844:( 1815:· 1809:· 1801:· 1791:· 1785:· 1779:· 1742:— 1626:( 1568:· 1562:· 1554:· 1544:· 1538:· 1532:· 1505:✉ 1492:☺ 1433:( 1418:· 1412:· 1404:· 1394:· 1388:· 1382:· 1311:. 1268:· 1262:· 1254:· 1244:· 1238:· 1232:· 1179:( 1168:) 1164:( 1105:) 1101:( 1073:· 1067:· 1059:· 1049:· 1043:· 1037:· 1003:( 961:· 955:· 947:· 937:· 931:· 925:· 893:( 875:) 871:( 844:) 840:( 821:· 815:· 807:· 797:· 791:· 785:· 757:( 659:· 653:· 645:· 635:· 629:· 623:· 591:( 540:· 534:· 526:· 516:· 510:· 504:· 448:) 436:( 396:: 392:@ 381:( 366:) 354:( 331:· 325:· 317:· 307:· 301:· 295:· 275:· 269:· 261:· 251:· 245:· 239:· 219:· 213:· 205:· 195:· 189:· 183:· 163:· 157:· 149:· 139:· 133:· 127:· 54:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources/Archive 16 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index