The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- WoW loses another 100,000 subscribers 154 comments
- The Daily Grind: What dead game would you play in a second if it revived? 88 comments
- The Daily Grind: What's the highest sub fee you'd pay? 86 comments
- BioWare kicks off Star Wars: The Old Republic Q&A Fridays 77 comments
- Earthrise shutting down today 69 comments
Massively Speaking Podcast
Massively Speaking Episode 185: Bree-to-play
Latest episode: Tuesday, February 7th, 2012



Reader Comments (3)
Posted: Jan 6th 2009 6:08PM (Unverified) said
Not everything can be or really even NEEDS to be sourced. Need a source for the information? Launch the game! It's as simple as that, really.
Wikipedia runs into this with many of their articles that reference video games. I'm not sure how much more of a source is needed than the game itself.
And when it comes to controversy, many video game controversies are sparked in forums, which are often not very reliable over time as they are usually fan driven and those that aren't see threads get archived after a period of time.
It's a failure on Wikipedia's end that I don't see the organization correcting any time soon.
Posted: Jan 6th 2009 7:17PM (Unverified) said
That's not what Wikipedia is, though.
What you want is probably better suited for a specialist wiki - there are hundreds of them on www.wikia.com - than a general-purpose encyclopedia, especially one with the standards Wikipedia attempts to enforce.
Posted: Jan 6th 2009 7:49PM (Unverified) said
I do agree with your comment about specialist wikis, it's my opinion that a "milestone" entry should be herald with a little bit of leniency.